What is CIT v. P.J. Chemicals Ltd. authority for?

This Supreme Court decision clarifies the conditions under which a capital subsidy received by an assessee should be reduced from the 'actual cost' of an asset for computing depreciation under Section 43(1) of the Income-tax Act, depending on whether the subsidy directly meets the cost of the asset.

How many judgments cite CIT v. P.J. Chemicals Ltd.?

158 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. P.J. Chemicals Ltd. (210 ITR 830), spanning 2007 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. P.J. Chemicals Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 43(1), Section 143(3), Section 32, Section 2(24)(xviii), Section 143(2), Section 153A.

CIT v. P.J. Chemicals Ltd. (210 ITR 830)

M/S. Alkoplus Producers Pvt. Ltd., Latur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Latur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that

ITA 1129/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

…rnment of Maharashatra, it becomes clear that the subsidy is a capital receipt not a revenue receipt. The impugned order is upheld to this extent. 11. At this stage, it is relevant to mention that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. P.J. Chemicals (1994) 210 ITR 830 (SC) held that subsidy received in Central Scheme is a Capital receipt and the same should not be reduced from the cost of assets for depreciation. The legislature introduced Explanation 10 to section 43(1) with effect from the assessment year 1999-2000 providing that subsidy on assets acquired after this date should be reduced from the cost…

DCIT, Central Circle - 4(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Limited., Kolkata

ITA 192/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT-DR & Robin Choudhury, Addl.CIT(DR)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/s. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAACE 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) DCIT, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/s. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेख…

DCIT, Central Circle - 4(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Limited., Kolkata

ITA 191/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT-DR & Robin Choudhury, Addl.CIT(DR)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/s. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAACE 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) DCIT, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/s. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेख…

M/S. Electrosteel Casting Limited., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cental Circle - 4(4), Kolkata

ITA 139/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT-DR & Robin Choudhury, Addl.CIT(DR)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/s. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAACE 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) DCIT, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/s. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेख…

M/S. Electrosteel Casting Limited., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cental Circle - 4(4), Kolkata

ITA 138/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/S. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaace 4975 B (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT-DR & Robin Choudhury, Addl.CIT(DR)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.138 & 139/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/s. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAACE 4975 B (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.191 & 192/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) DCIT, Central Circle-4(4), Vs. M/s. Electrosteel Castings Ltd. Kolkata. 19, G. K. Tower, Camac Street, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेख…

Mrs.Tarulata Shah, Mumbai vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) Range-2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 6464/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Sonal Shah Joint Commissioner Of 17/18, Swastik Bldg. 4Th Vs. Income Tax (Tds) Floor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056. Pan No. Aqops1855M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Tarulata Shah Joint Commissioner Of 21/22, Swastik Bldg. Vs. Income Tax (Tds) 5Thfloor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056. Pan No. Aadps0777K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Raveevwaglay, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Chaudhary Arunkumar Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/11/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/02/2019

For Appellant: Mr. RaveevWaglay, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Chaudhary Arunkumar Singh, DR

Section 143(3)Section 271C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Sonal Shah Joint Commissioner of 17/18, Swastik Bldg. 4th Vs. Income Tax (TDS) Floor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. JVPD Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056. PAN No. AQOPS1855M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Tarulata Shah Joint Commissioner of 21/22, Swastik Bldg. Vs. Income Tax (TDS) 5thFloor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. JVPD Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mu…

Mrs. Sonal Shah, Mumbai vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) Range-3, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 6462/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Sonal Shah Joint Commissioner Of 17/18, Swastik Bldg. 4Th Vs. Income Tax (Tds) Floor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056. Pan No. Aqops1855M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Tarulata Shah Joint Commissioner Of 21/22, Swastik Bldg. Vs. Income Tax (Tds) 5Thfloor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056. Pan No. Aadps0777K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Raveevwaglay, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Chaudhary Arunkumar Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/11/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/02/2019

For Appellant: Mr. RaveevWaglay, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Chaudhary Arunkumar Singh, DR

Section 143(3)Section 271C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Sonal Shah Joint Commissioner of 17/18, Swastik Bldg. 4th Vs. Income Tax (TDS) Floor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. JVPD Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056. PAN No. AQOPS1855M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Tarulata Shah Joint Commissioner of 21/22, Swastik Bldg. Vs. Income Tax (TDS) 5thFloor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. JVPD Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mu…

DCIT Circle - 1, Thane vs. Konkan Irrigation Development Corporation, Thane

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 2276/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Pawan Sing, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S. PadmajaFor Respondent: Shri Sudhir Dabir

Section 271(1)(c)Section 31Section 43(1)

…orporation fund. The ld. Counsel of the assessee has also relied upon following judicial pronouncements claiming that provisions of section 43(1) is not applicable to the assessee's case. 188 ITR 22(MAD) 188 ITR 11 (BOM) 215 ITR 834 (MAD) 234 ITR 53 (MAD) , 210 ITR 830(SC) :. ITA N0.5/NAG/2002- ITAT MUMBAI BENCH 'A') ITA NO.101 &102/NAG/2006- ITAT NAGPUR BENCH ) ITA N0.222 & 223/NAG/2007- ITAT NAGPUR BENCH) 7. During the course of assessment proceedings, the ld. Counsel of the assessee had also claimed that during the year projects costing Rs. 956.42 crores have been handed over by Govt Maharashtra for furthe…

Saf Yeast Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee for AY 2009-10 is partly allowed

ITA 1875/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 80I

…ging production of power from waste and effluents. The grant received is a capital receipt and was not given to supplement trade receipt. The appellant, relying on the 46 M/s. Saf Yeast Company Private Limited decisions in the case of CIT vs. P.J. Chemicals (210 ITR 830) Stated that the subsidy is not deductible from actual cost. Further, it also relied on the decision in the case of Sadichha Chitra vs. CIT (189 ITR 774) (Bombay) stating that the grant received by the appellant is not taxable as revenue receipt but is a capital receipt. Decision: 10.0 I have carefully examined the facts of the case, the stand t…

DCIT., Circle-4(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Rasoi Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 1580/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl.CIT, ld.DR)For Respondent: Shri P.R. Kothari, FCA, ld.AR

Section 43(1)

…05, the above stated subsidy was considered as capital receipt accepting the contention of the assessee. For the sake of consistency also the AO should not have managed the stand now. Even Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. P.J. Chemicals Ltd (1994) 210 ITR 830(SC) has considered this issue and held that where Government subsidy is intended as an incentive to encourage entrepreneurs to move to backward areas and establish industries, the specified percentage of the fixed capital cost, which the basis for determining the subsidy, being only a measure adopted under the scheme to quantify the financial aid…

M/S. Shree Raghunath Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 3(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1733/KOL/2017[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am] I.T.A. No. 1733/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2001-02 M/S. Shree Raghunath Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd. ...............................…..Appellant Sagar Estate, 2, Clive Ghat Street, 6Th Floor, Kolkata – 700 001 [Pan: Aaics 1426 M] I.T.O. Ward 3(2) Kolkata,...................………………………………………………Respondent P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069 Appearances By: Shri S.P. Choudhury, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Gautam Patra, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 13, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 16, 2018 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (Appeals) – 17, Kolkata Dated 30.12.2016 & The Solitary Issue Arising Out Of The Same Relates To The Disallowance Of Rs. 2,32,032/- Made By The A.O. & Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A) Out Of Depreciation. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 75 Days On The Part Of The Assessee In Filing This Appeal Before The Tribunal. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Application Seeking Condonation Of The Said Delay & Keeping In View The Submission Made Therein, I Am Satisfied That There Was A Sufficient Cause For The Delay On The Part Of The Assessee In Filing This Appeal Before The Tribunal. Even The Learned

Section 147Section 43(1)

…the value of the corresponding assets is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by 3 I.T.A. No. 1733/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2001-02 M/s. Shree Raghunath Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd. the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case P.J. Chemicals Ltd. 210 ITR 830, I find that this issue is not involved for consideration on merit in the year under consideration as the amount of the said subsidy was not received by the assessee in the year under consideration, but it was received in the previous year relevant to A.Y. 1999-2000 and 2000-2001. Although the Assessing Officer has reduced the opening written dow…

Everest Industires Ltd, New Delhi vs. JCIT RG 1, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is treated as allowed and the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed

ITA 3804/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Ramlal Negi (Jm)

…sisri ITA No.1880/PN/2013 Rohit Exhaust Systems Pvt. Ltd Extractions Ltd. Vs. ACIT (supra) that even after insertion of Explanation 10 to section 43(1) of the Act, the basic principle underlying the decision of Apex Court in CIT Vs. P.J. Chemicals Ltd. (1994) 210 ITR 830 (SC) still holds the field. The Tribunal has held as under:- "10. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the record. In our considered opinion, even after insertion of Expln. 10 to s. 43(1) of the Act, the basic principle underlying in the decision of the apex Court in the case of PJ. Chemicals Ltd. (supra) still holds th…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Pasadensa Foods Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 3002/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Smt Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2005-06 Acit, Vs. Pasadensa Foods Ltd., Circle-10(1), (Now Known As Dabur Foods Ltd.), 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, New Delhi. 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. Assessment Year: 2005-06 Pasadensa Foods Ltd., Vs. Acit, (Now Known As Dabur Circle-10(1), Foods Ltd.), New Delhi. 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…rposes of granting deduction. The ld. AR contended that the amount of subsidy of Rs.2.50 crore should not have been reduced from the value of fixed assets. He relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. P.J. Chemicals (1994) 210 ITR 830 (SC) in which it has been held that the amount of subsidy received under Central Scheme should not be reduced from cost of assets for depreciation. 10. Having gone through the relevant material on record, it is found that the assessee, in fact, received capital investment subsidy of Rs.2.50 crore which relates to the setting up of its unit in…

Pasadensa Foods Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 2731/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Smt Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2005-06 Acit, Vs. Pasadensa Foods Ltd., Circle-10(1), (Now Known As Dabur Foods Ltd.), 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, New Delhi. 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. Assessment Year: 2005-06 Pasadensa Foods Ltd., Vs. Acit, (Now Known As Dabur Circle-10(1), Foods Ltd.), New Delhi. 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…rposes of granting deduction. The ld. AR contended that the amount of subsidy of Rs.2.50 crore should not have been reduced from the value of fixed assets. He relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. P.J. Chemicals (1994) 210 ITR 830 (SC) in which it has been held that the amount of subsidy received under Central Scheme should not be reduced from cost of assets for depreciation. 10. Having gone through the relevant material on record, it is found that the assessee, in fact, received capital investment subsidy of Rs.2.50 crore which relates to the setting up of its unit in…