CIT v. P.V.A. Kulandagan Chettiar

267 ITR 657Reported decision#17530 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2017.

Judgments citing CIT v. P.V.A. Kulandagan Chettiar

M.R.M.PLANTATIONS P. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, KARAIKUDI

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

ITA 519/CHNY/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Nov 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Mr.B.Sagadevan, JCIT, D.RFor Respondent: 09.11.2017
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ot allowable expenses and (c) income from Malaysian Branch is not included ITA No. /Mds/2017 8 in the total income for the purpose of taxation in India on the basis of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT V. PVRM Kulandayan Chettiar [267 ITR 657], this case law is not applicable in the instant case. 13. The Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment for the above reasons, whether the Assessing Officer has applied his mind with regard to the reasons given above has to be examined separately. 14. So far as interest income against which expenditure is claimed, the assessee has declared i…

DCIT, KARAIKUDI vs. M.R.M.PLANTATIONS P. LTD., KARAIKUDI

In the results, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2947/CHNY/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2772 & 2773/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-2007. M/S. M.R.M. Plantations P. Ltd, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.40, M.R.M Arcade, Income Tax, Amman Sannathi Street, Circle Ii, Karaikudi Madurai [Pan Aaccm 9058R ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. T.N. Seetharaman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 57Section 6(3)

…l Meeting were conducted in India; the income of the Malaysian Branch is included in the accounts of the company and the profits appropriated. 4. The CIT(A) ought to have noted that the Apex Court's decision in the case of CIT vs. P.V.A. Kulandagan Chettiar (267 ITR 657) is not applicable to the present case since the control and management of the affairs of the ITA Nos.2772, 2773, 2946 , :- 3 -: 2947 & 2948/2014 Malaysian Branch of the assessee is situated in India as the Share Holders and Annual General Meeting were conducted in India’’. 3. The facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of inc…

DCIT, KARAIKUDI vs. M.R.M.PLANTATIONS P. LTD., KARAIKUDI

In the results, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2946/CHNY/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2772 & 2773/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-2007. M/S. M.R.M. Plantations P. Ltd, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.40, M.R.M Arcade, Income Tax, Amman Sannathi Street, Circle Ii, Karaikudi Madurai [Pan Aaccm 9058R ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. T.N. Seetharaman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 57Section 6(3)

…l Meeting were conducted in India; the income of the Malaysian Branch is included in the accounts of the company and the profits appropriated. 4. The CIT(A) ought to have noted that the Apex Court's decision in the case of CIT vs. P.V.A. Kulandagan Chettiar (267 ITR 657) is not applicable to the present case since the control and management of the affairs of the ITA Nos.2772, 2773, 2946 , :- 3 -: 2947 & 2948/2014 Malaysian Branch of the assessee is situated in India as the Share Holders and Annual General Meeting were conducted in India’’. 3. The facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of inc…

M.R.M.PLANTATIONS P. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, MADURAI

In the results, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2773/CHNY/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2772 & 2773/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-2007. M/S. M.R.M. Plantations P. Ltd, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.40, M.R.M Arcade, Income Tax, Amman Sannathi Street, Circle Ii, Karaikudi Madurai [Pan Aaccm 9058R ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. T.N. Seetharaman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 57Section 6(3)

…l Meeting were conducted in India; the income of the Malaysian Branch is included in the accounts of the company and the profits appropriated. 4. The CIT(A) ought to have noted that the Apex Court's decision in the case of CIT vs. P.V.A. Kulandagan Chettiar (267 ITR 657) is not applicable to the present case since the control and management of the affairs of the ITA Nos.2772, 2773, 2946 , :- 3 -: 2947 & 2948/2014 Malaysian Branch of the assessee is situated in India as the Share Holders and Annual General Meeting were conducted in India’’. 3. The facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of inc…

M.R.M.PLANTATIONS P. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, MADURAI

In the results, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2772/CHNY/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2772 & 2773/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-2007. M/S. M.R.M. Plantations P. Ltd, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.40, M.R.M Arcade, Income Tax, Amman Sannathi Street, Circle Ii, Karaikudi Madurai [Pan Aaccm 9058R ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. T.N. Seetharaman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 57Section 6(3)

…l Meeting were conducted in India; the income of the Malaysian Branch is included in the accounts of the company and the profits appropriated. 4. The CIT(A) ought to have noted that the Apex Court's decision in the case of CIT vs. P.V.A. Kulandagan Chettiar (267 ITR 657) is not applicable to the present case since the control and management of the affairs of the ITA Nos.2772, 2773, 2946 , :- 3 -: 2947 & 2948/2014 Malaysian Branch of the assessee is situated in India as the Share Holders and Annual General Meeting were conducted in India’’. 3. The facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of inc…

CIT v. P.V.A. Kulandagan Chettiar (267 ITR 657) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax