CIT v. Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd.

306 ITR 392Supreme Court of India2008#107 most cited

What is CIT v. Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. authority for?

The "Purpose Test" determines whether an incentive or subsidy is a capital or revenue receipt for income tax purposes. If the incentive's purpose is to enable an assessee to set up a new industry or make investments in capital assets, it is a capital receipt and not taxable.

577

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. · 306 ITR 392 · capital receipt vs revenue receipt · subsidy taxability · incentive scheme purpose test · sales tax incentive capital receipt · excise duty exemption capital receipt · section 2(24)(xviii) · section 43(1) · investment incentive taxability · purpose test subsidy · nature of receipt

Also reported as

174 Taxmann 87219 CTR 105

Sections most often in play

Section 115JBSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(xviii)Section 37(1)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)Section 43(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 2(24)(xviii)section 43(1)initial assessment yearsection 80hhcsection 80hhsection 2(24)additional depreciationbook profitswritten down valueblock of assetssection 32(1)liable to tax

Judgments citing CIT v. Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd.

DCIT Cir. 6 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S. Grasim Industries Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4337/MUM/2005[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jun 2023AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistri a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishore Dhule
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43BSection 80Section 80HSection 80I

…ived in the instant case would only have to be construed as capital receipts not chargeable to income tax. In this regard, we find that ld. AR placed reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd., reported in 306 ITR 392, wherein the incentive conferred under that scheme were two fold. First, in the nature of higher free sale sugar quota and second, in allowing the manufacturer to collect Excise duty on sale price on the free sale sugar in excess of the normal quota, but to pay to the Government only the Excise duty payable on the price of levy sugar. The Hon‟ble…

M/S. Grasim Industries Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT CIT Cir. 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3439/MUM/2005[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jun 2023AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistri a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishore Dhule
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43BSection 80Section 80HSection 80I

…ived in the instant case would only have to be construed as capital receipts not chargeable to income tax. In this regard, we find that ld. AR placed reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd., reported in 306 ITR 392, wherein the incentive conferred under that scheme were two fold. First, in the nature of higher free sale sugar quota and second, in allowing the manufacturer to collect Excise duty on sale price on the free sale sugar in excess of the normal quota, but to pay to the Government only the Excise duty payable on the price of levy sugar. The Hon‟ble…

Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1), Rajkot vs. M/S Ajanta Mfg. Ltd., Morbi

In the result this issue is decided against the revenue and accordingly ground no

ITA 138/RJT/2021[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal(1) I.T.A. No.102/Rjt/2021 (2) I.T.A. No.138/Rjt/2021 (Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) (1) Dcit, M/S. Ajanta Manufacturing Ltd. Circle-1(1), Orpat Industrial Estate, Rajkot Rajkot Morbi Highway, Morbi-363641 Vs. (2) Acit M/S. Ajanta Manufacturing Pvt. Circle1(1), Ltd., Rajkot Orpat Industrial Estate, Rajkot Morbi Highway, Morbi-363641 [Pan No.Aaeca6115B] (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Appellant By : Shri Vimal Desai, A.R. Respondent By: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Citdr Date Of Hearing 25.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.05.2023

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CITDR
Section 115J

…squarely covered by the decision of Sawhney Steel and Press Works Ltd 228 ITR 253, which has been correctly applied by the AO. Further, he submitted that the ITAT, Rajkot in the assessee’s own case has relied upon the decision of Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd 306 ITR 392 (SC) which has been rendered in on a different set of facts, and further the aforesaid decision has not distinguished the decision of Sawhney Steel and Press Works Ltd 228 ITR 253 rendered by the Supreme Court of India, which is directly applicable to the assessee’s set of facts. In response, the counsel for the assessee submitted that on identic…

Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1), Rajkot vs. M/S Ajanta Mfg. Ltd., Morbi

In the result this issue is decided against the revenue and accordingly ground no

ITA 102/RJT/2021[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot31 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal(1) I.T.A. No.102/Rjt/2021 (2) I.T.A. No.138/Rjt/2021 (Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) (1) Dcit, M/S. Ajanta Manufacturing Ltd. Circle-1(1), Orpat Industrial Estate, Rajkot Rajkot Morbi Highway, Morbi-363641 Vs. (2) Acit M/S. Ajanta Manufacturing Pvt. Circle1(1), Ltd., Rajkot Orpat Industrial Estate, Rajkot Morbi Highway, Morbi-363641 [Pan No.Aaeca6115B] (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Appellant By : Shri Vimal Desai, A.R. Respondent By: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Citdr Date Of Hearing 25.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.05.2023

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CITDR
Section 115J

…squarely covered by the decision of Sawhney Steel and Press Works Ltd 228 ITR 253, which has been correctly applied by the AO. Further, he submitted that the ITAT, Rajkot in the assessee’s own case has relied upon the decision of Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd 306 ITR 392 (SC) which has been rendered in on a different set of facts, and further the aforesaid decision has not distinguished the decision of Sawhney Steel and Press Works Ltd 228 ITR 253 rendered by the Supreme Court of India, which is directly applicable to the assessee’s set of facts. In response, the counsel for the assessee submitted that on identic…

DCIT Central Circle-31, New Delhi vs. Maral Overseas Ltd, West Nirmar

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1922/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2023AY 2015-16
Section 132Section 14A

…subsidy has been granted. Thelegal position to this effect stems from concurrent decisions of Supreme Court right from Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd. v. CIT [1997) 94 Taxman 368/228 ITR 253 (SC) to CIT v. Ponni Sugars 8s Chemicals Ltd. [20081 174 Taxman 87 /306 ITR 392(SC) DCIT Vs. Maral Overseas Ltd. and to the latest decision in the case of CIT(A) v. Chaphalkar Brothers Pune / [2018] 400 ITR 279 (SC) wherein the PURPOSE TEST was held to be ultimate test to decide the character of subsidy in the hands of the assessee. The relevant finding in the case of CIT v. Chaphalkar Brothers: “21. What is important from…

DCIT Central Circle-31, New Delhi vs. Maral Overseas Ltd, West Nirmar

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1921/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2023AY 2014-15
Section 132Section 14A

…subsidy has been granted. Thelegal position to this effect stems from concurrent decisions of Supreme Court right from Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd. v. CIT [1997) 94 Taxman 368/228 ITR 253 (SC) to CIT v. Ponni Sugars 8s Chemicals Ltd. [20081 174 Taxman 87 /306 ITR 392(SC) DCIT Vs. Maral Overseas Ltd. and to the latest decision in the case of CIT(A) v. Chaphalkar Brothers Pune / [2018] 400 ITR 279 (SC) wherein the PURPOSE TEST was held to be ultimate test to decide the character of subsidy in the hands of the assessee. The relevant finding in the case of CIT v. Chaphalkar Brothers: “21. What is important from…

Dy CIT CC 1(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Ultratech Cement Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 931/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) Ahura Centre, ‘B’ Wing 2Nd Floor Room No. 902, 9Th Floor Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe Maharishi Karve Road Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited Room No. 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, ‘B’ Wing 2Nd Floor Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe Maharishi Karve Road Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115Section 32Section 32ASection 80I

…set up a new unit backward area to generate employment'. The subsidy was held as capita receipt; accordingly, the decision of the Special Bench was confirmed. While confirming the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd in 306 ITR 392 was also taken into consideration by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. 5.2 We further noted that in similar circumstances, the other Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Maharashtra Oil Extraction P Ltd in 7618/Mum/2005 for AY 2003-04 following the decision in the case of Reliance Industries has allowed the claim the assessee. Similarly, in the case…

Ultratech Cement Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 1(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 465/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) Ahura Centre, ‘B’ Wing 2Nd Floor Room No. 902, 9Th Floor Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe Maharishi Karve Road Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited Room No. 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, ‘B’ Wing 2Nd Floor Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe Maharishi Karve Road Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115Section 32Section 32ASection 80I

…set up a new unit backward area to generate employment'. The subsidy was held as capita receipt; accordingly, the decision of the Special Bench was confirmed. While confirming the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd in 306 ITR 392 was also taken into consideration by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. 5.2 We further noted that in similar circumstances, the other Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Maharashtra Oil Extraction P Ltd in 7618/Mum/2005 for AY 2003-04 following the decision in the case of Reliance Industries has allowed the claim the assessee. Similarly, in the case…

Manali Petrochemicals Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Ltu-1, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3203/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3203/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Manali Petrochemical Ltd. The Deputy Commissioner Of Ponneri High Road, Manali, V. Income-Tax (Ltu-Appeals)-1, Chennai – 600 068. Chennai – 600 068. [Pan: Aaacm-3404-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.02.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.05.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

For Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 80

…No: 3203/Chny/2017 Therefore, he submitted that the AO and DRP erred in assessing subsidy received from the Government as revenue in nature and in this regard he relied upon the following judicial precedents: 1. CIT vs Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd & Others – 306 ITR 392 (SC) 2. CIT vs Chaphalkar Brokers Pune – 300 CTR 113 (SC) 3. PCIT vs Chemplast Sanmar – TCA No 525 of 2021 dated 25.11.2021 4. DCIT vs Haldex India Pvt Ltd – ITA No. 852/Pune/2019 dasted 19.05.2022 5. CIT vs GLoster Jute Mills Ltd 0 416 ITR 458 (Cal) 6. Deepak Spinners Ltd vs DCIT – ITA No. 2055/Kol/2018 dated 12.06.2018. 6. The ld. Senior AR, P.…

Bridgestone India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assl/Jt/Dy/CIT/Asstt/ITO, National E-Assessment Centre Delh, Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed,

ITA 1081/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Bridgestone India P.Ltd Plot No-A-43, Phase-Ii, Midc Addl/Jt/Dy/Cit/Ito, National E- Chakan, Village Sawardari, Assessment Centre Vs. Taluka Khed, Delhi-110 003 Pune-410501 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aabcb2304E Assessee By : Shri Sukhsagar Syal, Adv Revenue By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade, Cit Dr. Date Of Hearing: 24.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.04.2023

For Appellant: Shri Sukhsagar Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143Section 144BSection 144CSection 42(1)Section 43(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM Bridgestone India P.Ltd Plot No-A-43, Phase-II, Midc Addl/JT/DY/CIT/ITO, National E- Chakan, Village Sawardari, Assessment Centre Vs. Taluka Khed, Delhi-110 003 Pune-410501 (Respondent) (Appellant) PAN No. AABCB2304E Assessee by : Shri Sukhsagar Syal, Adv Revenue by : Dr. Mahesh Akhade, CIT DR. Date of hearing: 24.01.2023 Date of pronouncement : 21.04.2023 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 01. This appeal is filed by assessee against the assessment order passed for assessment year 2016 –…

M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1116/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 2Section 3

…vernment managed corporations/bodies with a specific direction as to the purpose of such subsidy, the said subsidies are held to be out of realms of taxation (Ref: Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd v. CIT 228 ITR 253 (SC), ClT v. Ponni Sugar and Chemical Limited 306 ITR 392 (SC) & Bihar Agricultural Produce Marketing Board v. CIT 205 Taxman 378 (Patna). Therefore, since the impugned amount of Rs.50 crores is a loan which is repayable in the future, the question of treating the same as income does not arise at all. 6.4 The ld A.R. submitted that the above submission may be taken on record and the said addition of Rs…

M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1115/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 2Section 3

…vernment managed corporations/bodies with a specific direction as to the purpose of such subsidy, the said subsidies are held to be out of realms of taxation (Ref: Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd v. CIT 228 ITR 253 (SC), ClT v. Ponni Sugar and Chemical Limited 306 ITR 392 (SC) & Bihar Agricultural Produce Marketing Board v. CIT 205 Taxman 378 (Patna). Therefore, since the impugned amount of Rs.50 crores is a loan which is repayable in the future, the question of treating the same as income does not arise at all. 6.4 The ld A.R. submitted that the above submission may be taken on record and the said addition of Rs…

M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1114/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 2Section 3

…vernment managed corporations/bodies with a specific direction as to the purpose of such subsidy, the said subsidies are held to be out of realms of taxation (Ref: Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd v. CIT 228 ITR 253 (SC), ClT v. Ponni Sugar and Chemical Limited 306 ITR 392 (SC) & Bihar Agricultural Produce Marketing Board v. CIT 205 Taxman 378 (Patna). Therefore, since the impugned amount of Rs.50 crores is a loan which is repayable in the future, the question of treating the same as income does not arise at all. 6.4 The ld A.R. submitted that the above submission may be taken on record and the said addition of Rs…

M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1113/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 2Section 3

…vernment managed corporations/bodies with a specific direction as to the purpose of such subsidy, the said subsidies are held to be out of realms of taxation (Ref: Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd v. CIT 228 ITR 253 (SC), ClT v. Ponni Sugar and Chemical Limited 306 ITR 392 (SC) & Bihar Agricultural Produce Marketing Board v. CIT 205 Taxman 378 (Patna). Therefore, since the impugned amount of Rs.50 crores is a loan which is repayable in the future, the question of treating the same as income does not arise at all. 6.4 The ld A.R. submitted that the above submission may be taken on record and the said addition of Rs…

M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1112/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 2Section 3

…vernment managed corporations/bodies with a specific direction as to the purpose of such subsidy, the said subsidies are held to be out of realms of taxation (Ref: Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd v. CIT 228 ITR 253 (SC), ClT v. Ponni Sugar and Chemical Limited 306 ITR 392 (SC) & Bihar Agricultural Produce Marketing Board v. CIT 205 Taxman 378 (Patna). Therefore, since the impugned amount of Rs.50 crores is a loan which is repayable in the future, the question of treating the same as income does not arise at all. 6.4 The ld A.R. submitted that the above submission may be taken on record and the said addition of Rs…

Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range - 1, Bangalore vs. M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1048/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 2Section 3

…vernment managed corporations/bodies with a specific direction as to the purpose of such subsidy, the said subsidies are held to be out of realms of taxation (Ref: Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd v. CIT 228 ITR 253 (SC), ClT v. Ponni Sugar and Chemical Limited 306 ITR 392 (SC) & Bihar Agricultural Produce Marketing Board v. CIT 205 Taxman 378 (Patna). Therefore, since the impugned amount of Rs.50 crores is a loan which is repayable in the future, the question of treating the same as income does not arise at all. 6.4 The ld A.R. submitted that the above submission may be taken on record and the said addition of Rs…

Welspun Corp Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 22, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3890/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)

…. 35,33,23,171/- is to be treated as capital receipts or revenue receipts. The Hon‘ble Supreme Court in the case of Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd vs CIT, reported in ITA.No,3890&4364/5063&5483/5165&5043/5166&5044/Mum/2016 M/s. Welspun Corp Ltd, Mumbai. [2008] 306 ITR 392 after referring to the earlier decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of Sahney Steel Works Ltd v CIT, reported in [1999] 228 ITR 253, held that the ―purpose for which subsidy is given is the crucial factor‖. The purpose is to be judged from the character of the receipts in the hands of the assessee which has to be determined with respect to…

DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3178/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…and examined is the purpose for which the subsidy has been given, and not the timing of the subsidy or the manner in which it has been given to the industry’, as is also held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Ltd [(2008) 306 ITR 392 (SC)]. A large number of judicial precedents have been cited in this context. Learned CIT(A) has then held that so far as the object and purpose for which the subsidy is given, only the subsidy schemes of the Maharashtra and Punjab State specifically state that the subsidies in question are for achieving dispersal of industries outside Mumbai, to…

DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3177/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…and examined is the purpose for which the subsidy has been given, and not the timing of the subsidy or the manner in which it has been given to the industry’, as is also held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Ltd [(2008) 306 ITR 392 (SC)]. A large number of judicial precedents have been cited in this context. Learned CIT(A) has then held that so far as the object and purpose for which the subsidy is given, only the subsidy schemes of the Maharashtra and Punjab State specifically state that the subsidies in question are for achieving dispersal of industries outside Mumbai, to…

DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3176/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 55A

…and examined is the purpose for which the subsidy has been given, and not the timing of the subsidy or the manner in which it has been given to the industry’, as is also held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Ltd [(2008) 306 ITR 392 (SC)]. A large number of judicial precedents have been cited in this context. Learned CIT(A) has then held that so far as the object and purpose for which the subsidy is given, only the subsidy schemes of the Maharashtra and Punjab State specifically state that the subsidies in question are for achieving dispersal of industries outside Mumbai, to…