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.

Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Haryana vs. DCIT, Hisar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 413/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…dition to necessary infrastructure in processing/developing the backward area, the same would be in the nature of capital receipt not liable to tax. 22. The issue before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd vs. CIT reported in 306 ITR 392 was with regard to the taxability of incentives bestowed to new / expanded sugar factories under the Sampat Incentive Scheme by way of (a) additional price realization by reason of enhancement of free sale sugar quota and (b) excise duty rebate. 23. The assessee claimed the said incentives to be in the nature of capital receipt not chargeable to…

DCIT, Hisar vs. Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Hisar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 341/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…dition to necessary infrastructure in processing/developing the backward area, the same would be in the nature of capital receipt not liable to tax. 22. The issue before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd vs. CIT reported in 306 ITR 392 was with regard to the taxability of incentives bestowed to new / expanded sugar factories under the Sampat Incentive Scheme by way of (a) additional price realization by reason of enhancement of free sale sugar quota and (b) excise duty rebate. 23. The assessee claimed the said incentives to be in the nature of capital receipt not chargeable to…

ACIT, Hisar vs. M/S Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Hisar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 220/DEL/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…dition to necessary infrastructure in processing/developing the backward area, the same would be in the nature of capital receipt not liable to tax. 22. The issue before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd vs. CIT reported in 306 ITR 392 was with regard to the taxability of incentives bestowed to new / expanded sugar factories under the Sampat Incentive Scheme by way of (a) additional price realization by reason of enhancement of free sale sugar quota and (b) excise duty rebate. 23. The assessee claimed the said incentives to be in the nature of capital receipt not chargeable to…

Jindal Steel & Power Limited vs. Addl. CIT

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 167/DEL/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…dition to necessary infrastructure in processing/developing the backward area, the same would be in the nature of capital receipt not liable to tax. 22. The issue before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd vs. CIT reported in 306 ITR 392 was with regard to the taxability of incentives bestowed to new / expanded sugar factories under the Sampat Incentive Scheme by way of (a) additional price realization by reason of enhancement of free sale sugar quota and (b) excise duty rebate. 23. The assessee claimed the said incentives to be in the nature of capital receipt not chargeable to…

Interglobe Aviation Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, Special Range- 4, New Delhi

Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2015 – 16 is allowed

ITA 7695/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv.; &For Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh [CIT] – D.R
Section 28Section 37(1)Section 40

…the credits are Fleet Introductory Assistance (FIA) and were received as a consideration for selecting engines of IAE in preference to others. This is the purpose. 33.13. We find the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Ltd., 306 ITR 392 (SC) after considering the decision in the case of Sahney Steels and Press Work Ltd. and Ors. v. CIT, 228 ITR 253 (SC) has observed as under :- “The importance of the judgment of this Court in Sahney Steel & Press Work’s Ltd.’s case (supra) lies in the fact that it has discussed and analysed the entire case law and it has laid down the basic tes…

Interglobe Aviation Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 4, New Delhi

Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2015 – 16 is allowed

ITA 433/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv.; &For Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh [CIT] – D.R
Section 28Section 37(1)Section 40

…the credits are Fleet Introductory Assistance (FIA) and were received as a consideration for selecting engines of IAE in preference to others. This is the purpose. 33.13. We find the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Ltd., 306 ITR 392 (SC) after considering the decision in the case of Sahney Steels and Press Work Ltd. and Ors. v. CIT, 228 ITR 253 (SC) has observed as under :- “The importance of the judgment of this Court in Sahney Steel & Press Work’s Ltd.’s case (supra) lies in the fact that it has discussed and analysed the entire case law and it has laid down the basic tes…

Interglobe Aviation Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 4, New Delhi

Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2015 – 16 is allowed

ITA 432/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv.; &For Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh [CIT] – D.R
Section 28Section 37(1)Section 40

…the credits are Fleet Introductory Assistance (FIA) and were received as a consideration for selecting engines of IAE in preference to others. This is the purpose. 33.13. We find the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Ltd., 306 ITR 392 (SC) after considering the decision in the case of Sahney Steels and Press Work Ltd. and Ors. v. CIT, 228 ITR 253 (SC) has observed as under :- “The importance of the judgment of this Court in Sahney Steel & Press Work’s Ltd.’s case (supra) lies in the fact that it has discussed and analysed the entire case law and it has laid down the basic tes…

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 4, New Delhi vs. Interglobe Aviation Ltd., New Delhi

Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2015 – 16 is allowed

ITA 413/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv.; &For Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh [CIT] – D.R
Section 28Section 37(1)Section 40

…the credits are Fleet Introductory Assistance (FIA) and were received as a consideration for selecting engines of IAE in preference to others. This is the purpose. 33.13. We find the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Ltd., 306 ITR 392 (SC) after considering the decision in the case of Sahney Steels and Press Work Ltd. and Ors. v. CIT, 228 ITR 253 (SC) has observed as under :- “The importance of the judgment of this Court in Sahney Steel & Press Work’s Ltd.’s case (supra) lies in the fact that it has discussed and analysed the entire case law and it has laid down the basic tes…

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 4, New Delhi vs. Interglobe Aviation Ltd., New Delhi

Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2015 – 16 is allowed

ITA 412/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv.; &For Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh [CIT] – D.R
Section 28Section 37(1)Section 40

…the credits are Fleet Introductory Assistance (FIA) and were received as a consideration for selecting engines of IAE in preference to others. This is the purpose. 33.13. We find the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Ltd., 306 ITR 392 (SC) after considering the decision in the case of Sahney Steels and Press Work Ltd. and Ors. v. CIT, 228 ITR 253 (SC) has observed as under :- “The importance of the judgment of this Court in Sahney Steel & Press Work’s Ltd.’s case (supra) lies in the fact that it has discussed and analysed the entire case law and it has laid down the basic tes…

DCIT, CC-3(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Ankit Metal & Power Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1493/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

Section 115JSection 92C(2)

…ndustrial units and expansion of existing industrial units pursuant to which IPA was to be paid in form of power subsidy, sales tax/VAT subsidy to the assessee. 29. The Hon’ble Apex Court in their judgment in the case of CIT vs. Ponni Sugar & Chemicals Ltd. (306 ITR 392) has held that whether the subsidy or grant given by the Government is in the nature of capital or revenue will have to be M/s Ankit Metal & Power Ltd.., AY 2013-14 judged and decided with reference to the object and the purpose for which the subsidies are granted and not the form and manner of payment. 30. From the given facts of the present c…

M/S. Fdc Limited, Mumbai vs. Addll. CIT- 8 (1), Mumbai

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 6901/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.6901/Mum/2018 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.6840/Mum/2018 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Fdc Limited Acit Circle– 8(1) बिाम/ 142-48, S. V. Road {Now Acit Circle 9(3)(1)} Jogeshwari (West) R. No. 215, Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Mumbai – 400 102 Mumbai-400 020 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacf-0253-H (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & 3. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.7016/Mum/2018 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit Circle– 8(1) M/S Fdc Limited बिाम/ {Now Acit Circle 9(3)(1)} 142-48, S. V. Road R. No. 215, Aayakar Bhavan Jogeshwari (West) Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai – 400 102 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacf-0253-H (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri S. S. Nagar, Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Sunil Deshpande, Ld. Cit-Dr ुनवाई की तारीख/ : 20/07/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 08/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Nagar, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Deshpande, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 92C

…1 M/s FDC Limited Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “के” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI माननीय श्री महावीर स िंह, उपाध्यक्ष एवुं माननीय श्री मनोज कुमार अग्रवाल ,लेखा दस्य के मक्ष। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.6901/Mum/2018 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.6840/Mum/2018 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/s FDC Limited ACIT Circle– 8(1) बिाम/ 142-48, S. V. Road {now ACIT Circle 9(3)(1)}…

ACIT, Circle- 14(2), New Delhi vs. Kribhco Shyam Fertilizers Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6100/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar

Section 115J

…s paid/received by the assessee and it is this "purpose test” that holds the key to decide whether any loss incurred subsequently on sale of the said Govt. bonds is capital or revenue in nature. The Supreme Court in the case of Ponni Sugars &. Chemicals Ltd. (306 ITR 392) held the subsidy in the form of sales tax exemption, water tax exemption etc to be on revenue account as it enabled the' assessee to carry on its business more profitably and competitively, whereas in the case of Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. (228 ITR 253) the subsidy was paid for repayment of outstanding loans which were capital in nature a…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Kribhco Shyam Fertilizers Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3490/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar

Section 115J

…s paid/received by the assessee and it is this "purpose test” that holds the key to decide whether any loss incurred subsequently on sale of the said Govt. bonds is capital or revenue in nature. The Supreme Court in the case of Ponni Sugars &. Chemicals Ltd. (306 ITR 392) held the subsidy in the form of sales tax exemption, water tax exemption etc to be on revenue account as it enabled the' assessee to carry on its business more profitably and competitively, whereas in the case of Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. (228 ITR 253) the subsidy was paid for repayment of outstanding loans which were capital in nature a…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Kribhco Shyam Fertilizers Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3489/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar

Section 115J

…s paid/received by the assessee and it is this "purpose test” that holds the key to decide whether any loss incurred subsequently on sale of the said Govt. bonds is capital or revenue in nature. The Supreme Court in the case of Ponni Sugars &. Chemicals Ltd. (306 ITR 392) held the subsidy in the form of sales tax exemption, water tax exemption etc to be on revenue account as it enabled the' assessee to carry on its business more profitably and competitively, whereas in the case of Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. (228 ITR 253) the subsidy was paid for repayment of outstanding loans which were capital in nature a…

B R Agrotech Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-4(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6247/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 6244/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 6245/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 6246/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 6247/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 M/S B R Agrotech Ltd., Vs Acit, 1505, Vikram Tower, Rajendra Circle-4(1), Place, New Delhi-110008 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcb3432F Assessee By : Sh. S. S. Nagar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Alka Gautam, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.09.2021

For Appellant: Sh. S. S. Nagar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 154

…the order in the case of Shree Balaji Alloys vs. CIT has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex court holding that the issue raised in the appeal is covered against the revenue by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. 306 ITR 392 or in the alternate, in CIT Vs Meghalaya Steels Ltd. 3 ITR 217. 18. The policy of Shree Balaji Alloys and the appellant is identical. 19. Thus, we find no dispute that the Excise Duty refund received by the assessee is to be treated as capital receipt. ITA Nos. 6244 to 6247/Del/2019 10 B R Agrotech Ltd. Exclusion of capital receipts in computi…

B R Agrotech Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-4(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6246/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 6244/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 6245/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 6246/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 6247/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 M/S B R Agrotech Ltd., Vs Acit, 1505, Vikram Tower, Rajendra Circle-4(1), Place, New Delhi-110008 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcb3432F Assessee By : Sh. S. S. Nagar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Alka Gautam, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.09.2021

For Appellant: Sh. S. S. Nagar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 154

…the order in the case of Shree Balaji Alloys vs. CIT has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex court holding that the issue raised in the appeal is covered against the revenue by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. 306 ITR 392 or in the alternate, in CIT Vs Meghalaya Steels Ltd. 3 ITR 217. 18. The policy of Shree Balaji Alloys and the appellant is identical. 19. Thus, we find no dispute that the Excise Duty refund received by the assessee is to be treated as capital receipt. ITA Nos. 6244 to 6247/Del/2019 10 B R Agrotech Ltd. Exclusion of capital receipts in computi…

B R Agrotech Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-4(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6245/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 6244/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 6245/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 6246/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 6247/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 M/S B R Agrotech Ltd., Vs Acit, 1505, Vikram Tower, Rajendra Circle-4(1), Place, New Delhi-110008 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcb3432F Assessee By : Sh. S. S. Nagar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Alka Gautam, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.09.2021

For Appellant: Sh. S. S. Nagar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 154

…the order in the case of Shree Balaji Alloys vs. CIT has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex court holding that the issue raised in the appeal is covered against the revenue by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. 306 ITR 392 or in the alternate, in CIT Vs Meghalaya Steels Ltd. 3 ITR 217. 18. The policy of Shree Balaji Alloys and the appellant is identical. 19. Thus, we find no dispute that the Excise Duty refund received by the assessee is to be treated as capital receipt. ITA Nos. 6244 to 6247/Del/2019 10 B R Agrotech Ltd. Exclusion of capital receipts in computi…

B R Agrotech Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-4(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6244/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 6244/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 6245/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 6246/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 6247/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 M/S B R Agrotech Ltd., Vs Acit, 1505, Vikram Tower, Rajendra Circle-4(1), Place, New Delhi-110008 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcb3432F Assessee By : Sh. S. S. Nagar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Alka Gautam, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.09.2021

For Appellant: Sh. S. S. Nagar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 154

…the order in the case of Shree Balaji Alloys vs. CIT has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex court holding that the issue raised in the appeal is covered against the revenue by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. 306 ITR 392 or in the alternate, in CIT Vs Meghalaya Steels Ltd. 3 ITR 217. 18. The policy of Shree Balaji Alloys and the appellant is identical. 19. Thus, we find no dispute that the Excise Duty refund received by the assessee is to be treated as capital receipt. ITA Nos. 6244 to 6247/Del/2019 10 B R Agrotech Ltd. Exclusion of capital receipts in computi…

Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax(OSD), Central Cirlce-1(4), Hyderabad vs. Medha Servo Drives Private Limited, Hyderabad

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

ITA 655/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri V. Shiva KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…r brothers 400 ITR 279 SC in support of its contention. 7. Learned C.I.T (Appeals) referred to the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chaphalkar brothers (Supra) and also the decisions in the cases of CIT vs Ponni Sugars and chemicals ltd., 306 ITR 392 SC and Pr.CIT vs Talbros Engineering ltd., 386 ITR 154 P & H and held that since the assessee had received the sales tax reimbursement for expanding its manufacturing capacity, the said amount is a capital receipt and cannot be considered as income. The C.I.T (Appeals) allowed the appeals. 8. Aggrieved by the decision of the C.I.T(Appeals}, Depar…

Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax(OSD), Central Cirlce-1(4), Hyderabad vs. Medha Servo Drives Private Limited, Hyderabad

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

ITA 654/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri V. Shiva KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…r brothers 400 ITR 279 SC in support of its contention. 7. Learned C.I.T (Appeals) referred to the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chaphalkar brothers (Supra) and also the decisions in the cases of CIT vs Ponni Sugars and chemicals ltd., 306 ITR 392 SC and Pr.CIT vs Talbros Engineering ltd., 386 ITR 154 P & H and held that since the assessee had received the sales tax reimbursement for expanding its manufacturing capacity, the said amount is a capital receipt and cannot be considered as income. The C.I.T (Appeals) allowed the appeals. 8. Aggrieved by the decision of the C.I.T(Appeals}, Depar…