CIT v. Prasad Productions Pvt. Ltd.

179 ITR 147High Court1989#11235 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2022.

Judgments citing CIT v. Prasad Productions Pvt. Ltd.

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. A.M.RATNAM, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2006-07 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1738/CHNY/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Jan 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1736 To 1738/Chny/2013 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2004-05 To 2006-07) The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Vs Mr. A.M. Ratnam Tax, 1, Velavan Street, Media Circle-Ii, West Kamakoti Nagar, Chennai-600 034. Valasaravakkam, Chennai-600 087. Pan: Addpr 8973M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: 21.10.2021
Section 147Section 151(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी.दुगा" राव, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जी.मंजुनाथ, लेखास द"य के सम$ BEFORE SHRI V.DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1736 to 1738/Chny/2013 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2004-05 to 2006-07) The Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs Mr. A.M. Ratnam Tax, 1, Velavan Street, Media Circle-II, West Kamakoti Nagar, Chennai-600 034. Valasaravakkam, Chennai-600 087. PAN: ADDPR 8973M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Ms. R.Anita, Addl.CIT अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Appellant by…

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. A.M.RATNAM, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2006-07 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1737/CHNY/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Jan 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1736 To 1738/Chny/2013 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2004-05 To 2006-07) The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Vs Mr. A.M. Ratnam Tax, 1, Velavan Street, Media Circle-Ii, West Kamakoti Nagar, Chennai-600 034. Valasaravakkam, Chennai-600 087. Pan: Addpr 8973M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: 21.10.2021
Section 147Section 151(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी.दुगा" राव, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जी.मंजुनाथ, लेखास द"य के सम$ BEFORE SHRI V.DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1736 to 1738/Chny/2013 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2004-05 to 2006-07) The Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs Mr. A.M. Ratnam Tax, 1, Velavan Street, Media Circle-II, West Kamakoti Nagar, Chennai-600 034. Valasaravakkam, Chennai-600 087. PAN: ADDPR 8973M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Ms. R.Anita, Addl.CIT अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Appellant by…

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. A.M.RATNAM, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2006-07 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1736/CHNY/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Jan 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1736 To 1738/Chny/2013 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2004-05 To 2006-07) The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Vs Mr. A.M. Ratnam Tax, 1, Velavan Street, Media Circle-Ii, West Kamakoti Nagar, Chennai-600 034. Valasaravakkam, Chennai-600 087. Pan: Addpr 8973M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: 21.10.2021
Section 147Section 151(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी.दुगा" राव, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जी.मंजुनाथ, लेखास द"य के सम$ BEFORE SHRI V.DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1736 to 1738/Chny/2013 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2004-05 to 2006-07) The Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs Mr. A.M. Ratnam Tax, 1, Velavan Street, Media Circle-II, West Kamakoti Nagar, Chennai-600 034. Valasaravakkam, Chennai-600 087. PAN: ADDPR 8973M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Ms. R.Anita, Addl.CIT अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Appellant by…

ROBUST MARKETING SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CIRCLE 8(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 621/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2013-14 Robust Marketing Services Assistant Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Flat No. 502, 5Th Income Tax, Range 8(1), Vs. Floor, Sterling Heritage, Mumbai, Room No. 624, 6Th Plot No. 388, Sankara Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Mattam Road, Matunga Road, Mumbai-400020. (Cr), Mumbai-400019. Pan No. Aabcr7635J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. H.P. Mahajani, ARFor Respondent: Mr. D.G. Pansari, DR
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Robust Marketing Services Assistant Commissioner of Pvt. Ltd., Flat No. 502, 5th Income Tax, Range 8(1), Vs. floor, Sterling Heritage, Mumbai, Room No. 624, 6th Plot No. 388, Sankara floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Mattam Road, Matunga Road, Mumbai-400020. (CR), Mumbai-400019. PAN No. AABCR7635J Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. H.P. Mahajani, AR Revenue by : Mr. D.G. Pansari, DR Date of Hearing : 17/07/2019 Date of pronouncement : 29/07/201…

DHARMA PRODUCTIONS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - 16(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6174/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Dharma Productions Acit-16(1), Private Limited, Room No.439, बनाम/ Unit No.201 & 202, 2Nd 4Th Floor, Vs. Floor, Supreme Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, Off Veera Desai Road, Mumbai-40020 17/18, Shah Industrial Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.Aaacd3889K "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Rakesh Mohan Shri Ram Tiwari-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By 04/06/2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/07/2018 2 M/S Dharma Productions Pvt. Ltd.

Section 143(3)

…of these two items normally means that they could be allowed in the year in which these expenses are incurred regardless of whether film is released in that year or not, as held by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Prasad Productions as reported in 179 ITR 147 the cost of making positive prints is allowable u/s 37 of the Act. Further in the case of B. Nagi Reddy as reported in 199 ITR 451, the Hon'ble Madras High Court held that any loss arising on account of feature film being abandoned midway without completing it, then, the expenditure incurred till that date including the payments made to artists,…

COMM OF WEALTHTAX HYD vs. M/S. N.K.LEASINGANDCONST CO P.LTD HYD

Appeal is disposed of

ITTA/67/2003HC Telangana11 Jul 2017
Section 35Section 37

…07. 31.07.2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties. By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 01.09.2003 (Annexure-1) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in I.T. Appeal No.123/CTK/1995, whereby learned Tribunal has allowed the claim of the assessee in part. This Court vide order dated 07.08.2006 while admitting the matter has framed the following substantial questions of law. “(1) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal is right in law to follow…

DHARMA PRODUCTIONS P LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 16(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 25/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Dharma Productions Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of 29, Jains Arcade, 2Nd Floor, 14Th Road, Income-Tax- 16(1) Khar (West), Mumbai 400 052 Aayakar Bhavan, 4Th Floor, Pan:Aaacd 3889 K Room No.439,Mumbai .. Appellant Respondent Appellant By .. Shri Vijay Mehta, Ar .. Respondent By Shri B. S. Bist, Dr Date Of Hearing .. 23-12-2016 .. Date Of Pronouncement 21-03-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

Section 143(3)

…he said expenses are in any case allowable vide section 37 of the Act, the same should be allowed on account of a right bifurcation. 7. Before us assessee relied on Hon’ble Madras High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Prasad Productions Pvt. Ltd. (1989) 179 ITR 147 (Mad), wherein a similar issue came up for adjudication and before it is held that though all expenditure incurred on the production of a film would be its cost of production but that would exclude the expenditure incurred for the preparation of the positive prints of the films so produced. The purpose of obtaining positive prints is to exhibit t…

RED CHILLIES ENTERTAINMENT P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 29, MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 5271/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Hiru RaiFor Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist

…is observed, identical dispute came up for consideration before the Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, in Dharma Productions Pvt. Ltd. v/s DCIT. The co–ordinate bench following the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in CIT v/s Prasad Productions Pvt. Ltd., [1989] 179 ITR 147 (Mad.) and the decision of the Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, in Mukta Arts Pvt. Ltd. v/s ACIT, [2015] 105 ITD 533 (Mum.), held that the advertisement expenditure incurred after certification by Board of Film Censors cannot be included as part of cost of production, hence, provisions of rule 9A, will not apply. It was held, the expenditure incurred in r…

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SOUTH GLORY INTERNATIONAL P.LTD VISAKHAP

Appeal is disposed of

ITTA/18/1999HC Telangana30 Jan 2012
Section 35Section 37

…15. 31.07.2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties. By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 17.05.1999 (Annexure-1) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in I.T. Appeal No.206/CTK/1997, whereby learned Tribunal has disallowed the claim of the assessee. This Court vide order dated 06.10.1999 while admitting the matter has framed the following substantial questions of law. “(1) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal has rightly allowed deduction a…

CIT v. Prasad Productions Pvt. Ltd. (179 ITR 147) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax