CIT v. Ralliwolf Ltd.

ACIT 3(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. EXPERIAN CREDIT INFORMATION CO. P.LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals of the Revenue stands dismissed

…s would not be necessary."[Para 10] 5.2.14 The above decision took into consideration ratios of Western India Vegetable Products Ltd. v. C/T[1954] 26 ITR 151 (Bom.) (para 10), CITv. 9 M/s. Experian Credit Information Company Pvt. Ltd. Ralliwolf Ltd. [1980J 121 ITR 262 (Bom.) (para 10), CIT Vs. Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Industries Ltd. [1973] 91 ITR 170 (Guj.) (para 10) and DHL Express (I) (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt CIT (2009) 124 TTJ 108 (Mum.) (para 10.1). 5.2.15 Questions such as lack of 3rd party/vendor certification etc., raised by the Assessing Officer are not relevant in deciding the issue. In the instant cas…

DCIT -1(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. TATA LOCKHEED MARTINAEROSTRUCTURES LTD., HYDERABAD

In the result , appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

…on the decision of Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Industries Ltd.(1972) 91 ITR 170,(Guj. HC) . The assessee also relied on the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Ralliwolf Limited (1978) 121 ITR 262(Bom. HC). It was submitted by learned counsel for the assessee that the assessee received orders from Lockheed Martin Aeronautics , USA for manufacturing tools indigenously for the assembly unit being set up by the assessee at Hyderabad and the business was set up when the said orders were received for execution by the assessee. The assessee coun…

DCIT CEN CIR 1(2), MUMBAI vs. SEARS CONSTRUCTION P.LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit, M/S. Sears Construction Central Circle-1(2), बनाम/ Pvt. Ltd. Room No.906, Pratishtha 514, Dalamal Towers, Vs. Bhavan, 10Th Floor, Old 211, Nariman Point, Cgo Building Annexe, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaacs5289E

…ng about the assessment of interest income earned during construction period. In support of this proposition about commencement of business, the Ld A.R placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ralliwolf Ltd (121 ITR 262). He further submitted that an identical issue was considered by the SMC bench of Tribunal in the case of M/s Gamma Constructions P Ltd (ITA No.530/Mum/2012 dated 25.5.2012) and the SMC bench held that the interest earned on short term deposits has nexus with the business of the assessee and hence the same cannot be assessed under the head Income…

STEPAN (INDIA) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 13(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon'Ble & Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble

…ading activities of the assessee and no part of their services were related to the setting up of chemical plant. 7. Learned Counsel for the assessee further relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Ralliwof Ltd. [121 ITR 262] submits that when the business of the assessee is a composite business i.e., manufacturing as well as the trading and the assessee has commenced its trading business the expenses relating to trading business have to be allowed though the manufacturing activity was not commenced. 8. The Learned Counsel for the assessee further submits that the A…

GLOBEX ENERGIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 6(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2010-11 Globex Energia P. Ltd. Acit 6(3) 4Th Floor, Sadhna House, 570 Mumbai- बनाम/ Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Vs. Behind Mahindra Towr, S. Worli Mumbai-400018 (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aadcg1161C Appellant By Shri Nishant Thakkar & Mis. Jasmin Amalsadvala (Ar) Revenue By Shri Prakash Mane (Dr) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing: 09/11/2016 18/11/2016 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order:

…. (86 ITR 11, 17) (SC) 9. Orissa Cement Ltd. (73 ITR 14, 17) (Del) In following cases it has been held that expenses shall become deductible after setting up of the business, even if commencement of business has not yet taken place: 1.CIT Vs. Ralliwolf Ltd. (121 ITR 262) (Bom) 2.Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Industries Ltd. (91 ITR 170) (Guj) 3.Western India Vegetable Products Ltd. (26 ITR 151) 4.Ramaraja Surgical Cottons Mills Ltd. (63 ITR 478) 5.CIT vs Whirlpool of India Ltd 318 ITR 347 (Delhi) In the case of CIT vs Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd 364 ITR 477 (Guj) it has been held that where business of t…

ASST CIT LTU, MUMBAI vs. ASIAN PAINTS LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…tances the said expenditure is not required to be disallowed on the ground of that the assessee had no business. In support of these contentions the learned representative of the assessee has placed reliance on the law settled in CIT Vs. Ralliwolf Ltd. (1980) 121 ITR 262 (Bom.) and Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2012) 138 ITD 203 (Ahd.) (SB) and Western India Vegetable Products Ltd. Vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 151 (Bom.) and CIT Vs. Saurashtra Cement and Chemical Industries Ltd. (1973) 91 ITR 170 (Guj.) 16. On the other hand learned representative of the department has strongly relied upon the finding of…

ASST CIT LTU, MUMBAI vs. ASIAN PAINTS LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…tances the said expenditure is not required to be disallowed on the ground of that the assessee had no business. In support of these contentions the learned representative of the assessee has placed reliance on the law settled in CIT Vs. Ralliwolf Ltd. (1980) 121 ITR 262 (Bom.) and Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2012) 138 ITD 203 (Ahd.) (SB) and Western India Vegetable Products Ltd. Vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 151 (Bom.) and CIT Vs. Saurashtra Cement and Chemical Industries Ltd. (1973) 91 ITR 170 (Guj.) 16. On the other hand learned representative of the department has strongly relied upon the finding of…

ASIAN PAINTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT CEN RG VIII, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…tances the said expenditure is not required to be disallowed on the ground of that the assessee had no business. In support of these contentions the learned representative of the assessee has placed reliance on the law settled in CIT Vs. Ralliwolf Ltd. (1980) 121 ITR 262 (Bom.) and Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2012) 138 ITD 203 (Ahd.) (SB) and Western India Vegetable Products Ltd. Vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 151 (Bom.) and CIT Vs. Saurashtra Cement and Chemical Industries Ltd. (1973) 91 ITR 170 (Guj.) 16. On the other hand learned representative of the department has strongly relied upon the finding of…

ASIAN PAINTS LTD ( ERSTWHILE TECHNICAL INSTRUMENT MANUFACTURERS( INDIA) LTD),MUMBAI vs. ACIT 10(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…tances the said expenditure is not required to be disallowed on the ground of that the assessee had no business. In support of these contentions the learned representative of the assessee has placed reliance on the law settled in CIT Vs. Ralliwolf Ltd. (1980) 121 ITR 262 (Bom.) and Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2012) 138 ITD 203 (Ahd.) (SB) and Western India Vegetable Products Ltd. Vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 151 (Bom.) and CIT Vs. Saurashtra Cement and Chemical Industries Ltd. (1973) 91 ITR 170 (Guj.) 16. On the other hand learned representative of the department has strongly relied upon the finding of…

AIG CAPITAL INDIA P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO RG 6(1)(4), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

…for commencement of business and actual commencement of business would not be necessary. In this regard, we can also take further guidance from following judgements:- Western India Vegetable Products Ltd v CIT(A) (26 ITR 151)(BOM) CIT Bombay v Ralliwolf ltd (121 ITR 262) (BOM) CIT(A) V Saurashtra Cement and Chemical Industries Limited (91 ITR 170)(Guj) 10.1. We shall also like to make reference to the judgment of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DHL Express (I) Ltd vs ACIT 154 TTJ 108 (Mum) wherein it was held that setting up of business is distinct from commencement of business. The business can…

EXECUTIVE CENTRE INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. JCIT (OSD) 8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

…ity which is the essential activity in the course of carrying on business it is started, the business therefore, must be said to have commenced. For this purpose reliance can be placed on the Bombay High Court decision rendered in the case of Ralliwolf Ltd. - 121 ITR 262 (Bom.) Awaram Ltd. - 197 ITR 22 & Mumbai Tribunal in Accor Radhakrishna Corporate Services (P) Ltd. - 13 SOT 652. 4.3 In view of the above discussion, we do not find any merit for the disallowance so made by the AO. 5. The AO has also disallowed traveling expenses Rs.16,66,006/ - incurred in the month of May 2008, as pre-operative in nature & has…