CIT v. Ramaniyam Homes Pvt. Ltd.

384 ITR 530High Court2016#2428 most cited

What is CIT v. Ramaniyam Homes Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Benefits received by a company from its business operations, such as waived loans not used for capital assets, are taxable under section 28(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

48

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ramaniyam Homes Pvt. Ltd. · 384 ITR 530 · section 28(iv) · business income · waiver of loan · benefit taxable · section 28

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 28(iv)Section 92CASection 234BSection 271Section 274Section 28

Issues it is cited on

section 28(iv)arm's length pricesection 28section 92casection 92csection 92section 144cinternational transactiontransfercompanytotal incomebusiness

Judgments citing CIT v. Ramaniyam Homes Pvt. Ltd.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. AMD INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

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

ITA 2032/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shashi Saklani, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 28

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.1859/Bang/2024 Assessment year : 2013-14 AMD India Private Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner No.102 & 103, EPIP, Whitefield, of Income Tax, Bengaluru – 560 066. Circle 1(1)(1), PAN: AABCC 3447R Bengaluru. [Old PAN: AAECA 6756C] APPELLANT RESPONDENT IT(TP)A No.2032/Bang/2024 Assessment year : 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner Vs. AMD India Private Ltd., of Income Tax, No.102 & 103, EPIP, Whitefield, Circle 1(1)(1), Bengaluru – 560 066. PAN: AABCC 3447R…

M/S INFORMATICA BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX SPECIAL RAGE-3, BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3356/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Tanmayee Rajkumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shashi Saklani, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 234BSection 271Section 274Section 28Section 37Section 40

…nd therefore he held that this sum is the benefit received by the company which is required to be taxed under section 28 (iv) of the Act. The ld. AO relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of CIT v. Romney Home Private Limited (2016) 384 ITR 530. The facts placed before us clearly show that the external commercial borrowing availed by the assessee in the financial year 2011 – 12 was ₹ 221,950,000/–. For the year ended on 31st March, 2012 unrealised loss on restatement of the ECB was accounted for at ₹ 32,428,000/–. Similarly loss for the year ended on 31st of March 2013 was also computed…

N.K. INDUSTRIES LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

ITA 448/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumarms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: NK Industries Ltd (Cross Appeals)
Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.TA. Nos.442 & 443/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2013-14) Dy. Commissioner of Vs. M/s. N.K. Industries Ltd., Income-tax, 7th Floor, Popular House, Ashram Circle3(1)(1), Road, Ahmedabad-380015 Ahmedabad [PAN : AAACN 9376 P] I.TA. Nos.447 & 448/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2013-14) M/s. N.K. Industries Ltd., Vs. M/s. N.K. Industries Ltd., 7th Floor, Popular House, Ashram 7th Floor, Popular House, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380015 Road, Ahmedabad-380015 [PAN : AAACN 9…

N.K. INDUSTRIES LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

ITA 447/AHD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumarms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: NK Industries Ltd (Cross Appeals)
Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.TA. Nos.442 & 443/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2013-14) Dy. Commissioner of Vs. M/s. N.K. Industries Ltd., Income-tax, 7th Floor, Popular House, Ashram Circle3(1)(1), Road, Ahmedabad-380015 Ahmedabad [PAN : AAACN 9376 P] I.TA. Nos.447 & 448/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2013-14) M/s. N.K. Industries Ltd., Vs. M/s. N.K. Industries Ltd., 7th Floor, Popular House, Ashram 7th Floor, Popular House, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380015 Road, Ahmedabad-380015 [PAN : AAACN 9…

THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1)., AHMEDABAD vs. N.K. INDUSTRIES LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

ITA 443/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumarms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: NK Industries Ltd (Cross Appeals)
Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.TA. Nos.442 & 443/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2013-14) Dy. Commissioner of Vs. M/s. N.K. Industries Ltd., Income-tax, 7th Floor, Popular House, Ashram Circle3(1)(1), Road, Ahmedabad-380015 Ahmedabad [PAN : AAACN 9376 P] I.TA. Nos.447 & 448/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2013-14) M/s. N.K. Industries Ltd., Vs. M/s. N.K. Industries Ltd., 7th Floor, Popular House, Ashram 7th Floor, Popular House, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380015 Road, Ahmedabad-380015 [PAN : AAACN 9…

THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1)., AHMEDABAD vs. N.K. INDUSTRIES LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

ITA 442/AHD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumarms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: NK Industries Ltd (Cross Appeals)
Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.TA. Nos.442 & 443/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2013-14) Dy. Commissioner of Vs. M/s. N.K. Industries Ltd., Income-tax, 7th Floor, Popular House, Ashram Circle3(1)(1), Road, Ahmedabad-380015 Ahmedabad [PAN : AAACN 9376 P] I.TA. Nos.447 & 448/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2013-14) M/s. N.K. Industries Ltd., Vs. M/s. N.K. Industries Ltd., 7th Floor, Popular House, Ashram 7th Floor, Popular House, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380015 Road, Ahmedabad-380015 [PAN : AAACN 9…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-14(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED, MUMBAI

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

ITA 4513/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 194Section 194HSection 28Section 35DSection 36(1)(iii)Section 391Section 394Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘I’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Vodafone Idea Limited Vs. The Deputy (Formerly Idea Cellular Limited) Commissioner of 10th Floor, Birla Centurion, Income Tax-3(2) Century Mills Compound Mumbai Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli Mumbai- 400 030 PAN/GIR No.AAACB2100P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Deputy Vs. Vodafone Idea Limited Commissioner of (Formerly Idea Cellular Limited) Income Tax-3(2) 10th Floor, Birla Centurion, Mumbai Century Mills Compound Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli Mumbai- 400 030 PAN/GIR No.AAACB210…

IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 4318/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘I’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 194Section 194HSection 28Section 35DSection 36(1)(iii)Section 391Section 394Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘I’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Vodafone Idea Limited Vs. The Deputy (Formerly Idea Cellular Limited) Commissioner of 10th Floor, Birla Centurion, Income Tax-3(2) Century Mills Compound Mumbai Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli Mumbai- 400 030 PAN/GIR No.AAACB2100P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Deputy Vs. Vodafone Idea Limited Commissioner of (Formerly Idea Cellular Limited) Income Tax-3(2) 10th Floor, Birla Centurion, Mumbai Century Mills Compound Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli Mumbai- 400 030 PAN/GIR No.AAACB210…

SUMANGAL GLASS PVT. LTD.,BHACHAU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2636/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 2636/Ahd/2017 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Sumangal Glass Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T, Plot No.617/1-618-620, Vs. Circle-4(1)(1), Nh-8A,Po.Samakhiyari Ahmedabad (Piprapati), Bhachau Taluka, Samakhiyari-370150. Pan: Aaics6992G

For Appellant: Shri Manish J Shah, with Shri Rushin Patel, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 194CSection 36(1)(va)Section 40

…nses. Thus, the same cannot be qualified as income under the provisions of section 41(1) of the Act. However, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO by making the reference to the following judgments. 1. CIT vs Ramaniyam Homes P Ltd (Madras High Court) 384 ITR 530 (Madras)/[2016) 287 CTR 200 (Madras) 2. [1996] 88 Taxman 429 (SC)/[1996] 222 ITR 344 (SC)/[1996] 136 CTR 444 (SC) Commissioner of Income-tax vs. T.V. Sundaiam Iyengar & Sons Ltd. 3. [2009] 308 ITR 417 (Bombay)/[2009] 222 CTR 455 (Bombay) Solid Containers Ltd. V. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax 20. The relevant extract of the order of the Ld. CI…

ACIT, CIRCLE- 26(1), NEW DELHI vs. V C SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1884/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. V. K. Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Sh. P. Barnwal, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)

…8. The Assessing Officer has treated the forfeiture of share application money as “Revenue” in nature. The Assessing Officer relied on the judgment in the case of CIT Vs. T.V. Sundaiam Iyengar & Sons Ltd. (222 ITR 344) (SC), CIT Vs. Ramaniyam Homes (P.) Ltd. (384 ITR 530), Rollatainers Ltd. Vs. CIT (339 ITR 54) (Del.), CIT Vs. Ravindra C. Gajiwala (204 ITR 157) (Guj.) and International Imex (Agents) P. Ltd. Vs. CIT (79 ITR 11) (Del.). The gist of the decisions relied upon by the AO is as under: “1. CIT vs. T.V. Sundaiam Iyengar & Sons Ltd. [1996] 222 ITR 344 (SC) “ ....Assessee received certain deposits from cu…

SHARE MICROFIN LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-3(1), HYERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 430/HYD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2016-17 Share Microfin Ltd Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Circle 3(1) Pan:Aaecs9243C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri A.G. Sitaraman, Ca Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 17/04/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 12/06/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23003.2020 Of The Learned Cit (A)-3, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2016-17. 2. There Is A Delay Of 5 Days In Filing Of This Appeal By The Assessee For Which The Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Application Along With An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons For Such Delay. The Reasons Given Therein Is Due To The Prevailing Covid 2019 Pandemic. After Considering The Contents Of The Condonation Application Explaining The Reasons Filed Along With The Affidavit, The Delay In Filing Of The Appeal By The Assessee Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri A.G. Sitaraman, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, DR
Section 143(2)Section 28Section 41(1)

…se. 7.19 In this regard, I would like to place the reliance upon the decisions of various High Courts and the Hon'ble Supreme Court involving identical set of facts and legal issues, as given below. 1. (Emphasis supplied) CIT VS. Ramaniyam Homes P. Ltd (2016) 384 ITR 530 (Mad.) 2. Solid Containers Ltd Vs. DCIT (2009) 178 Taxman 192 (Bom.) 3. Logitronics P. Ltd Vs. CIT (2011) 333 ITR 386 (Del) 4. Roll Containers Ltd Vs. CIT (2011) 339 ITR 54 (Del): and 5. CIT Vs. TV Sundaram lyengar & Sons Ltd (1996) 88 Taxman 429 (SC) 7.20 As seen from the above, it is clearly evident that the waiver of the loans other than loans…

M/S. MARVELL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE- 4(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 2577/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Butani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 28

…, benefit received by the company under section 28(iv) of the IT Act is Rs.71,55,525/- and the same is being added to income of the assessee. Reliance is placed on decision of Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT Vs. Ramaniyam Home Pvt. Ltd. [2016] 384 ITR 530 (Madras) dated 22/04/2016.” 33. The DRP confirmed the addition by holding that – “18.1 Having considered the submissions, and on perusal of the details filed, we note that assets worth Rs.71.55 lakhs have been received free of cost during the year. Though it was claimed that the assets have been received on free of cost or on loan basis, the ass…

ACIT CENT. CIR5(4) , MUMBAI vs. M/S. INFINITE BUILDCON PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2241/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2022AY 2018-19
Section 28Section 41(1)Section 56(2)(x)

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” Bench, Mumbai Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (JM) I.T.A. No. 2241/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2018-19) Vs. M/s. Infinite Buildcon ACIT, Central Circle-5(4) Room No. 1927 Pvt. Ltd. 19th Floor 322, Commerce House Air India Building 140 N.M. Road Nariman Point Fort, Mumbai-40001. Mumbai-400 021. PAN : AACC19980N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Sashi Tulsiyan Department by Shri Santhil Kumaran Date of Hearing 05.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement 20.09.2022 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran (AM) :- The Revenue has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 31.8.2021 p…

SIVANANDHA STEELS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

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

ITA 518/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ravindra T. Mishra, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 28

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "संह, उपा"य" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 518/CHNY/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sivanandha Steels Ltd., The DCIT, Plot No.18-20, Ambit Park Road, vs. Corporate Circle 3, Ambattur Industrial Estate, Coimbatore. Chennai – 600 058. PAN: AADCS 0678N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respo…

TECHNICHEM ORAGANICS PVT. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 18/AHD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 2(24)Section 28Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40A(2)(b)

…ITA No.18/Ahd/2020 A.Y. 2014-15 Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 Technichem Organics Pvt. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer, 5th Floor, Malak Building, Ward-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad. B/h. Old High Court, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. [PAN – AACCT 2027 K] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Mukesh Kumar Sharma, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 01.06.2022 Date of pronouncement : 07.07.2022 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEM…

INDIA CEMENTS CAPITAL LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1932/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam (CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 263Section 41(1)

…t of M/s. India Cements written off by M/s.Ceylon Bank should be taxed in the hands of assessee company u/s 41(1) or u/s 28(iv) in the line of the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of QT Vs. M/s. Ramaniyam Homes Private Limited reported in 384 ITR 530(Mad). 2.3 The Id. CIT(A) failed to conclude whether the sum of bad debt written off by Ceylon Bank amounting to Rs.3,81,98,688/- has been included in the disallowance of Rs.46.05 Crores in the assessment of M/s. India Cements Capital and Finance Limited for AY 2006- 07 which is now confirmed by Hon'ble Tribunal. 2.4 It is humbly submitted that pr…

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(2), CHENNAI vs. UNIQUE RECEIVABLE MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3081/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam (CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 263Section 41(1)

…t of M/s. India Cements written off by M/s.Ceylon Bank should be taxed in the hands of assessee company u/s 41(1) or u/s 28(iv) in the line of the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of QT Vs. M/s. Ramaniyam Homes Private Limited reported in 384 ITR 530(Mad). 2.3 The Id. CIT(A) failed to conclude whether the sum of bad debt written off by Ceylon Bank amounting to Rs.3,81,98,688/- has been included in the disallowance of Rs.46.05 Crores in the assessment of M/s. India Cements Capital and Finance Limited for AY 2006- 07 which is now confirmed by Hon'ble Tribunal. 2.4 It is humbly submitted that pr…

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. INDIA CEMENTS CAPITAL AND FINANCE LTD., CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1626/CHNY/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam (CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 263Section 41(1)

…t of M/s. India Cements written off by M/s.Ceylon Bank should be taxed in the hands of assessee company u/s 41(1) or u/s 28(iv) in the line of the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of QT Vs. M/s. Ramaniyam Homes Private Limited reported in 384 ITR 530(Mad). 2.3 The Id. CIT(A) failed to conclude whether the sum of bad debt written off by Ceylon Bank amounting to Rs.3,81,98,688/- has been included in the disallowance of Rs.46.05 Crores in the assessment of M/s. India Cements Capital and Finance Limited for AY 2006- 07 which is now confirmed by Hon'ble Tribunal. 2.4 It is humbly submitted that pr…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 4(1)(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S. KAPTRONICS PRIVATE LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1864/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), BengaluruFor Respondent: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, Advocate
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 28Section 41(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year: 2014-15 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/s. Kaptronics Pvt. Ltd., Ward 4(1)(2), No.165/4, C.K. Palya, Bengaluru. Bannerghatta Road, Bengaluru – 560 083. PAN: AABCK 1953C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Respondent by : Shri S.V. Ravishankar, Advocate Date of hearing : 16.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 07.04.2022 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member This appeal by the revenue is against…

M/S I G PETROCHEMICAL LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1317/BANG/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(24)(vd)Section 263Section 28Section 41(1)

…ITA No.1317/Bang/2018 M/s. I.G. Petrochemicals Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/s. I.G. Petrochemicals Ltd. D-4, Jyothi Complex Deputy Commissioner of 134/1, Infantry Road Income-tax Vs. Bengaluru 560 001 Circle-3(1)(1) Bengaluru PAN NO : AAACI4115R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri S. Parthasarathi, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R. Date of Hearing : 10.01.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 21.01.2022 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOU…

Showing 1–20 of 48 · Page 1 of 3

CIT v. Ramaniyam Homes Pvt. Ltd. (384 ITR 530) — Cited in 48 Judgments | BharatTax