What is CIT v. Rasoi Ltd. authority for?

Sales tax subsidies and Industrial Promotion Assistance received under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme are capital receipts and therefore not liable to tax. The ruling clarifies the inapplicability of the Sahney Steel judgment to such subsidies.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Rasoi Ltd.?

107 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Rasoi Ltd. (335 ITR 438), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Rasoi Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 115JB, Section 143(2), Section 143(3), Section 14A, Section 2(24), Section 250.

CIT v. Rasoi Ltd. (335 ITR 438)

Srf Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 1, Ltu, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 4539/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jadhav, CIT DR

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 92BSection 92C

…IT –vs- Sh. Sham Lal Bansal (Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, ITA No. 472 of 2010  PCIT v. Ankit Metal & Power Ltd. [416 ITR 591 2019] Cal High Court  CIT vs. Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. reported in (2008) 306 ITR 392 (SC)  CIT vs- Rasoi Ltd. [(2011) 335 ITR 438 (Cal.)]  CIT v. Chapalkhar Brothers [2017] 88 taxmann.com 178 (SC)/ (2018) 400 ITR 279 (SC)  DCIT vs.- Reliance Industries (2004) 88 ITD 273 (Mum.)(SB)  CIT vs. Birla VXL Lt. (2013) 90 DTR 376 (Guj.)(HC);  Hydro Carbons & Chemicals vs.- ACIT (ITA No. 1982- 86/Kol/09)  Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2012) 33 CCH 526 (Del.)(ITAT).  C…

Srf Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 80/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jadhav, CIT DR

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 92BSection 92C

…IT –vs- Sh. Sham Lal Bansal (Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, ITA No. 472 of 2010  PCIT v. Ankit Metal & Power Ltd. [416 ITR 591 2019] Cal High Court  CIT vs. Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. reported in (2008) 306 ITR 392 (SC)  CIT vs- Rasoi Ltd. [(2011) 335 ITR 438 (Cal.)]  CIT v. Chapalkhar Brothers [2017] 88 taxmann.com 178 (SC)/ (2018) 400 ITR 279 (SC)  DCIT vs.- Reliance Industries (2004) 88 ITD 273 (Mum.)(SB)  CIT vs. Birla VXL Lt. (2013) 90 DTR 376 (Guj.)(HC);  Hydro Carbons & Chemicals vs.- ACIT (ITA No. 1982- 86/Kol/09)  Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2012) 33 CCH 526 (Del.)(ITAT).  C…

DCIT Cir-5(1), Kolkata vs. Dhunseri Ventures Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1780/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata..……………………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. M/S Dhunseri Ventures Ltd…………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent 4A, Dhunseri House, Woodburn Park, Kol - 700020.. [Pan: Aabck1597K] Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 08, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 16, 2025

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14ASection 250

…accepted the sales tax subsidy as revenue receipt liable to tax and on appeal, the predecessors of the ld. CIT(A) admitted the claim of the company by following the decision rendered by the jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Rasoi Ltd. (335 ITR 438). The ld. AR further submits that the Hon’ble ITAT, Kolkata in the matter of same assessee upheld the order of the ld. CIT(A) by holding the sales tax subsidy to be in the nature of capital receipt not liable to tax. The ld. AR further submits that subsequent year i.e. assessment years 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13, the then Assessing Officer has…

DCIT CC-1(4), Kol, Kolkata vs. Saj Food Products Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1246/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 132Section 153ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40A(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “ए’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजपाल यादव, उपा"य" एबं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य के सम" [Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member ] I.T.A. Nos. 1244 to 1246/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Kolkata Vs. Saj Food Products Pvt. Ltd. (PAN: AAICS 0790 G) ( अपीलाथ" ) Respondent / (""यथ") Appellant / Date of Hearing / सुनवाई 23.10.2024 क" "त"थ Date of Pronouncement/ 25.11.2024 आदेश उ"घोषणा क" "त"थ For the Appellant/ Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate "नधा"रती क" ओर से Mit…

DCIT CC-1(4), Kol., Kolkata vs. Saj Food Products Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1245/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 132Section 153ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40A(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “ए’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजपाल यादव, उपा"य" एबं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य के सम" [Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member ] I.T.A. Nos. 1244 to 1246/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Kolkata Vs. Saj Food Products Pvt. Ltd. (PAN: AAICS 0790 G) ( अपीलाथ" ) Respondent / (""यथ") Appellant / Date of Hearing / सुनवाई 23.10.2024 क" "त"थ Date of Pronouncement/ 25.11.2024 आदेश उ"घोषणा क" "त"थ For the Appellant/ Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate "नधा"रती क" ओर से Mit…

DCIT CC-1(4), Kol., Kolkata vs. Saj Food Products Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1244/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 132Section 153ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40A(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “ए’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजपाल यादव, उपा"य" एबं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य के सम" [Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member ] I.T.A. Nos. 1244 to 1246/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Kolkata Vs. Saj Food Products Pvt. Ltd. (PAN: AAICS 0790 G) ( अपीलाथ" ) Respondent / (""यथ") Appellant / Date of Hearing / सुनवाई 23.10.2024 क" "त"थ Date of Pronouncement/ 25.11.2024 आदेश उ"घोषणा क" "त"थ For the Appellant/ Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate "नधा"रती क" ओर से Mit…

Economic Explosives Limited, Nagpur vs. National E Assessment Centre, New Delhi

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 242/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…subsidy can be treated as capital in nature and not revenue in nature: DCIT vs. Inox Leisure Ltd. (351 ITR 314) (Guj.); Shree Balaji Alloys vs. CIT (198 Taxmann 122) (J&K); CIT vs. Tiruttani Co-op Sugar Mills Ltd. (322 ITR 59) (Mad.); and CIT vs. Rasoi Ltd. (335 ITR 438) (Cal.). Now, a question arises as to whether the impugned subsidy be reduced while computing the book profit under the MAT provisions of the Act: The Mumbai Tribunal in the case of M/s. Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. ltd. Bearing ITA No. 4484/Mum/2019 wherein dealing with the identical scheme, it has been held that the same is capital in natu…

Economic Explosives Limited, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1 (2), Nagpur

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 177/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…subsidy can be treated as capital in nature and not revenue in nature: DCIT vs. Inox Leisure Ltd. (351 ITR 314) (Guj.); Shree Balaji Alloys vs. CIT (198 Taxmann 122) (J&K); CIT vs. Tiruttani Co-op Sugar Mills Ltd. (322 ITR 59) (Mad.); and CIT vs. Rasoi Ltd. (335 ITR 438) (Cal.). Now, a question arises as to whether the impugned subsidy be reduced while computing the book profit under the MAT provisions of the Act: The Mumbai Tribunal in the case of M/s. Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. ltd. Bearing ITA No. 4484/Mum/2019 wherein dealing with the identical scheme, it has been held that the same is capital in natu…

The Ramco Cements Ltd., Rajapalayam vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 2, Madurai

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2196/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.957/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.958/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2196/Chny/2019 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Ramco Cements Limited Dcit बनाम (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Corporate Circle -2, Ramamandiram, / Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1274/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1363/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1897/Chny/2017 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit The Ramco Cements Limited बनाम/ Corporate Circle -2, (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Ramamandiram, Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.Prabhakar (CA) &For Respondent: Mrs. Jothi Lakshmi Nayak (CIT)-Ld.DR

…trial Promotion Assistance IPA") of Rs.51,39,36,062/- received under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme and in not following the decisions of the Hon'ble Tribunal in ITA No 2148 and 2163/ MDS/2015 and the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Rasoi Ltd. (2011) 335 ITR 438, wherein it was held that the incentive received under the WB Incentive Scheme is capital in nature. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in incorrectly applying the decision of the Supreme Court in Sahney Steel and Press Works Limited Vs. CIT (1997)228 ITR 253 (SC), though the said decision has been specifically held to be…

ACIT Corporate Circle 2, Madurai vs. The Ramco Cements Limited, Chennai

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 1897/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.957/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.958/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2196/Chny/2019 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Ramco Cements Limited Dcit बनाम (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Corporate Circle -2, Ramamandiram, / Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1274/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1363/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1897/Chny/2017 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit The Ramco Cements Limited बनाम/ Corporate Circle -2, (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Ramamandiram, Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.Prabhakar (CA) &For Respondent: Mrs. Jothi Lakshmi Nayak (CIT)-Ld.DR

…trial Promotion Assistance IPA") of Rs.51,39,36,062/- received under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme and in not following the decisions of the Hon'ble Tribunal in ITA No 2148 and 2163/ MDS/2015 and the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Rasoi Ltd. (2011) 335 ITR 438, wherein it was held that the incentive received under the WB Incentive Scheme is capital in nature. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in incorrectly applying the decision of the Supreme Court in Sahney Steel and Press Works Limited Vs. CIT (1997)228 ITR 253 (SC), though the said decision has been specifically held to be…

The Ramco Cements Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Madurai

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 958/CHNY/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.957/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.958/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2196/Chny/2019 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Ramco Cements Limited Dcit बनाम (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Corporate Circle -2, Ramamandiram, / Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1274/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1363/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1897/Chny/2017 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit The Ramco Cements Limited बनाम/ Corporate Circle -2, (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Ramamandiram, Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.Prabhakar (CA) &For Respondent: Mrs. Jothi Lakshmi Nayak (CIT)-Ld.DR

…trial Promotion Assistance IPA") of Rs.51,39,36,062/- received under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme and in not following the decisions of the Hon'ble Tribunal in ITA No 2148 and 2163/ MDS/2015 and the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Rasoi Ltd. (2011) 335 ITR 438, wherein it was held that the incentive received under the WB Incentive Scheme is capital in nature. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in incorrectly applying the decision of the Supreme Court in Sahney Steel and Press Works Limited Vs. CIT (1997)228 ITR 253 (SC), though the said decision has been specifically held to be…

The Ramco Cements Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Madurai

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 957/CHNY/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.957/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.958/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2196/Chny/2019 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Ramco Cements Limited Dcit बनाम (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Corporate Circle -2, Ramamandiram, / Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1274/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1363/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1897/Chny/2017 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit The Ramco Cements Limited बनाम/ Corporate Circle -2, (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Ramamandiram, Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.Prabhakar (CA) &For Respondent: Mrs. Jothi Lakshmi Nayak (CIT)-Ld.DR

…trial Promotion Assistance IPA") of Rs.51,39,36,062/- received under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme and in not following the decisions of the Hon'ble Tribunal in ITA No 2148 and 2163/ MDS/2015 and the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Rasoi Ltd. (2011) 335 ITR 438, wherein it was held that the incentive received under the WB Incentive Scheme is capital in nature. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in incorrectly applying the decision of the Supreme Court in Sahney Steel and Press Works Limited Vs. CIT (1997)228 ITR 253 (SC), though the said decision has been specifically held to be…

DCIT, Madurai vs. The Ramco Cements Limited, Rajapalayam

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 1363/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.957/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.958/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2196/Chny/2019 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Ramco Cements Limited Dcit बनाम (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Corporate Circle -2, Ramamandiram, / Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1274/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1363/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1897/Chny/2017 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit The Ramco Cements Limited बनाम/ Corporate Circle -2, (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Ramamandiram, Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.Prabhakar (CA) &For Respondent: Mrs. Jothi Lakshmi Nayak (CIT)-Ld.DR

…trial Promotion Assistance IPA") of Rs.51,39,36,062/- received under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme and in not following the decisions of the Hon'ble Tribunal in ITA No 2148 and 2163/ MDS/2015 and the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Rasoi Ltd. (2011) 335 ITR 438, wherein it was held that the incentive received under the WB Incentive Scheme is capital in nature. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in incorrectly applying the decision of the Supreme Court in Sahney Steel and Press Works Limited Vs. CIT (1997)228 ITR 253 (SC), though the said decision has been specifically held to be…

DCIT, Madurai vs. The Ramco Cements Ltd., Rajapalayam

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 1274/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.957/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.958/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2196/Chny/2019 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Ramco Cements Limited Dcit बनाम (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Corporate Circle -2, Ramamandiram, / Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1274/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1363/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1897/Chny/2017 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit The Ramco Cements Limited बनाम/ Corporate Circle -2, (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Ramamandiram, Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.Prabhakar (CA) &For Respondent: Mrs. Jothi Lakshmi Nayak (CIT)-Ld.DR

…trial Promotion Assistance IPA") of Rs.51,39,36,062/- received under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme and in not following the decisions of the Hon'ble Tribunal in ITA No 2148 and 2163/ MDS/2015 and the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Rasoi Ltd. (2011) 335 ITR 438, wherein it was held that the incentive received under the WB Incentive Scheme is capital in nature. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in incorrectly applying the decision of the Supreme Court in Sahney Steel and Press Works Limited Vs. CIT (1997)228 ITR 253 (SC), though the said decision has been specifically held to be…