CIT v. Sadhu Forging Ltd.

336 ITR 444High Court2011#1559 most cited

What is CIT v. Sadhu Forging Ltd. authority for?

Receipts from the sale of scrap generated during manufacturing or production activities are eligible for deduction under Section 80-IB of the Income-tax Act.

73

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sadhu Forging Ltd. · 336 ITR 444 · section 80-IB · scrap sale · manufacturing · production · profit based deduction · eligible for deduction

Also reported as

172 Taxmann 5

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 14ASection 80IBSection 115JBSection 132Section 153ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 2(15a)section 17(2)(iiia)profit split methodsection 92ca(4)section 17(2)comparable uncontrolled price methodcost plus methodinterest on interestsection 43asection 32(1)(iia)section 80hsection 80ib

Judgments citing CIT v. Sadhu Forging Ltd.

Ipca Laboratories Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (Ltu), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 2493/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR
Section 801BSection 801CSection 80ISection 92C

…It cannot said that sale of empty containers is altogether different business of the assessee. We further held that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of honourable Delhi High Court in case of CIT versus Sadhu forging Ltd 336 ITR 444 as well as Ipca Laboratories ltd; A.Y. 2005:06 to 2010–11 the decision of the honourable Gujarat High Court in Tax Appeal No. 368 of 2008 DECEMBER 21, 2013 an Dy. CIT v. Harjivandas Juthabhai Zaveri [2002] 258 ITR 785/ [2003] 132 Taxman 923 (Guj.) In view of this, we find that lower authorities have erred in not allowing deduction under Section 8…

Ipca Laboratories Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (Ltu), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 3267/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR
Section 801BSection 801CSection 80ISection 92C

…It cannot said that sale of empty containers is altogether different business of the assessee. We further held that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of honourable Delhi High Court in case of CIT versus Sadhu forging Ltd 336 ITR 444 as well as Ipca Laboratories ltd; A.Y. 2005:06 to 2010–11 the decision of the honourable Gujarat High Court in Tax Appeal No. 368 of 2008 DECEMBER 21, 2013 an Dy. CIT v. Harjivandas Juthabhai Zaveri [2002] 258 ITR 785/ [2003] 132 Taxman 923 (Guj.) In view of this, we find that lower authorities have erred in not allowing deduction under Section 8…

Ipca Laboratories Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (Ltu), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 8120/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR
Section 801BSection 801CSection 80ISection 92C

…It cannot said that sale of empty containers is altogether different business of the assessee. We further held that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of honourable Delhi High Court in case of CIT versus Sadhu forging Ltd 336 ITR 444 as well as Ipca Laboratories ltd; A.Y. 2005:06 to 2010–11 the decision of the honourable Gujarat High Court in Tax Appeal No. 368 of 2008 DECEMBER 21, 2013 an Dy. CIT v. Harjivandas Juthabhai Zaveri [2002] 258 ITR 785/ [2003] 132 Taxman 923 (Guj.) In view of this, we find that lower authorities have erred in not allowing deduction under Section 8…

Ipca Laboratories Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (Ltu), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 8084/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR
Section 801BSection 801CSection 80ISection 92C

…It cannot said that sale of empty containers is altogether different business of the assessee. We further held that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of honourable Delhi High Court in case of CIT versus Sadhu forging Ltd 336 ITR 444 as well as Ipca Laboratories ltd; A.Y. 2005:06 to 2010–11 the decision of the honourable Gujarat High Court in Tax Appeal No. 368 of 2008 DECEMBER 21, 2013 an Dy. CIT v. Harjivandas Juthabhai Zaveri [2002] 258 ITR 785/ [2003] 132 Taxman 923 (Guj.) In view of this, we find that lower authorities have erred in not allowing deduction under Section 8…

ACIT Cen Cir 13, Mumbai vs. Ipca Laboratories Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 7511/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR
Section 801BSection 801CSection 80ISection 92C

…It cannot said that sale of empty containers is altogether different business of the assessee. We further held that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of honourable Delhi High Court in case of CIT versus Sadhu forging Ltd 336 ITR 444 as well as Ipca Laboratories ltd; A.Y. 2005:06 to 2010–11 the decision of the honourable Gujarat High Court in Tax Appeal No. 368 of 2008 DECEMBER 21, 2013 an Dy. CIT v. Harjivandas Juthabhai Zaveri [2002] 258 ITR 785/ [2003] 132 Taxman 923 (Guj.) In view of this, we find that lower authorities have erred in not allowing deduction under Section 8…

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

…(2002; 258 ITR 785), dismissed revenue’s appeal by observing as under: - 5. The decision of this Court in the case of Harjivandas Juthabhai Zaveri (supra) has been subsequently considered by the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Sadhu Forging Ltd. [2011] 336 ITR 444/200 Taxman 1/11 taxmann.com 322 (Delhi) and it is held that receipt of sale of scrap part and parcel of industrial activity and therefore, deduction under Section 80IB is allowable. In the said decision, the Delhi High Court has held that the industrial undertaking set up by the assessee was for the purpose of manufacture of steel forging, transm…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Jakson Ltd., Noida

The appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1140/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2021AY 2013-14
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 80I

…years while deleting the addition, we note that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by numerous judicial precedents, case in point being the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd. reported in 336 ITR 444 (Delhi High Court). Similarly, orders were passed by this Tribunal in case of group companies of the assessee company i.e. in the case of Jakson & Co. vs. CIT, in ITA No.350/Del/2014 for Assessment Year 2010-11 vide order dated 06.01.2016 and in the case of Jakson Enterprises vs. ACIT in ITA Nos. 6791 to 6793/Del/2013 vide order dated 29th July,…

ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi vs. Ultimate Flexipack Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1418/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2013-14]

For Appellant: Shri. M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR
Section 80I

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘B’ BENCH, NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING] BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER [A.Y 2013-14] The A.C.I.T Vs. Ultimate Flexipack Ltd. 305, 3rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle 27 New Delhi Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi - 110048 PAN : AAACU 6565 D [Appellant] [Respondent] Date of Hearing : 06.09.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 06.09.2021 Assessee by : Shri. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. Shri Rajiv Kumar, C.A. Revenue by : Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT ME…

Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 10(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1431/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No.1431 /Mum/2014 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd. Addl. Commissioner Of Income- Colgate Research Centre, Main Vs. Tax-10(3) Street, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai – 400076

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Senior Advocate a/w ShriFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Deshpande, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80ISection 8o

…nt units of the assessee's undertaking, hence, the CIT Appeal has rightly taken the said income which was from the sale of Scrap as income derived from industrial undertaking. Learned counsel for the assessee has placed reliance on three judgments reported in 336 ITR 444 (Del.) (CIT Vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd.), 141 ITR 745 (Mad) (CIT Vs. Wheels India Ltd.) and 258 ITR 785 (Guj.) (DCIT Vs. Harijivandas Juthabhai Zaveri). Section 80- HH contemplates deduction on profits and gains derived from the industrial undertaking. The issue is as to whether the income of Rs. 63,66,932/- can be said to be income derived from indus…

DCIT 10(3), Mumbai vs. Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1350/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No.1431 /Mum/2014 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd. Addl. Commissioner Of Income- Colgate Research Centre, Main Vs. Tax-10(3) Street, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai – 400076

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Senior Advocate a/w ShriFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Deshpande, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80ISection 8o

…nt units of the assessee's undertaking, hence, the CIT Appeal has rightly taken the said income which was from the sale of Scrap as income derived from industrial undertaking. Learned counsel for the assessee has placed reliance on three judgments reported in 336 ITR 444 (Del.) (CIT Vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd.), 141 ITR 745 (Mad) (CIT Vs. Wheels India Ltd.) and 258 ITR 785 (Guj.) (DCIT Vs. Harijivandas Juthabhai Zaveri). Section 80- HH contemplates deduction on profits and gains derived from the industrial undertaking. The issue is as to whether the income of Rs. 63,66,932/- can be said to be income derived from indus…

DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. Gail (India) Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4642/DEL/2013[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 1996-97

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 80HSection 80I

…d that miscellaneous income were inextricably linked to and have first degree nexus with the profits and gains of the eligible undertaking and the same were eligible for deduction. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: i. CIT vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd. 336 ITR 444 (Del HC) ii. CIT vs. Arvind Constructions 172 Taxman 5 (Del) iii. Fenner (India) Ltd. vs. CIT 241 ITR 803 (Mad) iv. CIT vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. 383 ITR 217 (SC) v. CIT vs. Indo Swiss Jewels Ltd. 284 ITR 389 (Bom) vi. DLF Power Limited in ITA No. 1195/Del/2002 (Del) vii. Asia Investments Ltd. vs. DCIT 90 ITD 630 (Mum) – Sale of scrap viii. ACIT…

Gail (India) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT-Ltu Delhi, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4454/DEL/2013[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 1996-97

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 80HSection 80I

…d that miscellaneous income were inextricably linked to and have first degree nexus with the profits and gains of the eligible undertaking and the same were eligible for deduction. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: i. CIT vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd. 336 ITR 444 (Del HC) ii. CIT vs. Arvind Constructions 172 Taxman 5 (Del) iii. Fenner (India) Ltd. vs. CIT 241 ITR 803 (Mad) iv. CIT vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. 383 ITR 217 (SC) v. CIT vs. Indo Swiss Jewels Ltd. 284 ITR 389 (Bom) vi. DLF Power Limited in ITA No. 1195/Del/2002 (Del) vii. Asia Investments Ltd. vs. DCIT 90 ITD 630 (Mum) – Sale of scrap viii. ACIT…

Isolloyd Engineering Technologies Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 12(2), New Delhi

ITA 3936/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S.N. Meena, Senior DR
Section 80I

…is settled principle of law that scrap generated in the business is part and parcel of the income derived from business and as such forms part of the business profit as has been held by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in case of CIT vs. Sadu Forgings Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 444 (Del.). However, ld. CIT (A) though mentioned in para 5.3 of the impugned order that, “the assessee’s contention appears prima facie plausible yet it is necessary to examine the assessee’s claim in the present case to ensure that the facts of the case aligning with the extant law”. Ld. CIT (A) accepting the contentions raised by the assessee a…

Srf Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the appellant- assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5784/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Chaudhary, CIT-D.R
Section 10ASection 115JSection 14ASection 92BSection 92C

…xmann.com 348 (Karnataka) wherein it was held that scrap generated during manufacturing or production activities of unit is eligible for profit based deduction. The assessee further placed reliance on the following judgments: • CIT vs Sadhu Forging Ltd [2011] 336 ITR 444 (Delhi-HC) - scrap sale receipts entitled for exemption u/s 80-IB • WIPRO Ltd [(2006) 5 SOT 805 (Bang)] - scrap sale income is eligible for deduction u/s 10A. 14. The ld. counsel of assessee submitted that the DRP relying on the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of I.T.A. No.5784/DEL/2016 16 CIT vs Sadhu Forging Ltd [2011] 336 ITR 444 (Delhi- HC…

Lodha Developers Ltd(Formerly Known As Lodha Developers Private Limited), Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 2348/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Bledy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax V. M/S. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle – 7(3) 412, 71-G, Vardhman Chamber Room No. 655, 6Th Floor C.P. Road, Horniman Circle Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Fort, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aabcl1117D (Appellant) (Respondent) Lodha Developers Limited Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax V. {Since Merged M/S. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd.,} Central Circle – 7(3) 412, 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhman Chamber Room No. 655, 6Th Floor Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Fort, Mumbai - 400 001 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aabcl1117D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rajan R. VoraFor Respondent: Shri Awungshi Gimson
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…ome derived from eligible business and assessee has rightfully included such income while computing deduction u/s. 80IB of the Act. Reliance was placed on the following decisions: - a) Vidyut corporation [324 ITR 221] (Bombay High Court) b) Sadhu Forging Ltd [336 ITR 444] (Delhi High Court) c) Sesa Industries Ltd [415 ITR 257] (Bombay High Court) d) Arun Mariammal Textiles Ltd [97 taxmann.com 298) (Madras HC) e) Vimal Builders in ITA.No. 3451/8MUM/2008 dated 09.09.2009. 34 ITA No. 2147 & 2348/MUM/2018 (A.Y: 2014-15) Lodha Developers Limited {since merged M/s. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd.,} 34. On the other hand, Ld.…

DCIT Cent. Cir. -7(3), Mumbai vs. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 2147/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Bledy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax V. M/S. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle – 7(3) 412, 71-G, Vardhman Chamber Room No. 655, 6Th Floor C.P. Road, Horniman Circle Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Fort, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aabcl1117D (Appellant) (Respondent) Lodha Developers Limited Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax V. {Since Merged M/S. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd.,} Central Circle – 7(3) 412, 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhman Chamber Room No. 655, 6Th Floor Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Fort, Mumbai - 400 001 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aabcl1117D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rajan R. VoraFor Respondent: Shri Awungshi Gimson
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…ome derived from eligible business and assessee has rightfully included such income while computing deduction u/s. 80IB of the Act. Reliance was placed on the following decisions: - a) Vidyut corporation [324 ITR 221] (Bombay High Court) b) Sadhu Forging Ltd [336 ITR 444] (Delhi High Court) c) Sesa Industries Ltd [415 ITR 257] (Bombay High Court) d) Arun Mariammal Textiles Ltd [97 taxmann.com 298) (Madras HC) e) Vimal Builders in ITA.No. 3451/8MUM/2008 dated 09.09.2009. 34 ITA No. 2147 & 2348/MUM/2018 (A.Y: 2014-15) Lodha Developers Limited {since merged M/s. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd.,} 34. On the other hand, Ld.…

M/S Sjvn Ltd. ( Formerly Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited), Shimla vs. DCIT, Circle, Shimla

ITA 835/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Mar 2019AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Sood, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Mona Mohanti, CIT DR
Section 250(6)

…ion of scrap had direct link with the manufacturing process carried out by the assessee and therefore income arising from sale of scrap is eligible for deduction u/s 80 IA of the Act. Further reliance was placed on the decision of Delhi High Court reported in 336 ITR 444 in the case of CIT vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd.” 3 6 . R e f e r r i n g t o t h e s a m e i t w a s p o i n t e d o u t t h a t t h e n e x u s o f t h e i n c o m e f r o m s c r a p s a l e w i t h t h e m a n u f a c t u r i n g a c t i v i t y h a d b e e n d u l y d e m o n s t r a t e d b y p o i n t i n g o u t t h a t t h e c o s t o f s p…

M/S Sjvn Ltd. ( Formerly Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited), Shimla vs. DCIT, Circle, Shimla

ITA 834/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Mar 2019AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Sood, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Mona Mohanti, CIT DR
Section 250(6)

…ion of scrap had direct link with the manufacturing process carried out by the assessee and therefore income arising from sale of scrap is eligible for deduction u/s 80 IA of the Act. Further reliance was placed on the decision of Delhi High Court reported in 336 ITR 444 in the case of CIT vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd.” 3 6 . R e f e r r i n g t o t h e s a m e i t w a s p o i n t e d o u t t h a t t h e n e x u s o f t h e i n c o m e f r o m s c r a p s a l e w i t h t h e m a n u f a c t u r i n g a c t i v i t y h a d b e e n d u l y d e m o n s t r a t e d b y p o i n t i n g o u t t h a t t h e c o s t o f s p…

ACIT, Circle, Shimla vs. M/S Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited, Shimla

ITA 827/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Mar 2019AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Sood, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Mona Mohanti, CIT DR
Section 250(6)

…ion of scrap had direct link with the manufacturing process carried out by the assessee and therefore income arising from sale of scrap is eligible for deduction u/s 80 IA of the Act. Further reliance was placed on the decision of Delhi High Court reported in 336 ITR 444 in the case of CIT vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd.” 3 6 . R e f e r r i n g t o t h e s a m e i t w a s p o i n t e d o u t t h a t t h e n e x u s o f t h e i n c o m e f r o m s c r a p s a l e w i t h t h e m a n u f a c t u r i n g a c t i v i t y h a d b e e n d u l y d e m o n s t r a t e d b y p o i n t i n g o u t t h a t t h e c o s t o f s p…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Replika Press Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3921/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblereplika Press Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit B-214, Ashok Vihar, Circle-15(1) Phase-1 New Delhi New Delhi Aaacr1084L (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit Vs Replika Press Pvt. Ltd. Circle-15(1) B-214, Ashok Vihar, C. R. Building, I.P. Estate Phase-1 New Delhi New Delhi Aaacr1084L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10BSection 143(1)Section 80

…Topman Export (Supra). Ground No. 1 of the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose. 7. As regards Ground No.2 of assessee’s appeal, the Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Sadhu Forging Ltd. 336 ITR 444 wherein it is held that the receipts of sale of scrap being part and parcel of the activity and being proximate thereto would also be within the ambit of gains derived from industrial undertaking for the purpose of computing deduction under Section 80-IB of the Act. Thus, the Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A) are not correct in not reducing…