CIT v. Sarda Binding Works

102 ITR 187High Court1976#8848 most cited
12

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2024.

Issues it is cited on

section 10(2)(xv)section 10(2)legal expensesinterest under section 201(1a)percentage completion methodsection 199business connectionrule of consistencysection 201(1a)section 260commercial expediencysection 201

Judgments citing CIT v. Sarda Binding Works

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III, vs. M/S. SAVIJANA SEA FOODS PVT. LTD.,

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITTA/55/2010HC Telangana20 Dec 2024

Bench: J SREENIVAS RAO,ALOK ARADHE

Section 260

…aid payment as „capital gains‟ in their hands in their returns would not be relevant in deciding the issue whether the payment by the Assessee should be treated as „business expenditure.‟ As explained by the Madras High Court in CIT v. Sarda Binding Works 102 ITR 187 (Mad), it is the point of view of the payer which is relevant. 37. The decision in CIT v. Mangal Tirth Estates Ltd. 303 ITR 366 (Mad) was a case where the Assessee therein had also followed the CCM. It was engaged in the business of construction and sale of a multi-storeyed office cum shopping complex. The Assessee had under the developme…

GOPAL DAS ESTATES & HOUSING PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2576/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 23

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “C” BENCH: NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, PRESIDENT & SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.2576/Del/2015 & 2523/Del/2017 [Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13] Gopal Das Estates & Housing Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT 16th Floor, Dr. Gopal Das Bhawan, Company Circle 10(1) 28, Barakhamba Road New Delhi New Delhi-110001. PAN-AAACG0072F APPELLANT RESPONDENT [Assessment Year : 2011-12] vs DCIT Gopal Das Estates & Housing Pvt. Ltd. Circle-10(1) 16th Floor, Dr. Gopal Das Bhawan, 28, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi PAN-AAACG0072F APPELLANT RESPONDE…

HAWARE INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 15(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2543/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Bairagra (AR)For Respondent: Shri B. Srinivas (CIT-DR) &
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 22Section 254(1)

…not be relevant in deciding the issue whether the payment by the assessee should be treated as business expenditure. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court relied on the decision of Shahazada Nand & Sons (supra), Nainital Bank Ltd. (62 ITR 638), Sharada Binding Works (102 ITR 187). 38. In CIT Vs. Nainital Bank Ltd. (supra) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that "a large quantity of jewellery pledged with assessee bank by its constituents were stolen by dacoits from premises of bank. Bank paid the market value of the 10 ITA No. 2543 & 4021 Mum 2019-Haware Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. jewellery pledged by the constituents and c…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VIII vs. GOPAL DASS ESTATES & HOUSING PVT.LTD.

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA - 742 / 2009HC Delhi20 Mar 2019
Section 260

…aid payment as „capital gains‟ in their hands in their returns would not be relevant in deciding the issue whether the payment by the Assessee should be treated as „business expenditure.‟ As explained by the Madras High Court in CIT v. Sarda Binding Works 102 ITR 187 (Mad), it is the point of view of the payer which is relevant. 37. The decision in CIT v. Mangal Tirth Estates Ltd. 303 ITR 366 (Mad) was a case where the Assessee therein had also followed the CCM. It was engaged in the business of construction and sale of a multi-storeyed office cum shopping complex. The Assessee had under the developme…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. GOPAL DASS ESTATES & HOUSING PVT.LTD.

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA - 548 / 2010HC Delhi20 Mar 2019
Section 260

…aid payment as „capital gains‟ in their hands in their returns would not be relevant in deciding the issue whether the payment by the Assessee should be treated as „business expenditure.‟ As explained by the Madras High Court in CIT v. Sarda Binding Works 102 ITR 187 (Mad), it is the point of view of the payer which is relevant. 37. The decision in CIT v. Mangal Tirth Estates Ltd. 303 ITR 366 (Mad) was a case where the Assessee therein had also followed the CCM. It was engaged in the business of construction and sale of a multi-storeyed office cum shopping complex. The Assessee had under the developme…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. GOPAL DASS ESTATES & HOUSING PVT.LTD.

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA - 400 / 2009HC Delhi20 Mar 2019
Section 260

…aid payment as „capital gains‟ in their hands in their returns would not be relevant in deciding the issue whether the payment by the Assessee should be treated as „business expenditure.‟ As explained by the Madras High Court in CIT v. Sarda Binding Works 102 ITR 187 (Mad), it is the point of view of the payer which is relevant. 37. The decision in CIT v. Mangal Tirth Estates Ltd. 303 ITR 366 (Mad) was a case where the Assessee therein had also followed the CCM. It was engaged in the business of construction and sale of a multi-storeyed office cum shopping complex. The Assessee had under the developme…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. GOPAL DASS ESTATES & HOUSING PVT.LTD.

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA - 581 / 2010HC Delhi20 Mar 2019
Section 260

…aid payment as „capital gains‟ in their hands in their returns would not be relevant in deciding the issue whether the payment by the Assessee should be treated as „business expenditure.‟ As explained by the Madras High Court in CIT v. Sarda Binding Works 102 ITR 187 (Mad), it is the point of view of the payer which is relevant. 37. The decision in CIT v. Mangal Tirth Estates Ltd. 303 ITR 366 (Mad) was a case where the Assessee therein had also followed the CCM. It was engaged in the business of construction and sale of a multi-storeyed office cum shopping complex. The Assessee had under the developme…

GLOBAL LOGIC TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-2(2) HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1672/HYD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanm/S. Global Logic Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Technologies Ltd Income Tax, Circle 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aadcr5222K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri K. Srinivas Reddy, DR
Section 143(3)

…he matter has to be looked at from the point of view of the person paying the amount and not that of the recipients. For this proposition, he placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sarada Binding Works (1976) 102 ITR 187 (Mad.). He submitted that both the payee as well as the recipient may not necessarily adopt the same method of accounting and therefore, the difference in method of Page 3 of 7 ITA No 1672 of 2016 Globallogic Technologies Ltd Hyderabad. accounting may result in the income in the hands of the recipient not being offered to tax in the same accou…

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. M/s. Kokivenkateswara Reddy AND others,

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITTA/210/2003HC Telangana21 Jun 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

Section 260

…aid payment as „capital gains‟ in their hands in their returns would not be relevant in deciding the issue whether the payment by the Assessee should be treated as „business expenditure.‟ As explained by the Madras High Court in CIT v. Sarda Binding Works 102 ITR 187 (Mad), it is the point of view of the payer which is relevant. 37. The decision in CIT v. Mangal Tirth Estates Ltd. 303 ITR 366 (Mad) was a case where the Assessee therein had also followed the CCM. It was engaged in the business of construction and sale of a multi-storeyed office cum shopping complex. The Assessee had under the developme…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II vs. MUNJAL SHOWA LTD

Accordingly, they are dismissed without any order as to

ITA/85/2009HC Delhi06 Sept 2010
Section 143(3)

…. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. P. Ltd., [1980] 123 ITR 538, Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. (supra), CIT v. CIBA of India Ltd., [1968] 69 ITR 692 (SC), CIT v. Lucas T.V.S. Limited (No.1), [1977] 110 ITR 338 (Mad), CIT v. Sarada Binding Works, [1976] 102 ITR 187 (Mad), and Agarwal Hardware Works (P.) Ltd. v. CIT, [1980] 121 ITR 510 (Cal), held thus: “It would thus appear that the courts have applied different tests like starting of a new business on the basis of technical know-how received from the foreign firm, the exclusive right of the company to use the patent or trademark which it receives fr…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II vs. MUNJAL SHOWA LTD

Accordingly, they are dismissed without any order as to

ITA/86/2009HC Delhi06 Sept 2010
Section 143(3)

…. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. P. Ltd., [1980] 123 ITR 538, Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. (supra), CIT v. CIBA of India Ltd., [1968] 69 ITR 692 (SC), CIT v. Lucas T.V.S. Limited (No.1), [1977] 110 ITR 338 (Mad), CIT v. Sarada Binding Works, [1976] 102 ITR 187 (Mad), and Agarwal Hardware Works (P.) Ltd. v. CIT, [1980] 121 ITR 510 (Cal), held thus: “It would thus appear that the courts have applied different tests like starting of a new business on the basis of technical know-how received from the foreign firm, the exclusive right of the company to use the patent or trademark which it receives fr…

Commissioner of Income Tax-IV vs. M/s DCM Technologies Limited

ITA/861/2010HC Delhi15 Jul 2010
Section 260A

…l as the test of „enduring benefit‟ may not be conclusive. Their Lordships also referred to the decisions in CIT v. CIBA of India Ltd. (1968) 69 ITR 692 (SC); CIT v. Lucas T.V.S. Limited (No.1) (1977) 110 ITR 338 (Mad); CIT v. Sarada Binding Works (1976) 102 ITR 187 (Mad.); Agarwal Hardware Works (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (1980) 121 ITR 510 (Cal); CIT v. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Pvt. Ltd. (1980) 123 ITR 538 (Bom.); Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1980) 124 ITR 1 (SC) and Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd.(supra) and eventually came to hold thus: “It would thus appear that the courts have applied different…