CIT v. Shah Originals

327 ITR 19High Court2010#4395 most cited

What is CIT v. Shah Originals authority for?

The decision in CIT v. Shah Originals is distinguished where a gain arises from foreign exchange fluctuation during an export transaction, and such gains are considered for Section 10A purposes. The case was specifically rendered in the context of Section 80HHC deductions, not Section 10A.

27

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Shah Originals · 327 ITR 19 · Section 10A · Section 80HHC · foreign exchange fluctuation · export transaction · business income

Also reported as

191 Taxmann 81
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 35(1)(iv)export oriented unitr&d expenditurecarry forward of lossessection 80hhcsection 35(2ab)section 10bsection 10(34)block of assetssection 10asection 35profits and gains of business or profession

Judgments citing CIT v. Shah Originals

J.P. Morgan Services India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed, as above

ITA 784/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh: (A.Y : 2009-10) J.P. Morgan Services India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit (Osd), Range-8(2), Prism Towers, Level Nos. 9 To 11, Mumbai (Respondent) Link Road, Mindspace, Goregaon (W), Mumbai 400 104 Pan : Aabcd0503B (Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka &For Respondent: Shri N.K. Chand
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 92C

…ITA Nos. 8987/Mum/2010 & 7822/Mum/2011 (A.Ys 2006-07 & 2007-08) dated 30.11.2015 13. The ld. CIT-DR has not disputed the aforesaid factual matrix but pointed out that following the ratio of judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Shah Originals, 327 ITR 19 (Bom.), the interest income in question is not eligible for the benefits of Sec. 10A of the Act. In this context, it is pointed out that as per the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court, interest income generated from deposits held in EEFC account does not qualify for being assessed as business income, but is assessable as income from other source…

Kepel Fels Offshore & Engineering Services Mumbai P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 9(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6278/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am Keppel Fels Offshore & Engineering Income Tax Officer Wd 9(2)(2), Room No.225, 2 Nd Services Mumbai P Ltd Unit Nos. 3&4, 8Th Floor, Prism Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Vs. Tower-A, Mindspace Link Road, Road, Mumbai-400012 Goregaon (W), Mumbai-400062 Pan No.Aacck6350M Appellant .. Respondent .. Shri. Nitesh Joshi, Ar & Assessee By Shri B.S. Chandresekar, Ar Revenue By .. Shri Maurya Pratap, Dr .. Date Of Hearing 20-12-2016 Date Of Pronouncement .. 20-12-2016

Section 10ASection 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI N.K. PRADHAN, AM Keppel Fels Offshore & Engineering Income Tax Officer Wd 9(2)(2), Room No.225, 2 nd Services Mumbai P Ltd Unit Nos. 3&4, 8th Floor, Prism Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Vs. Tower-A, Mindspace Link Road, Road, Mumbai-400012 Goregaon (W), Mumbai-400062 PAN No.AACCK6350M Appellant .. Respondent .. Shri. Nitesh Joshi, AR & Assessee by Shri B.S. Chandresekar, AR Revenue by .. Shri Maurya Pratap, DR .. Date of hearing 20-12-2016 Date of pronouncement .. 20-12-2016 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: This appeal by…

DCIT 8(3), Mumbai vs. Syntel Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5850/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Shri Manjunatha SwamyFor Respondent: Shri Dinesh Vyas, A.R
Section 10ASection 28

…s. 10A/10B of the Act relying upon the Bombay High Court's judgements in the cases of Punit Commercial Ltd. (245 ITR 550) and Nagpur Engineering (245 ITR 806) without appreciating that in a subsequent judgement delivered in the case of CIT Vs. Shah Originals (327 ITR 19 [2010], it was categorically held by the Bombay High Court that the interest accrued to the assessee on the deposits held in the EEFC account falls for classification as ‘income from other sources' and can not be treat as business income." 2. The only issue in appeal is regarding allowability of interest income of Rs.14,26,60,079/- as profits eli…

J.P Morgan Services India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as partly allowed

ITA 477/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09 J.P. Morgan Services India P. Dcit 8(2) Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, बनाम/ Prism Tower, Level No.9 To M.K. Rd Vs. 11, Link Rd, Mindspace, Mumbai-400020 Malad (W) Mumbai-400064 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aabcd0503B

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 92C

…he connotation ‘derived from’ is much narrower than that of the phrase ‘attributable to’. He placed reliance on following judgments: i. Liberty India 317 ITR 218 (SC) ii. Pandian Chemicals 262 ITR 278(SC) iii. Sterling Foods 237 ITR 579(SC) iv. Shah Originals 327 ITR 19(SC) and v. Swani Spice 332 ITR 288 (SC). 7.4. The Ld. CIT-DR made an alternative argument also that in case impugned interest income is considered as business income then quantification of the amount of deduction allowable should be done strictly in accordance with the mechanism of computation provided under sub-section (4) of section 10A, and t…

M/S New Delhi Television Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1023/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2015AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R.L. Meena, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE : SHRI I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 1023/Del./2013 Asstt. Year : 2003-04 New Delhi Television Ltd., vs. A.C.I.T., Circle 13(1), 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi. Phase-III, New Delhi. [PAN : AAACN0865 D] ITA Nos. 5126/Del./2011 Asstt. Year : 2003-04 New Delhi Television Ltd., vs. Commissioner of 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, Income-tax-V, New Delhi. Phase-III, New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Tarandeep Singh, C.A. Respondent by : Shri R.L. Meena, CIT/DR Date of hearin…

New Delhi Television Ltd., New Delhi vs. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5126/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2015AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R.L. Meena, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE : SHRI I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 1023/Del./2013 Asstt. Year : 2003-04 New Delhi Television Ltd., vs. A.C.I.T., Circle 13(1), 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi. Phase-III, New Delhi. [PAN : AAACN0865 D] ITA Nos. 5126/Del./2011 Asstt. Year : 2003-04 New Delhi Television Ltd., vs. Commissioner of 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, Income-tax-V, New Delhi. Phase-III, New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Tarandeep Singh, C.A. Respondent by : Shri R.L. Meena, CIT/DR Date of hearin…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Motorola India Electronics (P) Ltd

ITA/428/2007HC Karnataka11 Dec 2013

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

Section 10ASection 260Section 4

…xport of goods or merchandise and bailee. The assessee would not be allowed to compute the total income by deducting profits derived from export. The Bombay High Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. SHAH ORIGINALS REPORTED IN (2010) 327 ITR 19 has held that ‘an assessee who is a exporter, is not under an obligation of law to maintain the export proceeds in EEFC account but, this is a facility which is made available by the Reserve Bank of India. The transaction of export is complete in all respects upon the repatriation of the proceedings. It lies within the discretion of the e…