How many judgments cite CIT v. Sterling Foods?

311 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Sterling Foods (237 ITR 579), spanning 2007 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Sterling Foods come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 115JB, Section 80IB, Section 14A, Section 37(1), Section 80IC.

CIT v. Sterling Foods

237 ITR 579Supreme Court of India1999#247 most cited

What is CIT v. Sterling Foods authority for?

Income eligible for profit-linked deductions under sections like 80-IC or 10B must have a direct nexus to the eligible business activity or be derived from the industrial undertaking itself, and not merely attributable to it or arising from a post-manufacturing event.

311

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,518 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sterling Foods · 237 ITR 579 · section 80-IC · section 10B · profit-linked deductions · direct nexus · derived from industrial undertaking · eligible business activity · post-manufacturing event · income eligibility for deductions

Also reported as

104 Taxmann 204

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 115JB Section 80IB Section 14A Section 37(1)Section 80IC Section 92CA Section 80HH

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 80h section 80hh eligible business section 80ib deduction under section 80ia section 80hhc section 80i section 80ic section 80ia deduction u/s 80ia gross total income written down value

Judgments citing CIT v. Sterling Foods

ACIT, Chennai vs. M/S Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd., Chennai

ITA 318/CHNY/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Mar 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.318 & 319/Mds/2008 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1020/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1665/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Swaminathan, Sr.Standing

Section 271ASection 80Section 80H

…The Assessing ITA No.1020,1665 & 1386/Mds/10 Officer shall re-examine the matter afresh and thereafter decide the issue after considering the judgments of Apex Court in Cambay Electric Supply Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT (113 ITR 84), CIT v. Sterling Foods (237 ITR 579) and Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT (262 ITR 278) and thereafter, decide the issue in accordance with law, after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 105. The next issue arises for consideration is with regard to disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 106. Shri M. Swaminathan, Ld. Sr. Standing Counsel for the Revenue, subm…

National Housing Bank, New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result ground No. 8 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed with above direction

ITA 3704/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishinational Housing Bank, Addl Cit, Core-5A, India Habitat Centre, Range-31(1), Vs. Lodhi Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) National Housing Bank, Addl Cit, Core-5A, India Habitat Centre, Range-31(1), Lodhi Road, New Delhi Vs. New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) National Housing Bank, Addl Cit, Core-5A, India Habitat Centre, Range-31(1), Vs. Lodhi Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) National Housing Bank, Addl Cit, Core-5A, India Habitat Centre, Range-31(1), Vs. Lodhi Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Page 2 Of 50 National Housing Bank, Addl Cit, Core-5A, India Habitat Centre, Range-31(1), Vs. Lodhi Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) National Housing Bank, Addl Cit, Core-5A, India Habitat Centre, Range-31(1), Vs. Lodhi Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ashok Chopra, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ravi Jain, CIT DR

Section 271Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)

…he Legislature intended to cover receipts from sources other than the actual conduct of the business of generation and distribution of electricity. The scope of expression " derived'from" was again considered by the Apex court in CIT Vs. Sterling Food ( 1999) 237 ITR 579 (S) and it was held thus : " Held reversing the decision of the High Court, that the provisions of section 28 as amended made no difference. The words " derived" is usually followed by the word " from" and it mean " get" to trace from a source, arise from' originate in show the origin or formation of the source of import entitlements could not be…

Rupinder Singh Arora, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(1)(2), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 204/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Pradhan

For Appellant: Shri Swapan Kumar BepariFor Respondent: Shri Karthik Natarajan

Section 80

…ing aggrieved of the disallowance made the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT (Appeal). Ld. CIT (Appeal) upheld the disallowance made by the assessing officer more or less on identical reasoning relying upon following decision. 1. Sterling Foods Vs. CIT 237 ITR 579. (SC) 2. Hindustan Liver Ltd Vs. CIT 239 ITR 297. 3. CIT Vs. Kiran Enterprises 228 CTR 101. (HP) 5. The Ld. AR submitted, income received by way of Sales Tax incentive and subsidy have a direct nexus to the wind mill project set up by the assesse for generation of power. Therefore, he submitted, such income derived being a profit from the busines…

Bright Brothers Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 6(1), Mumbai

ITA 6907/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./6907/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. Bright Brothers Ltd. Addl. Cit Range-6(1) Aayakar Bhavan, 5Th Floor 610/611, Nirman Kendra Dr. Moses Road, Famous Studio Lane Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Mahalaxmi,Mumbai-400 011. Pan:Aaacb 3010 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Shri Suman Kumar-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Ajay R. Singh-Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 05/12/2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 11.01.2017 आयकर अिधिनयम आयक अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयक आयक अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य, राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार/ Per Rajendra A.M.- लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 14.8.14 Of Cit(A)-14,Mumbai The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee-Company, Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing,Job-Work & Trading Of Injection-Moulded Plastic Products,Filed Its Return Of Income On 27.09.2011,Declaring Total Income At Rs.1.81 Crores.The Assessing Officer (Ao)Completed The Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Act On 28.10.13,Determining Its Income At Rs.3.38 Crores.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R. Singh-ARFor Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar-DR

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 80Section 80I

…ly claimed from the income earned from other sources i.e.interest income and capital gains.After considering the submission of the assessee and the assessment order,the FAA referred to the cases of Cambay Electrical Supply Co. Ltd.(113 ITR 84); Sterling Food (237 ITR 53);Pandian Chemicals Ltd. (262 ITR 278); and held that section 80 IC referred to profits derived from eligible business, that it was not the ownership of the business that attracted the incentives,that the incentives were available to operational profits of the business,that there was distinction between profit linked incentives and investment linke…

D.C.I.T Cir - 12, Kolkata vs. M/S Berger Paints India Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1105/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Dec 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(1)Section 80I

…provisions of the said section. Your kindself is aware that the word "derived from" has a much narrower meaning than "attributable to". The Hon'ble Supreme Court has explained the meaning of the words "derived from" in its decision in CIT vs. Sterling Foods [237 ITR 579 (SC)] and has held that the said words would require the existence of a direct nexus and a mere commercial connection with a source does not amount to 'derive from'. Therefore, in order to arrive at the profits 'derived from' the industrial undertaking, it is necessary to deduct only those expenses which are incurred directly in the three industr…

M/S. Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd., Tuticorin vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 718/CHNY/2011[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Sept 2016AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Dr. Anita Sumanth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. M. Swaminathan, Sr. Standing Counsel

Section 80

…orate guarantee commission to the extent of `1,64,90,412/. The Assessing Officer and the CIT(Appeals) found that they are not derived from the eligible business of the assessee. Therefore, by placing reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in Sterling Foods (237 ITR 579) found that the income to the extent of `5,24,43,323/- received as interest income, management fees and 4 I.T.A. No.718/Mds/2011 I.T.A. No.1008/Mds/2011 corporate guarantee commission, etc. would not form part of eligible business, therefore, the assessee is not eligible for deduction under Section 80-IA of the Act. 5. The Ld. Sr. Standing Cou…

ACIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Sterlite Industries Ltd., Tuticorin

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1008/CHNY/2011[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Sept 2016AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Dr. Anita Sumanth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. M. Swaminathan, Sr. Standing Counsel

Section 80

M/S. Mirabelle International, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2258/DEL/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2002-03 M/S. Mirabelle International, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of 13/14, Windsor Mansion, Income Tax, Circle-31(1), 14Th Janpath Lane, New Delhi 1405, Floor, Civic Centre, Delhi. Pan : Aabfm1743P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Ms. Charu Goel, Ca Respondent By Sh. Surender Pal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19.07.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 05.09.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Dated 07/02/2014 By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Xxvi, New Delhi For Assessment Year 2002-03, Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal: I. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- Xxvi Is Wrong Is Deterring The Total Income At Rs. 2,55,22,744/-. Ii. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax Is Wrong Is Ignoring All Material Fact & Evidence & Evidence Produced Before Him While Computing The Total Income. Iii. That The Computation Of Total Income Is Bad In Law & Is Against The Actual Facts & Evidence On Record.

Section 143(3)Section 57Section 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2002-03 M/s. Mirabelle International, Vs. Deputy Commissioner of 13/14, Windsor Mansion, Income Tax, Circle-31(1), 14th Janpath Lane, New Delhi 1405, Floor, Civic Centre, Delhi. PAN : AABFM1743P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Ms. Charu Goel, CA Respondent by Sh. Surender Pal, Sr. DR Date of hearing 19.07.2016 Date of pronouncement 05.09.2016 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 07/02/2014 by the learne…

DCIT, Cir-11, Kolkata vs. M/S Graphite India Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 559/KOL/2008[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 154Section 80Section 80HSection 80I

…h the profit of industrial undertaking should not be considered in computing deduction u/s. 80IA. The aforesaid view is supported by the principle laid down in the following decisions. Liberty India vs. CIT (2009) 317 ITR 218 (SC) CIT vs.Sterling Foods (1999) 237 ITR 579 (SC) Cambay Electric Supply Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1978) 113 ITR 84 (SC) ITA No.304-05 & 559/Kol/2008 A.Y 03-04 Graphit e India Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT, Rng-11, Kol. Page 14 Pandian Chemicals Ltd. vs. CIT (2003) 262 ITR 278 (SC) Further, Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Balarampur Chini Mills Ltd. vs. DCIT (2011) 140 TTJ 73 (Kol)(UO) has catego…

Graphite India Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, R-11, Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 305/KOL/2008[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 154Section 80Section 80HSection 80I

Graphite India Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, R-11, Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 304/KOL/2008[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 154Section 80Section 80HSection 80I

DCIT, Coimbatore vs. Ambika Cotton Mills Ltd., Coimbatore

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

ITA 479/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.479/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-2012

For Appellant: Shri. M. Koteswar Rao, CITFor Respondent: Dr. Anita Sumanth, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 28

…irectly proportionate to the reduction in the amount of carbon-dioxide and other green house gases by using non- conventional means but are not revenue derived from generation of electricity from WTGs. 7.4 It has been held in the case of CIT V Sterling Foods 237 ITR 579 (SC) that the word derived restricts the qualifying profits to the profits arising directly from the particular activity. :- 6 -: 7.5 Hence considering the facts of the case and the decision of the honorable Supreme Court in sterling foods, revenue from sale of carbon credits cannot be treated as eligible for deduction under section 80IA. Howeve…

Pratibha Shipping Co. Ltd., Mumbai vs. D.C.I.T. 5(2), Mumbai

ITA 6299/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Love Kumar-DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 254(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “सी मुंबई सी सी ” ” ” ” खंडपीठ सी खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal “ C ”Bench Mumbai सव"ी जोिग"दर "सह, "याियक सद"य एवं राजे"", लेखा सद"य Before S/Sh.Joginder Singh,Judicial Member & Rajendra,Accountant Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./6299/Mum/2012,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2009-10 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/s. Pratibha Shipping Company Limited DCIT, Range-5(2) Room No.571, 5th Floor 1201/1202, 12th Floor Aayakar Bhavan Arcadia Bldg., NCPA Road Vs…

Lupin Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Ltu, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 825/MUM/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosain: (A.Y : 2003-04) M/S. Lupin Limited Vs. Acit Ltu, 159, C.S.T Road, Kalina, Mumbai. Santa Cruz (East), Mumbai 400 098. Pan : Aaacl1069K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora &For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar

Section 115JSection 127Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 35Section 80Section 80I

…from an industrial undertaking is only deductible u/s 80IB is clearly applicable in this case. Further reliance is placed on the ratio of decision of the apex court in the case of M/s. Pandian Chemicals ltd vs. CIT 262 ITR 278 (SC) and CIT vs. Sterling Foods 237 ITR 579 (SC). In both the decisions, the apex court have held that the deduction inter-alia under section 80I is available only in respect of such profits and gains which have a direct and proximate nexus with the activity of manufacture or production. Any other profit or gain which is not 'derived from' an industrial undertaking though 'attributable to'…

Mrs. Sashi Sadh, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6203/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11 Mrs. Sashi Sadh, 52/12, C.R. Park, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-23(2), New Delhi New Delhi Gir/Pan : Amlps4154L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10Section 10BSection 143(1)Section 143(2)

…er, the Assessing Officer rejected the claim of the assessee relying upon the judicial pronouncements in the case of CIT Vs. K. Ravichandran Nair, 295 1TR 228 (SC), Hon'ble Supreme Court’s decision in the case of P.R. Prabhakar Vs. CIT, CIT Vs. Sterling Foods 237 ITR 579 (SC), Liberty India Vs. CIT (2009'f 317 ITR 0218 (SC). On the basis of the ratio of above judicial pronouncements, it was held by the Assessing Officer that exemption claimed u/s 10-B of Rs. 34,40,551/- by including the duty drawback as part of eligible profits derived from 100% export oriented unit is not allowable. Therefore, the Assessing Offi…

M/S.. Upkar International (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 6710/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kanta.Y. : 2003-04 Upkar International (P) Ltd., Dcit, Circle 18(1), C/O J.S. Kochar & Associates, Vs. Cr Building, 209, Sewak Bhawan, I.P. Estate, New Delhi 16/2, Wea Karol Bagh, New Delhi – 110 005

For Appellant: Sh. J.S. Kochar & Sh. Udai BirFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Jain, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80Section 801BSection 80I

…or gains derived from Industrial Undertaking, since its 'immediate and oroximate source is not the industrial undertaking but the scheme of duty draw back. The judgment in this case also referred was the decision of Apex Court in the case of Sterling Food 237 ITR 579. The verdict of Hon'ble Supreme Court is law of the land and is equal to the statue book, also it should have 11 A.Y. 2003-04 been followed by the assessee in letter and spirit. In view of above facts I have reason to believe that income to the tune of Rs, 10,13,8281/- arising out of wrong claim of deduction uls 80IB has escaped assessment. Th…

DCIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. Ulka Sea Foods P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed and appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 5259/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Kishore I. MehtaFor Respondent: Shri G.M. Doss (CIT-DR) &

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 80I

…nouncements of Hon'ble 9 M/s. Ulka Seafoods Pvt. Ltd. ITA Nos. 4903 to 4906/Mum/2013 & 5259 to 5262/Mum/2013 Supreme Court. The Ld. DR representing the Revenue has also relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Sterling Foods, 237 ITR 579 (SC), wherein it has been held as under :- “Section 80HH of the Income Tax Act, 1961 – Deduction – Profits and gains from industrial undertakings in backward areas – Assessment Year 1979-80 – Whether there must be, for application of words ‘derived from’ as used in section 80HH, a direct nexus between profits and gains and industrial undertaking…

Ulka Seafoods P.Ltd, Maharashtra vs. DCIT (OSD) 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed and appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 4903/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Kishore I. MehtaFor Respondent: Shri G.M. Doss (CIT-DR) &

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 80I

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

…rom’ export oriented undertaking. The 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 su…

D.C.I.T.-Central Circle-XII, Kolkata vs. M/S Century Aluminium Mfg. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2408/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Md.Ghayasuddin Ansari, JCIT, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri N.P.Jain, Advocate

Section 801BSection 80ISection 80l

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘B’ KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] Assessment Year : 2008-09 D. C.I.T., Central Circle-XII, -versus- M/s.Century Aluminium Mfg.Ltd Kolkata Kolkata (PAN:AABCC2200Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant: Md.Ghayasuddin Ansari, JCIT, Sr.DR For the Respondent: Shri N.P.Jain, Advocate Date of Hearing : 09.05.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 13.05.2016. ORDER PER N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM: This is an appeal by the Revenue against the order dated 15.07.2013 of CIT(A) Central-II, Kolkata, relating to AY 2008-09. 2. Grounds of appeal…