CIT v. Sudarshan Chemicals Industries Ltd.

UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT CEN RG IX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

…ales tax so that the two terms became comparable. To support such contention,\nthe Id. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in\nCIT vs Catapharma (India) (P) Ltd. 292 ITR 641 (SC) and Sudarshan Chemicals\nIndustries Ltd. Vs CIT 245 ITR 769 (Bom).\n49. On the other hand, the Id. CIT DR for the Revenue supported the order of AO.\n50. We have considered the rival submission of both the parties. We find that AO\nwhile passing the assessment order included excise duty and sales tax amount of\nRs.37.83 crore as a part of total turnover. Before Id. CIT(A) the assessee\nsubmitted that exci…

ASST CIT CC 38, MUMBAI vs. UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

…sales tax so that the two terms became comparable. To support such contention, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Catapharma (India) (P) Ltd. 292 ITR 641 (SC) and Sudarshan Chemicals Industries Ltd. Vs CIT 245 ITR 769 (Bom). 49. On the other hand, the ld. CIT DR for the Revenue supported the order of AO. 50. We have considered the rival submission of both the parties. We find that AO while passing the assessment order included excise duty and sales tax amount of Rs. 37.83 crore as a part of total turnover. Before ld. CIT(A) the assessee submitted that exci…

ADDL CIT CEN RG IX, MUMBAI vs. UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD ( FORMLERY KNOWN AS UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

…sales tax so that the two terms became comparable. To support such contention, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Catapharma (India) (P) Ltd. 292 ITR 641 (SC) and Sudarshan Chemicals Industries Ltd. Vs CIT 245 ITR 769 (Bom). 49. On the other hand, the ld. CIT DR for the Revenue supported the order of AO. 50. We have considered the rival submission of both the parties. We find that AO while passing the assessment order included excise duty and sales tax amount of Rs. 37.83 crore as a part of total turnover. Before ld. CIT(A) the assessee submitted that exci…

UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT CEN RG IX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

…sales tax so that the two terms became comparable. To support such contention, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Catapharma (India) (P) Ltd. 292 ITR 641 (SC) and Sudarshan Chemicals Industries Ltd. Vs CIT 245 ITR 769 (Bom). 49. On the other hand, the ld. CIT DR for the Revenue supported the order of AO. 50. We have considered the rival submission of both the parties. We find that AO while passing the assessment order included excise duty and sales tax amount of Rs. 37.83 crore as a part of total turnover. Before ld. CIT(A) the assessee submitted that exci…

THE ACIT CC-38, MUMBAI vs. M/S. UNITED PHOSPHOROUS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

…sales tax so that the two terms became comparable. To support such contention, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Catapharma (India) (P) Ltd. 292 ITR 641 (SC) and Sudarshan Chemicals Industries Ltd. Vs CIT 245 ITR 769 (Bom). 49. On the other hand, the ld. CIT DR for the Revenue supported the order of AO. 50. We have considered the rival submission of both the parties. We find that AO while passing the assessment order included excise duty and sales tax amount of Rs. 37.83 crore as a part of total turnover. Before ld. CIT(A) the assessee submitted that exci…

M/S. UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD(NOW KNOWN AS UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD),MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT CEN CIR-38, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

…sales tax so that the two terms became comparable. To support such contention, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Catapharma (India) (P) Ltd. 292 ITR 641 (SC) and Sudarshan Chemicals Industries Ltd. Vs CIT 245 ITR 769 (Bom). 49. On the other hand, the ld. CIT DR for the Revenue supported the order of AO. 50. We have considered the rival submission of both the parties. We find that AO while passing the assessment order included excise duty and sales tax amount of Rs. 37.83 crore as a part of total turnover. Before ld. CIT(A) the assessee submitted that exci…

BAJAJ HOLDINGS & INVESTMENTS LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS BAJAJ AUTO LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

…ubmissions and have perused the material on record. 58.3. We note that the issue raised by the way of Ground No. 11 above is no longer res-integra in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sudarshan Chemicals Industries Ltd: 245 ITR 769 and the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, ITA No. 6838/Mum/2008, ITA No.6674/Mum/2008 ITA No.1223/Mum/2010, ITA No. 535/Mum/2010 ITA No.5299/Mum/2010, ITA No.4632/Mum/2010 Assessment Years 2004-05, 2005-06 & 2006-07 Coimbatore Vs. Lakshmi Machine Works [2007] 290 ITR 667 (SC). In the aforesaid judg…

M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL. CIT. RG. - 3(1), MUMBAI

…e case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to exclude excise duty and sales tax from the total turnover while computing deduction u/s. 80HHC of the Act relying on the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sudarshan Chemicals Industries Ltd. 245 ITR 769." (ii) "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in directing the AO not to exclude 90% of the technical know-how fees amounting to Rs. 1,00,30,883/- from the profits of the business while computing deduction u/s.80HHC of the Act.” 16. “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.C…

ACIT CIR 7(1), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS INDIA ( FORMELRY KNOWN AS HINDUSTAN CIBA GIEGY LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, (i) the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose (ii) the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and (iii) the Cross Objections filed by the assessee ...

Bench: Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal & Co 76/Mum/2013 (A.Y 2003-04) Novartis India Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income–Tax–14(1)(1) Inspire Bkc, 7Th Floor, Room No 432, Bandra Kurla Complex, Aaykar Bhawan, Bandra (E) M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400020. Pan/Gir No. Aaach2914F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Deputy Commissioner Vs. Novartis India Limited Of Income–Tax–14(1)(1) Inspire Bkc, 7Th Floor, Room No 432, Bandra Kurla Complex, Aaykar Bhawan, Bandra (E) M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400020 Pan/Gir No. Aaach2914F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant (""यथ"/Respondent)

…ales, if the proceeds were out of scrap sales of raw material then they were to be excluded from total turnover. However, scrap sale of packing material was to be included as per the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Sudarshan Chemical Industries Ltd. (245 ITR 769). 17.4 Proceeding further, Ld. CIT(A), relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in Pandian Chemicals Ltd. V/s CIT (262 ITR 278) which held that the term „derived from‟ must be understood as something which has a direct or immediate nexus with the assessee’s industrial undertaking, held that the tabulated receipts were not directly derived…

ADDL CIT R G 7(1), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS INDIA LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS HINDUSTAN CIBA GIEGY LTD. ), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Novartis India Limited V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income –Tax - 7(2)(2) {Earlier Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} 6Th& 7Th Floor 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Inspire Bkc M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 “G” Block, Bkc Main Road Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1) V. M/S. Novartis India Limited Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.190/Mum/2011 [Arising Out Of Ita No.6772/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2002-03)] M/S. Novartis India Limited V. Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent)

…learned Counsel for the assessee stated that this issue of exclusion of excise duty and sales tax is squarely covered in favour of assessee and against Revenue by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sudarshan Chemicals Industries Ltd. (2000) 245 ITR 769 (Bom), wherein it is held as under: - “6. We find merit in the contentions of the assessee. Under section 80HHC, the Legislature intends that the profits from exports should not be taxed. For this purpose, a formula has been introduced whereby if the business is of composite nature then the proportionate profit relatable to the export business is…

DCIT CIR - 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesse are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3055/Mum/2005 (A.Y. 2000-2001) Bajaj Auto Ltd. Vs. DCIT Rg. 3(1), Bajaj Bhavan, 226 6th Floor, Aayakar Nariman Point, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent ITA No. 2655/Mum/2005 DCIT Rg. 3(1), Vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd. 6th Floor, Aayakar Bajaj Bhavan, Bhavan, M. K. Road, 226 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent C.O. N…

M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE DY CIT CIR 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesse are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3055/Mum/2005 (A.Y. 2000-2001) Bajaj Auto Ltd. Vs. DCIT Rg. 3(1), Bajaj Bhavan, 226 6th Floor, Aayakar Nariman Point, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent ITA No. 2655/Mum/2005 DCIT Rg. 3(1), Vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd. 6th Floor, Aayakar Bajaj Bhavan, Bhavan, M. K. Road, 226 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent C.O. N…

THE DCIT 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BAJAJAJ AUTO LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesse are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3055/Mum/2005 (A.Y. 2000-2001) Bajaj Auto Ltd. Vs. DCIT Rg. 3(1), Bajaj Bhavan, 226 6th Floor, Aayakar Nariman Point, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent ITA No. 2655/Mum/2005 DCIT Rg. 3(1), Vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd. 6th Floor, Aayakar Bajaj Bhavan, Bhavan, M. K. Road, 226 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent C.O. N…

M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE DY CIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesse are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3055/Mum/2005 (A.Y. 2000-2001) Bajaj Auto Ltd. Vs. DCIT Rg. 3(1), Bajaj Bhavan, 226 6th Floor, Aayakar Nariman Point, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent ITA No. 2655/Mum/2005 DCIT Rg. 3(1), Vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd. 6th Floor, Aayakar Bajaj Bhavan, Bhavan, M. K. Road, 226 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent C.O. N…

THE DY CIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesse are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3055/Mum/2005 (A.Y. 2000-2001) Bajaj Auto Ltd. Vs. DCIT Rg. 3(1), Bajaj Bhavan, 226 6th Floor, Aayakar Nariman Point, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent ITA No. 2655/Mum/2005 DCIT Rg. 3(1), Vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd. 6th Floor, Aayakar Bajaj Bhavan, Bhavan, M. K. Road, 226 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent C.O. N…

DCIT CIR. 6 (3), MUMBAI vs. M/S. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…se duty and sales-tax from the total turnover for the Grasim Industries Ltd. ITA no.4337/Mum./2005 ITA no.4337/Mum./2005 computing of deduction u/s.80HHC by relying on the jurisdictional High Court's decision in the case of Sudarshan Chemical Industries Ltd. (245 ITR 769) without appreciating that the department has not accepted the same by filing an SLP. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to reduce only 90% of Rs.5,82,12,856/- from the business profits being the DEPB income, for the purpose of computing the deduction u/s.80HHC without appreciatin…

M/S. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIT CIR. 6(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…se duty and sales-tax from the total turnover for the Grasim Industries Ltd. ITA no.4337/Mum./2005 ITA no.4337/Mum./2005 computing of deduction u/s.80HHC by relying on the jurisdictional High Court's decision in the case of Sudarshan Chemical Industries Ltd. (245 ITR 769) without appreciating that the department has not accepted the same by filing an SLP. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to reduce only 90% of Rs.5,82,12,856/- from the business profits being the DEPB income, for the purpose of computing the deduction u/s.80HHC without appreciatin…

DCIT CIR 6(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…ssessing Officer to exclude the amount of sales tax and excise duty from the total turnover for the purpose of computation of deduction u/s.80HHC of the Act relying upon the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Sudarshan Chemicals Industries Ltd. (245 ITR 769) which has been contested by the department by way of SLP. 9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in holding that no amount of head office expenses can be apportioned to the units eligible for deduction u/s.80-IA, relying upon the orders of the CIT(A) in the assessee's own case for the AYrs.1996-97 to 20…

GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RANGE 6(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…ssessing Officer to exclude the amount of sales tax and excise duty from the total turnover for the purpose of computation of deduction u/s.80HHC of the Act relying upon the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Sudarshan Chemicals Industries Ltd. (245 ITR 769) which has been contested by the department by way of SLP. 9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in holding that no amount of head office expenses can be apportioned to the units eligible for deduction u/s.80-IA, relying upon the orders of the CIT(A) in the assessee's own case for the AYrs.1996-97 to 20…