CIT v. Univmin Ltd.

202 ITR 825High Court1993#11251 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 80-IA(8)/(10)Section 80-ICSection 2(29BA)

Issues it is cited on

section 2(29ba)section 32asection 80icchildsection 80isection 32section 80section 15transfercompanyindianfac

Judgments citing CIT v. Univmin Ltd.

M/S. Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2011-12, 2012-

ITA 1950/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms.R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 80

…6] 217 ITR 185 and ITA Nos.1946-1950/Chny/2025 (AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14, 2017-18 & 2018-19) M/s. Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd. :: 17 :: CIT v. Mercantile Construction Co. [1994] 74 Taxman 41 (Cal.) and the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Univmin Ltd. [1993] 202 ITR 825. The Revenue has not questioned any of these decisions, at least not successfully, and the position of law. therefore, was taken as settled. The reasoning given by the High Court, in the decisions noted by us earlier, is in our opinion, unimpeachable. This Court had as early as in 1961, in Chrestian Mica Industries Ltd. v. State of Bihar [1961]…

M/S. Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2011-12, 2012-

ITA 1948/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms.R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 80

…6] 217 ITR 185 and ITA Nos.1946-1950/Chny/2025 (AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14, 2017-18 & 2018-19) M/s. Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd. :: 17 :: CIT v. Mercantile Construction Co. [1994] 74 Taxman 41 (Cal.) and the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Univmin Ltd. [1993] 202 ITR 825. The Revenue has not questioned any of these decisions, at least not successfully, and the position of law. therefore, was taken as settled. The reasoning given by the High Court, in the decisions noted by us earlier, is in our opinion, unimpeachable. This Court had as early as in 1961, in Chrestian Mica Industries Ltd. v. State of Bihar [1961]…

M/S.Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2011-12, 2012-

ITA 1947/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms.R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 80

…6] 217 ITR 185 and ITA Nos.1946-1950/Chny/2025 (AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14, 2017-18 & 2018-19) M/s. Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd. :: 17 :: CIT v. Mercantile Construction Co. [1994] 74 Taxman 41 (Cal.) and the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Univmin Ltd. [1993] 202 ITR 825. The Revenue has not questioned any of these decisions, at least not successfully, and the position of law. therefore, was taken as settled. The reasoning given by the High Court, in the decisions noted by us earlier, is in our opinion, unimpeachable. This Court had as early as in 1961, in Chrestian Mica Industries Ltd. v. State of Bihar [1961]…

M/S. Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2011-12, 2012-

ITA 1946/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms.R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 80

…6] 217 ITR 185 and ITA Nos.1946-1950/Chny/2025 (AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14, 2017-18 & 2018-19) M/s. Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd. :: 17 :: CIT v. Mercantile Construction Co. [1994] 74 Taxman 41 (Cal.) and the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Univmin Ltd. [1993] 202 ITR 825. The Revenue has not questioned any of these decisions, at least not successfully, and the position of law. therefore, was taken as settled. The reasoning given by the High Court, in the decisions noted by us earlier, is in our opinion, unimpeachable. This Court had as early as in 1961, in Chrestian Mica Industries Ltd. v. State of Bihar [1961]…

DCIT, Circle-10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Indian Oil Petronas (P) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1885/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 250Section 32(1)(iiia)Section 80

…h did so in CIT v. Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd. [1996J 221ITR 48, the Calcutta High Court in Khalsa Brothers v. CIT [1996] 217 ITR 185 and CIT v. Mercantile Construction Co. [1994] 74 Taxman 41 (Cal.) and the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Univmin .) Ltd. [1993] 202 ITR 825. The Revenue has not questioned any of these decisions, at least not successfully, and the position of law. therefore, was taken as settled. The reasoning given by the High Court, in the decisions noted by us earlier, is in our opinion, unimpeachable. This Court had as early as in 1961, in Chrestian Mica Industries Ltd. v. State of Bihar [1961] 1…

D.C.I.T., Circle-10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Indian Oil Petronas Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1884/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 250Section 32(1)(iiia)Section 80

…h did so in CIT v. Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd. [1996J 221ITR 48, the Calcutta High Court in Khalsa Brothers v. CIT [1996] 217 ITR 185 and CIT v. Mercantile Construction Co. [1994] 74 Taxman 41 (Cal.) and the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Univmin .) Ltd. [1993] 202 ITR 825. The Revenue has not questioned any of these decisions, at least not successfully, and the position of law. therefore, was taken as settled. The reasoning given by the High Court, in the decisions noted by us earlier, is in our opinion, unimpeachable. This Court had as early as in 1961, in Chrestian Mica Industries Ltd. v. State of Bihar [1961] 1…

Vedanta Ltd, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle- 26(2), New Delhi

ITA 12/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: FixedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[Assessment Year: 2014-15]

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153

…IT v. Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd. (1996) 221 ITR 48 (AP), the Calcutta High Court in Khalsa Brothers v. CIT (1996) 217 ITR 185 (Cal) and CIT v. Mercantile Construction Co. (1994) 74 Taxman 41 (Cal) and the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Univmine (P) Ltd. (1993) 202 ITR 825 (Del). The revenue has not questioned any of these decisions, at least not successfully, and the position of law, therefore, was taken as settled. 6. At the outset, it may be noted that section 32A(2)(b)(iii) makes it clear that investment allowance is deductible in respect of, inter alia, a plant owned by the assessee which is wholly used for t…

DCIT, Circle-10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Indian Oil Petronas (P) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1930/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr.A.L.Saini, Am D.C.I.T, Cir­10(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Indian Oil Petronas Pvt. Ltd. Pan: Aaaci5573R (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. Assessee/Revenue By : Shri P.K. Srihari, Cit, Ld. Dr Respondent/Assessee By : Shrid. S Damle, Fca, Ld.Ar सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 18/12/2018 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/03/2019 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: ShriD. S Damle, FCA, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Srihari, CIT, ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 2Section 37(1)Section 40

…h did so in CIT v. Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd. [1996J 221 ITR 48, the Calcutta High Court in Khalsa Brothers v. CIT [1996] 217 ITR 185 and CIT v. Mercantile Construction Co. [1994]74 Taxman 41 (Cal.) and the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Univmin .) Ltd. [1993] 202 ITR 825. The Revenue has not questioned any of these decisions, at least not successfully, and the position of law. therefore, was taken as settled. The reasoning given by the High Court, in the decisions noted by us earlier, is in our opinion, unimpeachable. This Court had as early as in 1961, in Chrestian Mica Industries Ltd. v. State of Bihar [1961] 1…

M/S. Sukripam Worldwide, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 5561/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddyay: 2010-11 Sukripam Worldwide Vs. Acit, Circle 59(3) S 205, Rajkamal Sadan New Delhi Preet Vihar, Commercial Complex New Delhi

For Appellant: Shri K.Sampath, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr.D.R
Section 2Section 80Section 80ISection 80l

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC-3’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AY: 2010-11 Sukripam Worldwide vs. ACIT, Circle 59(3) S 205, Rajkamal Sadan New Delhi Preet Vihar, Commercial Complex New Delhi PAN: AAFFS 1655 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri K.Sampath, Adv. & Sh. V.Raj Kumar, Adv. Respondent by : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr.D.R. O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the Assessee directed against the order of the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, New Delhi dated 30.07.2015 pertaining to the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2010-11. 2. Facts in…

CIT v. Univmin Ltd. (202 ITR 825) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax