CIT v. Veekay Lal Investments Co. Pvt. Ltd.

249 ITR 597High Court2001#1125 most cited

What is CIT v. Veekay Lal Investments Co. Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Book profits under Section 115JB must include income by way of capital gains, similar to how total income is calculated under Section 45.

99

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Veekay Lal Investments Co. Pvt. Ltd. · CIT vs Veekaylal Investments CO.(P) Ltd · 249 ITR 597 · Section 115JB · book profits · capital gains · Section 45 · income tax act · companies act · total income

Sections most often in play

Section 115JBSection 143(3)Section 10(38)Section 115JSection 115JASection 115JB(2)(i) (Explanation 1Section 115QASection 2(22)(d)

Issues it is cited on

section 115jasection 115jb(2)book profitstransfer of capital assetwritten down valuesection 115jsection 2(24)section 115jbliable to taxsection 54section 35section 254

Judgments citing CIT v. Veekay Lal Investments Co. Pvt. Ltd.

Dy. CIT, Central Circle-6(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Alok Industries Limited, Mumbai

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

ITA 905/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Harit (CIT-DR) &For Respondent: Shri Nimesh K. Chothani
Section 115Section 115J

…High Court held that such income have to be taken into account for computation of book profit. In this regard, learned Departmental Representative referred to the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Veekaylal Investment Co. (P.) Ltd., 249 ITR 597 (Bom.) 9. The Learned Departmental Representative further submitted that ITAT, M/s. Alok Industries Ltd. Hyderabad Special Bench in Rain Commodities Ltd. vs DCIT, 131 TTJ 514 (Hyderabad) (SB) has duly taken note of these decisions and has held that in view of these decisions such exempt capital gain have to be computed and taken into account fo…

DCIT Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Alok Industries Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 902/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Harit (CIT-DR) &For Respondent: Shri Nimesh K. Chothani
Section 115Section 115J

…High Court held that such income have to be taken into account for computation of book profit. In this regard, learned Departmental Representative referred to the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Veekaylal Investment Co. (P.) Ltd., 249 ITR 597 (Bom.) 9. The Learned Departmental Representative further submitted that ITAT, M/s. Alok Industries Ltd. Hyderabad Special Bench in Rain Commodities Ltd. vs DCIT, 131 TTJ 514 (Hyderabad) (SB) has duly taken note of these decisions and has held that in view of these decisions such exempt capital gain have to be computed and taken into account fo…

DCIT Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Alok Industries Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 901/MUM/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Harit (CIT-DR) &For Respondent: Shri Nimesh K. Chothani
Section 115Section 115J

…High Court held that such income have to be taken into account for computation of book profit. In this regard, learned Departmental Representative referred to the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Veekaylal Investment Co. (P.) Ltd., 249 ITR 597 (Bom.) 9. The Learned Departmental Representative further submitted that ITAT, M/s. Alok Industries Ltd. Hyderabad Special Bench in Rain Commodities Ltd. vs DCIT, 131 TTJ 514 (Hyderabad) (SB) has duly taken note of these decisions and has held that in view of these decisions such exempt capital gain have to be computed and taken into account fo…

Bilakhia Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Vapi vs. The ACIT., Vapi Circle, Vapi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for assessment year 2010-11

ITA 795/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.507/Ahd/2013: िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A.No.1415Ahd/2015: िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1416/Ahd/2015:िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.795/Ahd/2016: िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Bialkhia Holdings Pvt. Vs. Addl.Cit Range - Vapi / Ltd., Bilakhia House, Assistant Commissioner Of Muktanand Marg, Chala Income Tax Vapi Circle Vapi, Vapi, Gujarat. Shivam Commercial Complex, [Pan: Aadcs 4420 J] National Highway No.8, Vapi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C

…graph 3.9 and in particular 3.12 of the ICAI’s guidelines specify the manner of qualification-adoption of notes of accounts (as contained in Para 4.6 at Pg. 11 of the paper book) cannot amount to a qualification. 4. The decision in the case of Veekaylal (Bom)-249 ITR 597 relied upon by the AO is no longer good law in view of the later decisions of the Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Adbhut Trading Co. P. Ltd. [2011] 338 ITR 94 (Bom) and Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Akshay Textiles Trading and Agencies P. Ltd [2008] 304 ITR 401 (Bom) which have held that in view of the decision of…

Bilakhia Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Vapi vs. The Addl.CIT., Vapi Range, Vapi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for assessment year 2010-11

ITA 1416/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.507/Ahd/2013: िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A.No.1415Ahd/2015: िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1416/Ahd/2015:िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.795/Ahd/2016: िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Bialkhia Holdings Pvt. Vs. Addl.Cit Range - Vapi / Ltd., Bilakhia House, Assistant Commissioner Of Muktanand Marg, Chala Income Tax Vapi Circle Vapi, Vapi, Gujarat. Shivam Commercial Complex, [Pan: Aadcs 4420 J] National Highway No.8, Vapi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C

…graph 3.9 and in particular 3.12 of the ICAI’s guidelines specify the manner of qualification-adoption of notes of accounts (as contained in Para 4.6 at Pg. 11 of the paper book) cannot amount to a qualification. 4. The decision in the case of Veekaylal (Bom)-249 ITR 597 relied upon by the AO is no longer good law in view of the later decisions of the Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Adbhut Trading Co. P. Ltd. [2011] 338 ITR 94 (Bom) and Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Akshay Textiles Trading and Agencies P. Ltd [2008] 304 ITR 401 (Bom) which have held that in view of the decision of…

Bilakhia Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Vapi vs. The Jt.CIT., Vapi Range, Vapi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for assessment year 2010-11

ITA 1415/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.507/Ahd/2013: िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A.No.1415Ahd/2015: िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1416/Ahd/2015:िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.795/Ahd/2016: िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Bialkhia Holdings Pvt. Vs. Addl.Cit Range - Vapi / Ltd., Bilakhia House, Assistant Commissioner Of Muktanand Marg, Chala Income Tax Vapi Circle Vapi, Vapi, Gujarat. Shivam Commercial Complex, [Pan: Aadcs 4420 J] National Highway No.8, Vapi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C

…graph 3.9 and in particular 3.12 of the ICAI’s guidelines specify the manner of qualification-adoption of notes of accounts (as contained in Para 4.6 at Pg. 11 of the paper book) cannot amount to a qualification. 4. The decision in the case of Veekaylal (Bom)-249 ITR 597 relied upon by the AO is no longer good law in view of the later decisions of the Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Adbhut Trading Co. P. Ltd. [2011] 338 ITR 94 (Bom) and Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Akshay Textiles Trading and Agencies P. Ltd [2008] 304 ITR 401 (Bom) which have held that in view of the decision of…

Bilakhia Holding P Ltd, Vapi vs. The Jt.CIT., Vapi Range, Vapi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for assessment year 2010-11

ITA 507/AHD/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.507/Ahd/2013: िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A.No.1415Ahd/2015: िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1416/Ahd/2015:िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.795/Ahd/2016: िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Bialkhia Holdings Pvt. Vs. Addl.Cit Range - Vapi / Ltd., Bilakhia House, Assistant Commissioner Of Muktanand Marg, Chala Income Tax Vapi Circle Vapi, Vapi, Gujarat. Shivam Commercial Complex, [Pan: Aadcs 4420 J] National Highway No.8, Vapi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C

…graph 3.9 and in particular 3.12 of the ICAI’s guidelines specify the manner of qualification-adoption of notes of accounts (as contained in Para 4.6 at Pg. 11 of the paper book) cannot amount to a qualification. 4. The decision in the case of Veekaylal (Bom)-249 ITR 597 relied upon by the AO is no longer good law in view of the later decisions of the Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Adbhut Trading Co. P. Ltd. [2011] 338 ITR 94 (Bom) and Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Akshay Textiles Trading and Agencies P. Ltd [2008] 304 ITR 401 (Bom) which have held that in view of the decision of…

ACIT, Cir-11(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee and Revenue are allowed to the extent indicated above

ITA 2003/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd. Vs. Addl. Cit, Range-9, New Delhi D-2, 6Th Floor, Southern Park, Saket Place, New Delhi-110017. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacs1425L (Assessee) .. (Revenue/Department) Addl. Cit, Range-9, New Delhi Vs. Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd. D-2, 6Th Floor, Southern Park, Saket Place, New Delhi-110017. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacs1425L (Respondent) .. (Appellant) Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-11(2), Kolkata 86C, Vishwakarma, Topsia Road(South), Kolkata-700046. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacs1425L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Acit, Circle-11(2), Kolkata Vs. Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd. 86C, Vishwakarma, Topsia Road(South), Kolkata-700046. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacs1425L (Respondent) .. (Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Shah & Amit Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…the P & L A/c. The P & L A/c is required to disclose every material feature including credits or receipts and debits or expenses in respect of non-recurring transactions or transactions of an exceptional nature including capital profits (Veekaylal Investments 249 ITR 597 (Bom) followed). Items referred to in the Notes are a part of the P&L A/c (Sain Processing 221 CTR 493 (Del) followed; (iii) The assessee had included the said capital gains in the P & L A/c and it was not its’ case that same was not includible. The fact that the capital gains was exempt u/s 47(iv) does not mean it can be excluded from the “book…

Srei Infrastructure Finance Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-11(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee and Revenue are allowed to the extent indicated above

ITA 1821/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd. Vs. Addl. Cit, Range-9, New Delhi D-2, 6Th Floor, Southern Park, Saket Place, New Delhi-110017. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacs1425L (Assessee) .. (Revenue/Department) Addl. Cit, Range-9, New Delhi Vs. Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd. D-2, 6Th Floor, Southern Park, Saket Place, New Delhi-110017. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacs1425L (Respondent) .. (Appellant) Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-11(2), Kolkata 86C, Vishwakarma, Topsia Road(South), Kolkata-700046. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacs1425L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Acit, Circle-11(2), Kolkata Vs. Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd. 86C, Vishwakarma, Topsia Road(South), Kolkata-700046. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacs1425L (Respondent) .. (Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Shah & Amit Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…the P & L A/c. The P & L A/c is required to disclose every material feature including credits or receipts and debits or expenses in respect of non-recurring transactions or transactions of an exceptional nature including capital profits (Veekaylal Investments 249 ITR 597 (Bom) followed). Items referred to in the Notes are a part of the P&L A/c (Sain Processing 221 CTR 493 (Del) followed; (iii) The assessee had included the said capital gains in the P & L A/c and it was not its’ case that same was not includible. The fact that the capital gains was exempt u/s 47(iv) does not mean it can be excluded from the “book…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ircon International Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 3805/DEL/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…ion of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres limited (supra). The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the finding of the Assessing Officer in view of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Veekaylal Investment Company Private Limited reported in (2001) 249 ITR 597(Bombay). 23.2 Before us, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee clearly conceded that issue in dispute is covered against the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vee Kay Lal Investment Company Private Limited (supra) and the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of NJ Jose and Company Private Limi…

Ircon International Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 705/DEL/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2002-2003

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…ion of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres limited (supra). The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the finding of the Assessing Officer in view of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Veekaylal Investment Company Private Limited reported in (2001) 249 ITR 597(Bombay). 23.2 Before us, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee clearly conceded that issue in dispute is covered against the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vee Kay Lal Investment Company Private Limited (supra) and the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of NJ Jose and Company Private Limi…

DCIT, Circle-11(1) vs. Ircon International Ltd

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 2234/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2001-2002

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…ion of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres limited (supra). The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the finding of the Assessing Officer in view of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Veekaylal Investment Company Private Limited reported in (2001) 249 ITR 597(Bombay). 23.2 Before us, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee clearly conceded that issue in dispute is covered against the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vee Kay Lal Investment Company Private Limited (supra) and the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of NJ Jose and Company Private Limi…

Ircon International Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 3804/DEL/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…ion of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres limited (supra). The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the finding of the Assessing Officer in view of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Veekaylal Investment Company Private Limited reported in (2001) 249 ITR 597(Bombay). 23.2 Before us, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee clearly conceded that issue in dispute is covered against the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vee Kay Lal Investment Company Private Limited (supra) and the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of NJ Jose and Company Private Limi…

Ircon International Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, Range-11

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 1825/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2001-2002

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…ion of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres limited (supra). The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the finding of the Assessing Officer in view of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Veekaylal Investment Company Private Limited reported in (2001) 249 ITR 597(Bombay). 23.2 Before us, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee clearly conceded that issue in dispute is covered against the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vee Kay Lal Investment Company Private Limited (supra) and the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of NJ Jose and Company Private Limi…

Tata Metaliks Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 3(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 788/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Oct 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Ashish Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT
Section 115JSection 43B

…owing the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Apollo Tyres (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC) rw Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd vs CIT(2011) 330 ITR 363(SC). The appellant has also relied upon the judgment in the case of CIT vs Veekaylal Investments CO.(P) Ltd (2001) 249 ITR 597(BOM), although the copy of judgment in this case was not furnished. The reliance on the decision by the Hon'ble Mumbai High Court by the appellant is found to be misplaced, it was observed by the Hon'ble High Court that, "The important thing to be noted is that while calculating the total income under the Income Tax Act, the assessee is required…

DCIT, Circle - 3(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Tata Metaliks Limited, Kolkata

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

ITA 1143/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Oct 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Ashish Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT
Section 115JSection 43B

…owing the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Apollo Tyres (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC) rw Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd vs CIT(2011) 330 ITR 363(SC). The appellant has also relied upon the judgment in the case of CIT vs Veekaylal Investments CO.(P) Ltd (2001) 249 ITR 597(BOM), although the copy of judgment in this case was not furnished. The reliance on the decision by the Hon'ble Mumbai High Court by the appellant is found to be misplaced, it was observed by the Hon'ble High Court that, "The important thing to be noted is that while calculating the total income under the Income Tax Act, the assessee is required…

Sangu Chakra Hotels Pvt Ltd., Trichy vs. DCIT Circle 1, Trichy

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 2759/CHNY/2017[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Aug 2019AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2759/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2001-02. M/S. Sangu Chakra Hotels Pvt. Ltd, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Collector’S Office Road, Income Tax, Tiruchirapalli 620 001. Circle 1, Tiruchirapalli. [Pan Aaacs 8819A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Philip George, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, IRS, JCIT
Section 115Section 115JSection 234BSection 80A(2)Section 80HSection 8O

…ial Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. :- 5 -: vs. Asst. CIT (1993) 199 ITR (AT) 164 (Cal) (SB) and this stand was superseded by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT. vs. Veekaylal Investment Company (P) Ltd 249 ITR 597 and not allowed exemption of income u/s.80HHD of the Act from the book profit. 4. Being aggrieved, an appeal was preferred before the ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order had confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer stating that gross total income was reduced by the amount of brought forward loss placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble…

Karanja Terminal & Logistics P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 6(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2472/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble Accountantmember & Shri Ramlal Negi, Hon'Ble Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri J.P. BairagraFor Respondent: Shri B. Srinivas
Section 115JSection 147Section 148

…i Industries Ltd., 178 TTJ 658(Kol Tri) vi) ACIT, Circle-2 V/s. Shree Cement Ltd., ITA NO.614, 615 & 635/JP/2010,152 ITR 561(Jaipur Tri) vii) Shree Cement Ltd. V/s. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, 152 ITD 561(Jai Tri) viii)Veekaylal Investment Co. Pvt.Ltd. 249 ITR 597(Bom) ix) JSW Steel Ltd. Vs. ACIT, 82 Taxmann.com 210 (Mumbai Tri) x) Bisleri Sales Ltd v/s. CIT, 377 ITR 144(Bom) xi) Veekaylal Investment Co. Pvt. Ltd. 249 ITR 597 (Bom) was distinguished. M/s. Karanja Terminal & Logistics Pvt. Ltd., The ld AR submitted that that in the Asst year 13-14 & 14-15 interest earned was credited to the P&L account but…

M/S. Andhra Trade Development - Corporation, Pvt.Ltd., Guntur vs. The ACIT, Guntur

ITA 233/VIZ/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Dec 2018AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.233/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2013-2014) M/S Andhra Trade Development The Assistant Commissioner Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Of Income-Tax, Circle-1(1) Guntur Guntur [Pan : Aabca8777C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 33ASection 74

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री िी. दुगाा राि,न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री धड.एस. सुन्दर ससह, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.233/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2013-2014) M/s Andhra Trade Development The Assistant Commissioner Corporation Pvt. Ltd., of Income-Tax, Circle-1(1) Guntur Guntur [PAN : AABCA8777C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri G.V.N.Hari, AR प्रत्यार्थी क…

DCIT, Circle - 3(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Tata Metaliks Limited, Kolkata

ITA 1481/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 43B

…owing the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Apollo Tyres (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC) rw Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd vs CIT(2011) 330 ITR 363(SC). The appellant has also relied upon the judgment in the case of CIT vs Veekaylal Investments CO.(P) Ltd (2001) 249 ITR 597(BOM), although the copy of judgment in this case was not furnished. The reliance on the decision by the Hon'ble Mumbai High Court by the appellant is found to be misplaced, it was observed by the Hon'ble High Court that, "The important thing to be noted is that while calculating the total income under the Income Tax Act, the assessee is required…