CIT vs. Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Limited: 306 ITR 392, Sahney Steel and Press Works v. CIT (60 ITR 253)

Q: What is CIT vs. Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Limited: 306 ITR 392, Sahney Steel and Press Works v. CIT authority for?

The character of a subsidy in the hands of the recipient is determined by the purpose for which it was given. Subsidies given for promoting industrialization, development of the state, or generation of employment are capital receipts.

Q: How many judgments cite CIT vs. Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Limited: 306 ITR 392, Sahney Steel and Press Works v. CIT?

28 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT vs. Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Limited: 306 ITR 392, Sahney Steel and Press Works v. CIT (60 ITR 253), spanning 2016 to 2024.

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. JITF WATER INFRA (NAYA RAIPUR) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2457/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Naveen Chandra, Ita No:- 2457/Del/2017 (Assessment Year- 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. and Shri Saksham Singhal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT(DR)

…ITA No.-2457/Del/2017 M/s JITF Water Infra (Naya Raipur) Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘C’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, ITA No:- 2457/Del/2017 (Assessment Year- 2012-13) ITO, M/s JITF Water Infra (Naya Ward-13(3), Vs. Raipur) Ltd., New Delhi. 28, Shivaji Marg, New Delhi-110015. PAN No: AACCJ2374D APPELLANT RESPONDENT Revenue by : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT(DR) Assessee by : Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. and Shri Saksham Singhal, Adv. Date of Hearing : 28.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 10.12.2024 ORDER Per Mah…

M/S. BRIDGESTONE INDIA PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. THE ACIT NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 84/IND/2022[2017-18/]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Jul 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanibridgestone India Pvt. Ltd. Acit (Nfac) Plot No.A-43, Phase-Ii, Delhi Midc Chakan, Village Vs. Sawardari, Taluka Khed, Pune (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabcb 2304 E Assessee By Shri Sukhsagar Syal, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 23.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17.07.2023

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 43(1)

…lty in holding that the money received by the company was not in course of trade but was of capital nature. We shall now see how our Courts have dealt with the problem. 21. This Court in V.S.S.V. Meenakshi Achi & Anr. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras, 60 ITR 253 followed the same principle and relied upon and approved of an English decision in the case of Higgs V. Wrightson.(1944) 26 T.C. 73. There a dairy farmer had received grant in respect of the ploughing and bringing into a state of cleanliness and fertility land previously under grass for seven years or more. Macnaghtenn, j. held that since the amo…

M/S. JINDAL (INDIA) LTD.,WEST BENGAL vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for the reasons given here in above

ITA 5250/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. N.K. Billaiya & Sh. Kul Bharat

Section 132Section 143Section 153Section 153A

…say of the Counsel that there is no dispute whatsoever that the assessee is eligible for the West Bengal incentive scheme 2000 for its unit at Jangalpur Distt., Hawrah. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of VSSV Meenakshi Achi 60 ITR 253 the Counsel stated that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in this case that the character of the subsidy in the hands of the recipient is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy has been given. The Counsel referred to the relevant closures of the scheme and pointed out that the purpose of the scheme was to promote indu…

M/S. JINDAL (INDIA) LTD.,WEST BENGAL vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for the reasons given here in above

ITA 5249/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N.K. Billaiya & Sh. Kul Bharat

Section 132Section 143Section 153Section 153A

…say of the Counsel that there is no dispute whatsoever that the assessee is eligible for the West Bengal incentive scheme 2000 for its unit at Jangalpur Distt., Hawrah. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of VSSV Meenakshi Achi 60 ITR 253 the Counsel stated that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in this case that the character of the subsidy in the hands of the recipient is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy has been given. The Counsel referred to the relevant closures of the scheme and pointed out that the purpose of the scheme was to promote indu…

M/S. JINDAL (INDIA0 LTD.,WEST BENGAL vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for the reasons given here in above

ITA 5248/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N.K. Billaiya & Sh. Kul Bharat

Section 132Section 143Section 153Section 153A

…say of the Counsel that there is no dispute whatsoever that the assessee is eligible for the West Bengal incentive scheme 2000 for its unit at Jangalpur Distt., Hawrah. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of VSSV Meenakshi Achi 60 ITR 253 the Counsel stated that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in this case that the character of the subsidy in the hands of the recipient is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy has been given. The Counsel referred to the relevant closures of the scheme and pointed out that the purpose of the scheme was to promote indu…

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, HARYANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 4185/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ITA. No. 167/Del/2009 ITA. No. 413/Del/2010 AND ITA. Nos. 2280 & 4185/Del/2011. (Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) M/s. Jindal Steel & Power Addl. CIT, Limited, Jindal Centre, Vs. Hisar Range, 12–BhikajiCama Place, Hisar, Haryana. New Delhi – 110 066. PAN: AAACJ7097D A N D ITA. No. 220/Del/2009 ITA. No. 341/Del/2010 AND ITA. Nos. 2230 & 4067/Del/2011. (Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) ACIT, M/…

DCIT, HISAR vs. JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD., HISAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 4067/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ITA. No. 167/Del/2009 ITA. No. 413/Del/2010 AND ITA. Nos. 2280 & 4185/Del/2011. (Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) M/s. Jindal Steel & Power Addl. CIT, Limited, Jindal Centre, Vs. Hisar Range, 12–BhikajiCama Place, Hisar, Haryana. New Delhi – 110 066. PAN: AAACJ7097D A N D ITA. No. 220/Del/2009 ITA. No. 341/Del/2010 AND ITA. Nos. 2230 & 4067/Del/2011. (Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) ACIT, M/…

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, HISAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 2280/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ITA. No. 167/Del/2009 ITA. No. 413/Del/2010 AND ITA. Nos. 2280 & 4185/Del/2011. (Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) M/s. Jindal Steel & Power Addl. CIT, Limited, Jindal Centre, Vs. Hisar Range, 12–BhikajiCama Place, Hisar, Haryana. New Delhi – 110 066. PAN: AAACJ7097D A N D ITA. No. 220/Del/2009 ITA. No. 341/Del/2010 AND ITA. Nos. 2230 & 4067/Del/2011. (Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) ACIT, M/…

ACIT, HISAR vs. JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD., HISAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 2230/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ITA. No. 167/Del/2009 ITA. No. 413/Del/2010 AND ITA. Nos. 2280 & 4185/Del/2011. (Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) M/s. Jindal Steel & Power Addl. CIT, Limited, Jindal Centre, Vs. Hisar Range, 12–BhikajiCama Place, Hisar, Haryana. New Delhi – 110 066. PAN: AAACJ7097D A N D ITA. No. 220/Del/2009 ITA. No. 341/Del/2010 AND ITA. Nos. 2230 & 4067/Del/2011. (Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) ACIT, M/…

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD.,HARYANA vs. DCIT, HISAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 413/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ITA. No. 167/Del/2009 ITA. No. 413/Del/2010 AND ITA. Nos. 2280 & 4185/Del/2011. (Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) M/s. Jindal Steel & Power Addl. CIT, Limited, Jindal Centre, Vs. Hisar Range, 12–BhikajiCama Place, Hisar, Haryana. New Delhi – 110 066. PAN: AAACJ7097D A N D ITA. No. 220/Del/2009 ITA. No. 341/Del/2010 AND ITA. Nos. 2230 & 4067/Del/2011. (Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) ACIT, M/…

DCIT, HISAR vs. JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD., HISAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 341/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ITA. No. 167/Del/2009 ITA. No. 413/Del/2010 AND ITA. Nos. 2280 & 4185/Del/2011. (Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) M/s. Jindal Steel & Power Addl. CIT, Limited, Jindal Centre, Vs. Hisar Range, 12–BhikajiCama Place, Hisar, Haryana. New Delhi – 110 066. PAN: AAACJ7097D A N D ITA. No. 220/Del/2009 ITA. No. 341/Del/2010 AND ITA. Nos. 2230 & 4067/Del/2011. (Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) ACIT, M/…

ACIT, HISAR vs. M/S JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD., HISAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 220/DEL/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ITA. No. 167/Del/2009 ITA. No. 413/Del/2010 AND ITA. Nos. 2280 & 4185/Del/2011. (Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) M/s. Jindal Steel & Power Addl. CIT, Limited, Jindal Centre, Vs. Hisar Range, 12–BhikajiCama Place, Hisar, Haryana. New Delhi – 110 066. PAN: AAACJ7097D A N D ITA. No. 220/Del/2009 ITA. No. 341/Del/2010 AND ITA. Nos. 2230 & 4067/Del/2011. (Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) ACIT, M/…

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LIMITED vs. ADDL. CIT,

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 167/DEL/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ITA. No. 167/Del/2009 ITA. No. 413/Del/2010 AND ITA. Nos. 2280 & 4185/Del/2011. (Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) M/s. Jindal Steel & Power Addl. CIT, Limited, Jindal Centre, Vs. Hisar Range, 12–BhikajiCama Place, Hisar, Haryana. New Delhi – 110 066. PAN: AAACJ7097D A N D ITA. No. 220/Del/2009 ITA. No. 341/Del/2010 AND ITA. Nos. 2230 & 4067/Del/2011. (Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09) ACIT, M/…

JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(OSD), CENTRAL CIRLCE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. MEDHA SERVO DRIVES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 655/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri V. Shiva KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…nditure the House of Lords had no difficulty in holding that the money received by the company was not in course of trade but was of capital nature. We shall now see how our Courts have dealt with the problem. 21. This Court in V.S.S.V. Meenakshi Ac hi v. CIT 60 ITR 253 followed the same principle and relied upon and approved of an English decision in the case of Higgs v. Wrightson [1944] 26 TC 73. There a dairy farmer had received grant in respect of the ploughing and bringing into a state of cleanliness and fertility land previously under grass for seven years more. Mecnaghten, J. held that since the amount of…

JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(OSD), CENTRAL CIRLCE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. MEDHA SERVO DRIVES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 654/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri V. Shiva KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…nditure the House of Lords had no difficulty in holding that the money received by the company was not in course of trade but was of capital nature. We shall now see how our Courts have dealt with the problem. 21. This Court in V.S.S.V. Meenakshi Ac hi v. CIT 60 ITR 253 followed the same principle and relied upon and approved of an English decision in the case of Higgs v. Wrightson [1944] 26 TC 73. There a dairy farmer had received grant in respect of the ploughing and bringing into a state of cleanliness and fertility land previously under grass for seven years more. Mecnaghten, J. held that since the amount of…

M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6525/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…y was given. For the above proposition, the ld. Counsel relied on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Limited: 306 ITR 392, Sahney Steel and Press Works vs. CIT: 228 ITR 253; and V.S.S.V. Meenakshi Achi: 60 ITR 253 and various other decisions. 142. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in the case of Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Ltd. the Hon’ble Supreme Court, after following the purpose test as explained in Sahney Steel (supra) held that the point of time at which subsidy is paid is not relevant. The source and form of subsidy is also material. If th…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6256/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…y was given. For the above proposition, the ld. Counsel relied on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Limited: 306 ITR 392, Sahney Steel and Press Works vs. CIT: 228 ITR 253; and V.S.S.V. Meenakshi Achi: 60 ITR 253 and various other decisions. 142. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in the case of Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Ltd. the Hon’ble Supreme Court, after following the purpose test as explained in Sahney Steel (supra) held that the point of time at which subsidy is paid is not relevant. The source and form of subsidy is also material. If th…

M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3241/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…y was given. For the above proposition, the ld. Counsel relied on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Limited: 306 ITR 392, Sahney Steel and Press Works vs. CIT: 228 ITR 253; and V.S.S.V. Meenakshi Achi: 60 ITR 253 and various other decisions. 142. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in the case of Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Ltd. the Hon’ble Supreme Court, after following the purpose test as explained in Sahney Steel (supra) held that the point of time at which subsidy is paid is not relevant. The source and form of subsidy is also material. If th…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3114/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…y was given. For the above proposition, the ld. Counsel relied on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Limited: 306 ITR 392, Sahney Steel and Press Works vs. CIT: 228 ITR 253; and V.S.S.V. Meenakshi Achi: 60 ITR 253 and various other decisions. 142. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in the case of Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Ltd. the Hon’ble Supreme Court, after following the purpose test as explained in Sahney Steel (supra) held that the point of time at which subsidy is paid is not relevant. The source and form of subsidy is also material. If th…

JITF WATER INFRA (NAYA RAIPUR) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-13(3), NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1103/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kambleआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.1102 & 1103/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2013-14 & 2014-15 बनाम Jitf Water Infra (Naya Raipur) Ito, Ltd., Vs. Ward 13(3), 28, Shivaji Marg, West Delhi, New Delhi. New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Pan No. Aaccj2374D

Section 263

…purpose for which the grant/subsidy is granted. This I.T.A.Nos.1102 & 1103/Del/2018/A.Ys.2013-14 & 2014-15/JITF Water Infra (Naya Raipur) Ltd. Page 6 of 17 view is fortified by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of V.S.S.V. Meenakshi Achi 60 ITR 253 in which the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the character of the subsidy in the hands of the recipient is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy has been given. This principle has been reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahni Steel & Press Works Ltd. 228 ITR 253, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Co…

CIT vs. Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Limited: 306 ITR 392, Sahney Steel and Press Works v. CIT

What is CIT vs. Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Limited: 306 ITR 392, Sahney Steel and Press Works v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT vs. Ponni Sugar and Chemicals Limited: 306 ITR 392, Sahney Steel and Press Works v. CIT

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. JITF WATER INFRA (NAYA RAIPUR) LTD., NEW DELHI

M/S. BRIDGESTONE INDIA PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. THE ACIT NFAC, DELHI

M/S. JINDAL (INDIA) LTD.,WEST BENGAL vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

M/S. JINDAL (INDIA) LTD.,WEST BENGAL vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

M/S. JINDAL (INDIA0 LTD.,WEST BENGAL vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, HARYANA

DCIT, HISAR vs. JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD., HISAR

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, HISAR

ACIT, HISAR vs. JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD., HISAR

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD.,HARYANA vs. DCIT, HISAR

DCIT, HISAR vs. JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD., HISAR

ACIT, HISAR vs. M/S JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD., HISAR

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LIMITED vs. ADDL. CIT,

JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(OSD), CENTRAL CIRLCE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. MEDHA SERVO DRIVES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(OSD), CENTRAL CIRLCE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. MEDHA SERVO DRIVES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, NEW DELHI

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, NEW DELHI

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

JITF WATER INFRA (NAYA RAIPUR) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-13(3), NEW DELHI