CIT vs. South Arcot Soc. (176 ITR 117, 119) (SC) Ct v. UO Co-op Fed. (

177 ITR 418Supreme Court of India1989#4463 most cited

What is CIT vs. South Arcot Soc. (176 ITR 117, 119) (SC) Ct v. UO Co-op Fed. ( authority for?

Provisions granting deduction, exemption, or relief to an assessee are to be interpreted liberally and in favour of the assessee.

26

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT vs. South Arcot Soc. · deduction · exemption · relief · liberal interpretation · favour of assessee · tax benefit

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 10(2A)Section 143(3A)Section 28(v)Section 40(b)Section 142(1)Section 143(3B)

Issues it is cited on

section 2(29ba)section 28(v)section 80jjsection 10(2a)section 40(b)section 80jsection 80icsection 80hhcsection 80hhtax benefitsection 80ainitial assessment year

Judgments citing CIT vs. South Arcot Soc. (176 ITR 117, 119) (SC) Ct v. UO Co-op Fed. (

M/S. Vodafone Essar East Ltd., Kolkata vs. Addl. CIT, Range - 7, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 357/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

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

…n, exemption or relief should be construed liberally and in favour of the assessee. The above test has also been laid down in the following case: CIT vs. South Arcot Soc. (176 ITR 117, 119) (SC) Ct vs. UO Co-op Fed. (176 ITR 435, 441)(SC) Broach Soc. vs. CIT (177 ITR 418,422)(SC) In view of the foregoing discussion the assessee humbly submitted that hundred per cent deduction be allowed for A.Y 2005-06. However the AO during the assessment proceedings made certain observations as detailed under:- “16(a) As stated above the assessee-company is claiming deduction us. 80IA on mobile/cellular services provided by it.…

M/S. Vodafone Essar East Ltd., Kolkata vs. JCIT, Range - 7, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 356/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

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

…n, exemption or relief should be construed liberally and in favour of the assessee. The above test has also been laid down in the following case: CIT vs. South Arcot Soc. (176 ITR 117, 119) (SC) Ct vs. UO Co-op Fed. (176 ITR 435, 441)(SC) Broach Soc. vs. CIT (177 ITR 418,422)(SC) In view of the foregoing discussion the assessee humbly submitted that hundred per cent deduction be allowed for A.Y 2005-06. However the AO during the assessment proceedings made certain observations as detailed under:- “16(a) As stated above the assessee-company is claiming deduction us. 80IA on mobile/cellular services provided by it.…

ACIT, Circle - 7, Kolkata vs. Hutchison Telecom East Limited, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 343/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

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

…n, exemption or relief should be construed liberally and in favour of the assessee. The above test has also been laid down in the following case: CIT vs. South Arcot Soc. (176 ITR 117, 119) (SC) Ct vs. UO Co-op Fed. (176 ITR 435, 441)(SC) Broach Soc. vs. CIT (177 ITR 418,422)(SC) In view of the foregoing discussion the assessee humbly submitted that hundred per cent deduction be allowed for A.Y 2005-06. However the AO during the assessment proceedings made certain observations as detailed under:- “16(a) As stated above the assessee-company is claiming deduction us. 80IA on mobile/cellular services provided by it.…

Imsi India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Dehradun

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2506/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 5856/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 4277/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 5744/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2506/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Imsi India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy/Assistant Commissioner C/O Luthra & Luthra Law Offices, Of Income Tax, Circle-2, 103, Ashoka Estate, Barakhamba Dehradun, Uttranchal Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabci1797A Assessee By : Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Sh. Sudhindra Jain & Sh. Alok Kumar Jain, Cas Revenue By : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2007- 08 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 03.10.2011 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Ii, Dehradun & The Other Appeals Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 09.02.2012, 20.12.2011 & 30.11.2012 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-I, Dehradun For The Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Respectively. 2. Since The Issue Involved Is Common In All These Appeals Which Were Heard Together So These Are Being Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Sh. Sudhindra JainFor Respondent: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR
Section 2Section 234BSection 80Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM and Ms. Suchitra Kamble, JM ITA No. 5856/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 ITA No. 4277/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 ITA No. 5744/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 ITA No. 2506/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 IMSI India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy/Assistant Commissioner C/o Luthra & Luthra Law Offices, of Income Tax, Circle-2, 103, Ashoka Estate, Barakhamba Dehradun, Uttranchal Road, New Delhi-110001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AABCI1797A Assessee by : Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Sh. Sudhindra Jain & Sh. Alok Kumar Jain, CAs R…

Imsi India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Dehradun

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5856/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 5856/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 4277/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 5744/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2506/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Imsi India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy/Assistant Commissioner C/O Luthra & Luthra Law Offices, Of Income Tax, Circle-2, 103, Ashoka Estate, Barakhamba Dehradun, Uttranchal Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabci1797A Assessee By : Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Sh. Sudhindra Jain & Sh. Alok Kumar Jain, Cas Revenue By : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2007- 08 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 03.10.2011 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Ii, Dehradun & The Other Appeals Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 09.02.2012, 20.12.2011 & 30.11.2012 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-I, Dehradun For The Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Respectively. 2. Since The Issue Involved Is Common In All These Appeals Which Were Heard Together So These Are Being Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Sh. Sudhindra JainFor Respondent: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR
Section 2Section 234BSection 80Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM and Ms. Suchitra Kamble, JM ITA No. 5856/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 ITA No. 4277/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 ITA No. 5744/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 ITA No. 2506/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 IMSI India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy/Assistant Commissioner C/o Luthra & Luthra Law Offices, of Income Tax, Circle-2, 103, Ashoka Estate, Barakhamba Dehradun, Uttranchal Road, New Delhi-110001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AABCI1797A Assessee by : Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Sh. Sudhindra Jain & Sh. Alok Kumar Jain, CAs R…

ITO, Ooty vs. The Bikatty Industrial Co-Operative Tea Factory Ltd., the Nilgiris

In the result, the appeal of the Department in ITA

ITA 709/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Aug 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Shiva Srinivasas, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. N. Vijaykumar, C.A
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

…agricultural produce of the members and held that the profits of the society were exempt u/s.809(2)(a)(iii) of the Act. 9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Broach District Cooperative Cotton Sales, Ginning and Pressing Society Ltd. reported in [1989] 177 ITR 418 has held as under : “The assessee a co-operative society, possessed a ginning a pressing factory to cater to the needs of its members. It got raw cotton from its members and ginned and pressed the cotton for marketing on behalf of its members. For rendering the services of ginning and pressing before selling the goods, the appellant charged the…