Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shirke Construction Equipments Ltd.

246 ITR 429High Court2000#20170 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2004 to 2017.

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shirke Construction Equipments Ltd.

ADVANCED ENZYME TECHNOLOGIES LTD,THANE vs. ACIT CIR I, THANE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1775/MUM/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Nov 2017AY 2002-03

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am Advanced Enzyme The Asst. Commissioner Of Technologies Ltd. (Formerly Income Tax- 1, Circle01, Known As Advanced Ashar It Park B Wing, 6 Th Biochemicals Ltd.) Floor, Road No. Z-16, Now Known As Advanced Wagle Indl Estate Vs. Enzyme Technologies Ltd. Thane (W) -400 604 Sun Magnetica, A Wing, 5 Th Fl Near Lic Service Road, Thane (W)-400 604 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aabca4555E

For Appellant: Vipul Joshi & Dinkle Hariya, ARs’For Respondent: Rajesh Kumar Yadav, DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 80Section 80H

…n fact, the claim of the assessee, as well acceptance thereof by the AO was based on a series of judicial pronouncements, including of the jurisdictional high court. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v/s. Shrike Construction Equipments Ltd. [(2000) 246 ITR 429 (Bom)] had taken a view that Section 80 HHC is a complete code in itself and while computing deduction u/s. 80 HHC of the Act unabsorbed business losses and depreciation of earlier year are not to be set off. On the other hand, the learned Sr. Departmental Representative heavily relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 5. We have heard the…

EXIDE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 189/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 40Section 90(2)

…I.T.A. No. 189/KOL./2007 Assessment year: 2003-2004 & I.T.A. No. 1414/KOL/2007 Assessment Year : 2004-2005 Page 1 of 22 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Accountant Member and Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member I.T.A. No. 189/KOL/ 2007 Assessment Year: 2003-2004 Exide Industries Limited,........................................................Appellant 59E, Chowringhee Road, Kolkata-700 020 [PAN : AAACE 6641 E] -Vs.- Additional Commissioner of Income Tax,.............................Respondent Range-I, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee S…

COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, PUNE vs. SHIRKE CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT LTD

The appeal stands allowed accordingly

C.A. No.-006758-006758 - 2001Supreme Court17 May 2007

For Respondent: Shirke Construction Equipment Ltd

Section 29Section 72Section 80Section 80H

…ory Ltd. (supra), hence the same are not restated herein. In IPCA Laboratory Ltd. (supra), the counsel appearing for the assessee had placed reliance on two judgments, i.e., one by the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Shirke Construction Equiments Ltd. [2000 246 ITR 429 Bom.], which is the judgment impugned in the instant appeal, and another by the High Court of Kerala in CIT v. T.C. Usha (supra). 6. Taking a contrary view, this Court in IPCA Laboratory Ltd. (supra) has held that (i) Section 80- HHC of the Act is not independent of Section 80-AB and would be governed by Section 80-AB; and (ii) losses w…

IPCA LABORATORY LTD. vs. DY. COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

C.A. No.-001697-001697 - 2003Supreme Court11 Mar 2004

For Respondent: Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

Section 260ASection 80Section 80H

…language. An interpretation which leads to an absurd result or a result not contemplated by its language cannot be given. Mr. Dastur also relied upon the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Shirke Construction Equipments Ltd. reported in (2000) Vol. 246 ITR 429. In this case the Bombay High Court has held that http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 9 Section 80HHC is a complete code in itself and that it is not controlled by Section 80AB. It was held that profits had to be computed under Section 29 and Section 72 was not applicable. It was held that carry forward losses could n…