Delhi in PCIT v. M. Sons Gems N Jewellery (P) Ltd.

69 Taxmann.com 373Reported decision#25640 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2022.

Issues it is cited on

section 2(28a)strategic investmentsection 194asection 40(a)(ia)section 194section 250(6)section 19section 133aincome from other sourcessection 143(1)section 25transfer

Judgments citing Delhi in PCIT v. M. Sons Gems N Jewellery (P) Ltd.

ACADEMY OF HIGHER EDUCATION,TRICHY vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRICHY

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 1973/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am.

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Ann L Kapthuama (CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 194Section 250(6)

…s availed factoring facility from EAFSL against receivables and paid factoring charges. We find that factoring charges could not be termed as interest u/s 2(28A) as per the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in PCIT vs. M. Sons Gems N Jewellery (P) Ltd. (69 Taxmann.com 373). This decision has referred to the decisions of Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in CIT v. MKJ Enterprises Ltd. 2015 50 Taxmann.com 441 as well as another decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Cargill Global Trading (P.) Ltd (11 Taxmann.com 219). Considering these binding decisions and in the absence of any contrary decision on record,…

SIVA INDUSTRIES AND HOLDINGS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 1393/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am.

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Ann L Kapthuama (CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 194Section 250(6)

…s availed factoring facility from EAFSL against receivables and paid factoring charges. We find that factoring charges could not be termed as interest u/s 2(28A) as per the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in PCIT vs. M. Sons Gems N Jewellery (P) Ltd. (69 Taxmann.com 373). This decision has referred to the decisions of Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in CIT v. MKJ Enterprises Ltd. 2015 50 Taxmann.com 441 as well as another decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Cargill Global Trading (P.) Ltd (11 Taxmann.com 219). Considering these binding decisions and in the absence of any contrary decision on record,…

SIVA INDUSTRIES AND HOLDINGS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 1392/CHNY/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Dec 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am.

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Ann L Kapthuama (CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 194Section 250(6)

…s availed factoring facility from EAFSL against receivables and paid factoring charges. We find that factoring charges could not be termed as interest u/s 2(28A) as per the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in PCIT vs. M. Sons Gems N Jewellery (P) Ltd. (69 Taxmann.com 373). This decision has referred to the decisions of Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in CIT v. MKJ Enterprises Ltd. 2015 50 Taxmann.com 441 as well as another decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Cargill Global Trading (P.) Ltd (11 Taxmann.com 219). Considering these binding decisions and in the absence of any contrary decision on record,…

Delhi in PCIT v. M. Sons Gems N Jewellery (P) Ltd. (69 Taxmann.com 373) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax