Deora Tea Co. Ltd. v. Commr. Agr. I. T

44 ITR 6Supreme Court of India1962#10656 most cited
10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2005 to 2022.

Judgments citing Deora Tea Co. Ltd. v. Commr. Agr. I. T

MOHAMED HANIF RASUL PATEL,,SANGLI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(5),, SANGLI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1488/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1488/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Mohamed Hanif Rasul Patel, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(5), Sangli. Golibar Road, Near Railway Crossing, Miraj, Sangli. Pan : Abppp5778G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri M. K. Kulkarni Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.09.2022 आदेश / Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am : This Appeal Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kolhapur Dated 02.07.2018 Emanating From The Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Passed By Ito, Ward-1(5), Sangli, Dated 18.12.2017. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under :- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The A. O. The Assessing Authority & Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Order Of The A.O. When He Passed The Assessment Without Granting Sufficient Opportunity As Mentioned In The Appeal Order Of Cit(A) In His Common Order. The Principles Of Natural Justice Have Been Violated. The Assessment Be Quashed. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit Was Not Justified In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.

For Appellant: Shri M. K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(3)

…ot been considered by both the authorities. The addition be quashed. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Hon’ble Supreme Court (supra) observed the decision of the Supreme Court in Deora Tea Co. Ltd. v. Commr. Agr. I. T. (1962) 44 ITR 6 (SC) is authority for the proposition that the agricultural income to arise, it is not predicated that the agricultural income must be sold: use of agricultural produce for the purpose of business of the assessee may give rise to agricultural income. The principle enunciated applies to this case of the appellant. Since deposits are out of agricultur…

MOHAMED HANIF RASUL PATEL,,SANGLI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(5),, SANGLI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1477/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1474 To 1477/Pun/2018 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri M.K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma
Section 143(3)

…ot been considered by both the authorities. The addition be quashed. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble Supreme Court (supra) observed the decision of the Supreme Court in Deora Tea Co. Ltd. v. Commr. Agr. I. T. (1962) 44 ITR 6 (SC) is authority for the proposition that the agricultural income to arise, it is not predicated that the agricultural income must be sold: use of agricultural produce for the purpose of business of the assessee may give rise to agricultural income. The principle enunciated applies to this case of the appellant. Since deposits are out of agricultur…

MOHAMED HANIF RASUL PATEL,,SANGLI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(5),, SANGLI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1476/PUN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1474 To 1477/Pun/2018 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri M.K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma
Section 143(3)

…ot been considered by both the authorities. The addition be quashed. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble Supreme Court (supra) observed the decision of the Supreme Court in Deora Tea Co. Ltd. v. Commr. Agr. I. T. (1962) 44 ITR 6 (SC) is authority for the proposition that the agricultural income to arise, it is not predicated that the agricultural income must be sold: use of agricultural produce for the purpose of business of the assessee may give rise to agricultural income. The principle enunciated applies to this case of the appellant. Since deposits are out of agricultur…

MOHAMED HANIF RASUL PATEL,,SANGLI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(5),, SANGLI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1475/PUN/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1474 To 1477/Pun/2018 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri M.K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma
Section 143(3)

…ot been considered by both the authorities. The addition be quashed. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble Supreme Court (supra) observed the decision of the Supreme Court in Deora Tea Co. Ltd. v. Commr. Agr. I. T. (1962) 44 ITR 6 (SC) is authority for the proposition that the agricultural income to arise, it is not predicated that the agricultural income must be sold: use of agricultural produce for the purpose of business of the assessee may give rise to agricultural income. The principle enunciated applies to this case of the appellant. Since deposits are out of agricultur…

MOHAMED HANIF RASUL PATEL,,SANGLI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(5),, SANGLI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1474/PUN/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1474 To 1477/Pun/2018 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri M.K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma
Section 143(3)

…ot been considered by both the authorities. The addition be quashed. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble Supreme Court (supra) observed the decision of the Supreme Court in Deora Tea Co. Ltd. v. Commr. Agr. I. T. (1962) 44 ITR 6 (SC) is authority for the proposition that the agricultural income to arise, it is not predicated that the agricultural income must be sold: use of agricultural produce for the purpose of business of the assessee may give rise to agricultural income. The principle enunciated applies to this case of the appellant. Since deposits are out of agricultur…

PRAVARDHAN SEEDS PRIAVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 667/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Years: 2012-13 Pravardhan Seeds Pvt. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Hyderabad. Income-Tax, Circle – 16(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aaaafcp0118A

For Appellant: Shri C.S. SubramanyamFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai
Section 10(1)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263

…avardhan Seeds Pvt. Ltd., Hyd. 9.3 On agricultural processing, the Apex Court had an occasion to consider the import and scope at the "process ordinarily employed by the cultivator". In "Dooars Tea Company Limited Vs. Commissioner of Agriculture, Income- tax, 44 ITR 6" and" K. Lakshman & Co. and Another Vs CIT, 239 MR 597 " the Apex Court held that the process should be to make produce rarketable. It should not change the character and nature of the produce without resulting in an altogether new product. Then it would be agricultural income. 9.4 Applying the above principles, it can be construed that the process…

M/S GIVO LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2041/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 41(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G. D. AGRAWAL, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.2041/Del/2013 (Assessment Year2006-07) Givo Ltd., Vs. DCIT, Circle 12(1), C/o Vinod Kumar New Delhi Bindal & Co. C.A., Shiv Sushil Bhawan, D-219, Vivek Vihar I, New Delhi – 110 095 GIR / PAN :AAACG3928L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by :Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, CA Respondent by :Shri T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 13.07.2016 Date of Pronouncement: 27.07.2016 ORDER PER BEENA A. PILLAI, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the asses…

M/S.VIRTUAL SOFT SYSTEMS LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-I

C.A. No.-007115-007115 - 2005Supreme Court06 Feb 2007
For Respondent: Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-I
Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…nce was made to CIT v. S.V. Angidi Chettiar, 44 ITR 739 (SC) which referred to the expression "income tax" this judgment being under Section 28(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1922, Dooars Tea Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, West-Bengal, 44 ITR 6 (SC) referring to the expression "total income", CIT (Central) Delhi v. Harparshad & Co. P. Ltd., 99 ITR 118 (SC), again referring to the expression word "total income". Reference is also made to CIT v. J.H. Gotla, 156 ITR 323 (SC) for the proposition as to whether word income would include loss. In this connection, the High Court also refer…

M/S.VIRTUAL SOFT SYSTEMS LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-I

C.A. No.-007115-007115 - 2005Supreme Court06 Feb 2007
For Respondent: Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-I
Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…nce was made to CIT v. S.V. Angidi Chettiar, 44 ITR 739 (SC) which referred to the expression "income tax" this judgment being under Section 28(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1922, Dooars Tea Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax, West-Bengal, 44 ITR 6 (SC) referring to the expression "total income", CIT (Central) Delhi v. Harparshad & Co. P. Ltd., 99 ITR 118 (SC), again referring to the expression word "total income". Reference is also made to CIT v. J.H. Gotla, 156 ITR 323 (SC) for the proposition as to whether word income would include loss. In this connection, the High Court also refer…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S WELCOME SEEDS LTD.

ITA/183/2001HC Delhi29 Jul 2005

…quires". The context in which the expression'ototal income" is used is also of vital importance. This is the legislative mandate. But, even if any authorities were needed for this proposition we have Dooors Tea Co. Ltd. v. Comrussioner Qf Agricah West Bengal: 44 ITR 6 (SC)8 and Reserve Bank of India v. Peerless General TOmitted by Finance Ac! 1988, w.e.f. 1.4.1989 SThe Supreme Court held that -- "What the word "income" denotes has to be determined in the ITA 205.0letc Page No. 30 of 37 \/\L 1S l. Finance and Investmen! 1p'Lt{i tIgST I SCC 424e. Now, various provisions were pointed out by ihe learned counsel for…

Deora Tea Co. Ltd. v. Commr. Agr. I. T (44 ITR 6) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax