DevidasVithaldas& Co. v. CIT

191 ITR 249High Court1991#7454 most cited
15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2021.

Judgments citing DevidasVithaldas& Co. v. CIT

HITACHI METGLAS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5906/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[A.Y 2010-11]

For Appellant: Shri Saleel Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar Meel, CIT- DR

…97 ITR 422 (SC) 51 • ITA Nos.551/Del./2014 & 636/Del./2015 · • ChandulalKeshavlal v. CIT: 38 ITR 601(SC) · • Bombay Steam Navigation Co. (1953) (P.) Ltd. v. CIT: 56 ITR 52 (SC) · DevidasVithaldas& Co. v. CIT: 84 ITR 277 (SC) · • Chelpark Company Ltd. v. CIT: 191 ITR 249 (Mad.) · • K.T.M.T.M. Abdul Kayoom v. CIT: 44 ITR 689 (SC) · • Assam Bengal Cement Co. Ltd. v. CIT: 27 ITR 34 (SC) · • L.H. Sugar Factory & Oil Mills P. Ltd. v. CIT: 125 ITR 293 (SC) · Dalmia Jain & Co. Ltd. v. CIT: 81 ITR 754 (SC) · • M.K. Bros. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT: 86 ITR 38 (SC) · • Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT: 62 ITR 566 (SC) · • C…

ACIT LTU-2 , CHENNAI vs. CHEMPLAST SANMAR LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2963/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [Pan: Aaacc 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, JCIT

…ed by the assessee for both assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08. 16.3 The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. DR strongly relied on the decisions in the case of Tamilnadu Diary Development Corporation 239 ITR 142 (Mad) and Chelpark Company Ltd. 191 ITR 249 and supported the order passed by the Assessing Officer. 16.4 Per contra, by relying the recent judgement of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Carborandum Universal Limited v. JCIT in T.C.(A) No. 244 of 2006 dated 10.09.2012, the ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 16.5. We have heard bot…

ACIT LTU-2 , CHENNAI vs. CHEMPLAST SANMAR LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2962/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [Pan: Aaacc 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, JCIT

…ed by the assessee for both assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08. 16.3 The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. DR strongly relied on the decisions in the case of Tamilnadu Diary Development Corporation 239 ITR 142 (Mad) and Chelpark Company Ltd. 191 ITR 249 and supported the order passed by the Assessing Officer. 16.4 Per contra, by relying the recent judgement of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Carborandum Universal Limited v. JCIT in T.C.(A) No. 244 of 2006 dated 10.09.2012, the ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 16.5. We have heard bot…

ACIT LTU-2 , CHENNAI vs. CHEMPLAST SANMAR LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2961/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [Pan: Aaacc 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, JCIT

…ed by the assessee for both assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08. 16.3 The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. DR strongly relied on the decisions in the case of Tamilnadu Diary Development Corporation 239 ITR 142 (Mad) and Chelpark Company Ltd. 191 ITR 249 and supported the order passed by the Assessing Officer. 16.4 Per contra, by relying the recent judgement of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Carborandum Universal Limited v. JCIT in T.C.(A) No. 244 of 2006 dated 10.09.2012, the ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 16.5. We have heard bot…

ACIT LTU-2 , CHENNAI vs. CHEMPLAST SANMAR LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2960/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [Pan: Aaacc 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, JCIT

…ed by the assessee for both assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08. 16.3 The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. DR strongly relied on the decisions in the case of Tamilnadu Diary Development Corporation 239 ITR 142 (Mad) and Chelpark Company Ltd. 191 ITR 249 and supported the order passed by the Assessing Officer. 16.4 Per contra, by relying the recent judgement of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Carborandum Universal Limited v. JCIT in T.C.(A) No. 244 of 2006 dated 10.09.2012, the ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 16.5. We have heard bot…

ACIT LTU-2 , CHENNAI vs. CHEMPLAST SANMAR LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2958/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [Pan: Aaacc 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, JCIT

…ed by the assessee for both assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08. 16.3 The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. DR strongly relied on the decisions in the case of Tamilnadu Diary Development Corporation 239 ITR 142 (Mad) and Chelpark Company Ltd. 191 ITR 249 and supported the order passed by the Assessing Officer. 16.4 Per contra, by relying the recent judgement of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Carborandum Universal Limited v. JCIT in T.C.(A) No. 244 of 2006 dated 10.09.2012, the ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 16.5. We have heard bot…

ACIT LTU-2 , CHENNAI vs. CHEMPLAST SANMAR LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2957/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [Pan: Aaacc 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, JCIT

…ed by the assessee for both assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08. 16.3 The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. DR strongly relied on the decisions in the case of Tamilnadu Diary Development Corporation 239 ITR 142 (Mad) and Chelpark Company Ltd. 191 ITR 249 and supported the order passed by the Assessing Officer. 16.4 Per contra, by relying the recent judgement of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Carborandum Universal Limited v. JCIT in T.C.(A) No. 244 of 2006 dated 10.09.2012, the ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 16.5. We have heard bot…

CHEMPLAST SANMAR LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT LTU, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2810/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [Pan: Aaacc 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, JCIT

…ed by the assessee for both assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08. 16.3 The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. DR strongly relied on the decisions in the case of Tamilnadu Diary Development Corporation 239 ITR 142 (Mad) and Chelpark Company Ltd. 191 ITR 249 and supported the order passed by the Assessing Officer. 16.4 Per contra, by relying the recent judgement of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Carborandum Universal Limited v. JCIT in T.C.(A) No. 244 of 2006 dated 10.09.2012, the ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 16.5. We have heard bot…

CHEMPLAST SANMAR LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT LTU, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2809/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [Pan: Aaacc 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, JCIT

…ed by the assessee for both assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08. 16.3 The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. DR strongly relied on the decisions in the case of Tamilnadu Diary Development Corporation 239 ITR 142 (Mad) and Chelpark Company Ltd. 191 ITR 249 and supported the order passed by the Assessing Officer. 16.4 Per contra, by relying the recent judgement of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Carborandum Universal Limited v. JCIT in T.C.(A) No. 244 of 2006 dated 10.09.2012, the ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 16.5. We have heard bot…

CHEMPLAST SANMAR LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT LTU, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2808/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [Pan: Aaacc 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, JCIT

…ed by the assessee for both assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08. 16.3 The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. DR strongly relied on the decisions in the case of Tamilnadu Diary Development Corporation 239 ITR 142 (Mad) and Chelpark Company Ltd. 191 ITR 249 and supported the order passed by the Assessing Officer. 16.4 Per contra, by relying the recent judgement of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Carborandum Universal Limited v. JCIT in T.C.(A) No. 244 of 2006 dated 10.09.2012, the ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 16.5. We have heard bot…

CHEMPLAST SANMAR LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT LTU, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2807/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2807, 2808, 2809 & 2810/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Chemplast Sanmar Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.9, Cathedral Road, Income Tax, Chennai – 600 086. Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit, [Pan: Aaacc 3000F] 1775, 21 Mahatma Gandhi High Road, Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, JCIT

…ed by the assessee for both assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08. 16.3 The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. DR strongly relied on the decisions in the case of Tamilnadu Diary Development Corporation 239 ITR 142 (Mad) and Chelpark Company Ltd. 191 ITR 249 and supported the order passed by the Assessing Officer. 16.4 Per contra, by relying the recent judgement of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Carborandum Universal Limited v. JCIT in T.C.(A) No. 244 of 2006 dated 10.09.2012, the ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 16.5. We have heard bot…

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 vs. HERO CORPORATES SERVICES LTD.

In the result ground Nos

ITA/952/2016HC Delhi30 Jan 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

…id tests but deriving support from many aspects of the circumstances and the ultimate answer could depend upon a commonsense appreciation of the guiding features. The decision relied up on by the a ld DR of Chelpark Park limited V Page 3 of 5 CIT 191 ITR 249 was on non compete expenditure paid to managing director r(sic) and therefore nature of expenditure is distinguishable and further non compete fees in order to ward off damaging competition from a potential competitor, resulting in the acquisition by the assessee of a right as well as protection to carry on its business activities as a whol…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. MANAGED INFORMATION SERVICES P. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 566/CHNY/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 566/Mds/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Managed Information Services Income Tax, V. Pvt. Ltd., “Pottipati” Plaza, 5Th Floor, Company Circle Iv(1), Chennai - 600 034. No.77, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aaccm 7680 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M. Murugaboopathy, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 37(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 566/Mds/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 The Deputy Commissioner of M/s Managed Information Services Income Tax, v. Pvt. Ltd., “Pottipati” Plaza, 5th floor, Company Circle IV(1), Chennai - 600 034. No.77, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai - 600 034. PAN : AACCM 7680 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HERO CORPORATE SERVICES LTD., DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2050/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, M/S. Hero Corporate Services Ltd., Circle-12(1), E-1, Qutab Hotel Complex, Vs. New Delhi Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, New Delhi Pan:Aaach1277P (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Hero Corporate Services Ltd., Dcit, E-1, Qutab Hotel Complex, Circle-12(1), Vs. Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaach1277P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Prabhakant, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32Section 37

…ational provides for exclusive arrangement, which creates the advantage of enduring nature in favor of the assessee, and therefore it becomes an intangible asset. He also relied on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of Chelpark Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 191 ITR 249 (Mad) and also other decisions of 73 ITR 778 and 120 ITR 35. Therefore his argument was that exclusive rights given by the agreement results into a capital assets in the hands of the assessee. 13. Ld AR in rejoinder submitted that exclusive arrangement does not create intangible assets and it cannot make capital expenditure. He further referred t…

M/S. HONDA SIEL POWER PRODUCTS LTD.,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee-company are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 551/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: S/Sh. Neeraj Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Armendra Kumar, CIT/ DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 2Section 92B

…. CIT: 97 ITR 422 (SC) 51 ITA Nos.551/Del./2014 & 636/Del./2015 • ChandulalKeshavlal v. CIT: 38 ITR 601(SC) • Bombay Steam Navigation Co. (1953) (P.) Ltd. v. CIT: 56 ITR 52 (SC) • DevidasVithaldas& Co. v. CIT: 84 ITR 277 (SC) • Chelpark Company Ltd. v. CIT: 191 ITR 249 (Mad.) • K.T.M.T.M. Abdul Kayoom v. CIT: 44 ITR 689 (SC) • Assam Bengal Cement Co. Ltd. v. CIT: 27 ITR 34 (SC) • L.H. Sugar Factory & Oil Mills P. Ltd. v. CIT: 125 ITR 293 (SC) • Dalmia Jain & Co. Ltd. v. CIT: 81 ITR 754 (SC) • M.K. Bros. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT: 86 ITR 38 (SC) • Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT: 62 ITR 566 (SC) • CIT v. B.N. E…