(g) ITO v. Oricon (P) Ltd.

32 ITD 645Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#20470 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 350,364 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 80IA

Issues it is cited on

section 80ia(4)infrastructure facilitydeduction u/s 80iasection 80iasection 80isection 80transferprescribedpersoncompanyindiabusiness

Judgments citing (g) ITO v. Oricon (P) Ltd.

Ajr Infra and Tolling Limited (Formerly Gammon Infrastructure Projects Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT CC-41 (Presently With D.C.I.T. Cent. Cir. - 7(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2622/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 80I

…e has purchased machinery for manufacturing fuel injection pipes for diesel engines. The question was whether the said purchase of machinery would amount to industrial undertaking or not. Thus it was totally different issue. (g) ITO vs. Oricon (P) Ltd (1990)(32 ITD 645)(Bom). In this case, it was observed that the ‘industrial undertaking’ have not been defined under the Act. It was held that it would mean a venture or an enterprise carrying on some activities carrying on some activities which had some relation to some industrial activity. This decision only lays down the criteria to understand the meaning of an…

Ajr Infra and Tolling Limited (Formerly Gammon Infrastructure Projects Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT CC-41 (Presently With D.C.I.T. Cent. Cir. - 7(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2621/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 80I

…e has purchased machinery for manufacturing fuel injection pipes for diesel engines. The question was whether the said purchase of machinery would amount to industrial undertaking or not. Thus it was totally different issue. (g) ITO vs. Oricon (P) Ltd (1990)(32 ITD 645)(Bom). In this case, it was observed that the ‘industrial undertaking’ have not been defined under the Act. It was held that it would mean a venture or an enterprise carrying on some activities carrying on some activities which had some relation to some industrial activity. This decision only lays down the criteria to understand the meaning of an…

Ajr Infra and Tolling Limited (Formerly Gammon Infrastructure Projects Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT CC-41 (Presently With D.C.I.T. Cent. Cir. - 7(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2620/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 80I

…e has purchased machinery for manufacturing fuel injection pipes for diesel engines. The question was whether the said purchase of machinery would amount to industrial undertaking or not. Thus it was totally different issue. (g) ITO vs. Oricon (P) Ltd (1990)(32 ITD 645)(Bom). In this case, it was observed that the ‘industrial undertaking’ have not been defined under the Act. It was held that it would mean a venture or an enterprise carrying on some activities carrying on some activities which had some relation to some industrial activity. This decision only lays down the criteria to understand the meaning of an…

Ajr Infra and Tolling Limited (Formerly Gammon Infrastructure Projects Ltd)., Mumbai vs. ACIT CC-41 (Presently With D.C.I.T. Cent. Cir. - 7(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2619/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 80I

…e has purchased machinery for manufacturing fuel injection pipes for diesel engines. The question was whether the said purchase of machinery would amount to industrial undertaking or not. Thus it was totally different issue. (g) ITO vs. Oricon (P) Ltd (1990)(32 ITD 645)(Bom). In this case, it was observed that the ‘industrial undertaking’ have not been defined under the Act. It was held that it would mean a venture or an enterprise carrying on some activities carrying on some activities which had some relation to some industrial activity. This decision only lays down the criteria to understand the meaning of an…

(g) ITO v. Oricon (P) Ltd. (32 ITD 645) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax