Hasimara Industries Ltd. v. CIT

231 ITR 842Supreme Court of India1998#4833 most cited
25

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Issues it is cited on

related party transactionsection 36(1)(vii)computer softwareput to usecomparable companiesmost appropriate methodarm's length pricetransfer pricing adjustmenttnmmsection 92casection 92csection 92

Judgments citing Hasimara Industries Ltd. v. CIT

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. GOCL CORPORATION LIMITED,, HYDERABAD

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

ITA 51/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Acit,Circle-2(1) Vs. Gocl Corporation Ltd. Room No.513, 5Th Floor, Idl Road Signature Towers Kukatpally Kondapur Hyderabad-500 072 Hyderabad-500 084 Pan : Aabcg8433B

For Appellant: Shri Y.Ratnakar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R.Murthy, Sr.AR

…sidiary is not business or trading advances for running its business and, therefore, the same were Capital advances. Accordingly, these were not eligible for a tax deduction. In hasimara Industries Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. [1998] reported in 231 ITR 842, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that capital loss cannot be deducted from an asessee’s income as a business loss. 2) As mentioned it is noteworthy that the assessee for some reason, has not chosen to debit the irrecoverable advance in its Profit& Loss account for the year. Rather , it had opted to make a claim subsequently in the computation of…

ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (LTU) , BANGALORE vs. M/S TEXAS INSTRUMENTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 606/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year Acit (Ltu)

For Appellant: Shri. Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Susan D. George, CIT (DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru

…ssessee in respect of under recovery of loss towards damaged machinery can not be allowed even u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Reliance was placed by the AO on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hasimara Industries Ltd. vs. CIT [1998] 231 ITR 842. The AO thus held that the assessee is not eligible to claim Advances written off amount of Rs. 71,28,124 and disallowed and added back to the total income. 49. The CIT(A) upheld the order of the AO. The assessee has preferred the appeal before the Tribunal. We have heard the rival submissions. From the facts of the case, it is clear that the as…

M/S TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INDIA PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTU , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 365/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year Acit (Ltu)

For Appellant: Shri. Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Susan D. George, CIT (DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru

…ssessee in respect of under recovery of loss towards damaged machinery can not be allowed even u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Reliance was placed by the AO on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hasimara Industries Ltd. vs. CIT [1998] 231 ITR 842. The AO thus held that the assessee is not eligible to claim Advances written off amount of Rs. 71,28,124 and disallowed and added back to the total income. 49. The CIT(A) upheld the order of the AO. The assessee has preferred the appeal before the Tribunal. We have heard the rival submissions. From the facts of the case, it is clear that the as…

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, BANGALORE vs. M/S. TEXAS INSTRUMENTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1447/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year Acit (Ltu)

For Appellant: Shri. Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Susan D. George, CIT (DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru

…ssessee in respect of under recovery of loss towards damaged machinery can not be allowed even u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Reliance was placed by the AO on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hasimara Industries Ltd. vs. CIT [1998] 231 ITR 842. The AO thus held that the assessee is not eligible to claim Advances written off amount of Rs. 71,28,124 and disallowed and added back to the total income. 49. The CIT(A) upheld the order of the AO. The assessee has preferred the appeal before the Tribunal. We have heard the rival submissions. From the facts of the case, it is clear that the as…

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, BANGALORE vs. M/S. TEXAS INSTRUMENTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1446/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year Acit (Ltu)

For Appellant: Shri. Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Susan D. George, CIT (DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru

…ssessee in respect of under recovery of loss towards damaged machinery can not be allowed even u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Reliance was placed by the AO on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hasimara Industries Ltd. vs. CIT [1998] 231 ITR 842. The AO thus held that the assessee is not eligible to claim Advances written off amount of Rs. 71,28,124 and disallowed and added back to the total income. 49. The CIT(A) upheld the order of the AO. The assessee has preferred the appeal before the Tribunal. We have heard the rival submissions. From the facts of the case, it is clear that the as…

M/S. TEXAS INSTRUMENTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1076/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year Acit (Ltu)

For Appellant: Shri. Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Susan D. George, CIT (DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru

…ssessee in respect of under recovery of loss towards damaged machinery can not be allowed even u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Reliance was placed by the AO on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hasimara Industries Ltd. vs. CIT [1998] 231 ITR 842. The AO thus held that the assessee is not eligible to claim Advances written off amount of Rs. 71,28,124 and disallowed and added back to the total income. 49. The CIT(A) upheld the order of the AO. The assessee has preferred the appeal before the Tribunal. We have heard the rival submissions. From the facts of the case, it is clear that the as…

M/S. TEXAS INSTRUMENTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1075/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year Acit (Ltu)

For Appellant: Shri. Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Susan D. George, CIT (DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru

…ssessee in respect of under recovery of loss towards damaged machinery can not be allowed even u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Reliance was placed by the AO on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hasimara Industries Ltd. vs. CIT [1998] 231 ITR 842. The AO thus held that the assessee is not eligible to claim Advances written off amount of Rs. 71,28,124 and disallowed and added back to the total income. 49. The CIT(A) upheld the order of the AO. The assessee has preferred the appeal before the Tribunal. We have heard the rival submissions. From the facts of the case, it is clear that the as…

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(LTU), BANGALORE vs. M/S. TEXAS INSTRUMENTS(INDIA) PVT. LTD, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1967/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year Acit (Ltu)

For Appellant: Shri. Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Susan D. George, CIT (DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru

…ssessee in respect of under recovery of loss towards damaged machinery can not be allowed even u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Reliance was placed by the AO on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hasimara Industries Ltd. vs. CIT [1998] 231 ITR 842. The AO thus held that the assessee is not eligible to claim Advances written off amount of Rs. 71,28,124 and disallowed and added back to the total income. 49. The CIT(A) upheld the order of the AO. The assessee has preferred the appeal before the Tribunal. We have heard the rival submissions. From the facts of the case, it is clear that the as…

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(2), CHENNAI vs. RUDRADEV AVIATION PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

ITA 2100/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meenaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:2100/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2012 – 13 The Acit, M/S. Rudradev Aviation Pvt. Corporate Circle – 5(2), V. Ltd., Chennai - 34. Rr Tower Iii, Thiru Vi Ka Indl. Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. Pan: Aadcr 3575R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & C.O. No.: 152/Chny/2017 (In I.T.A. No. 2100/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012 – 13 M/S. Rudradev Aviation Pvt. The Acit, Ltd., V. Corporate Circle – 5(2), Rr Tower Iii, Chennai - 34. Thiru Vi Ka Indl. Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. Pan: Aadcr 3575R राज" की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Guru Bashyam, Cit "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri R. Venkatesh, Ca सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 14.03.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkatesh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 28Section 37(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "संह, उपा"य" एवं डॉ एम एल मीना, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND Dr. M.L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.:2100/CHNY/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2012 – 13 The ACIT, M/s. Rudradev Aviation Pvt. Corporate Circle – 5(2), v. Ltd., Chennai - 34. RR Tower III, Thiru Vi Ka Indl. Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. PAN: AADCR 3575R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & C.O. No.: 152/CHNY/2017 (in I.T.A. No. 2100/CHNY/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012 – 13 M…

REFEX INDUSTRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(3), CHENNAI

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 2939/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar (CA) – Ld ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Palani Kumar, Ld. CIT - DR
Section 143(3)Section 32

…ion in the value of the same could not be claimed as revenue expenditure and the loss thus suffered was not in the normal course of assessee’s business. 3.6 To reject the assessee’s claim, reliance was placed on the decision of Hasimara Industries Ltd Vs CIT [230 ITR 927 (SC)], wherein irrecoverable advances made by assessee to licensor / lessor was held to be capital loss since the investment was made to start new business and hence, not deductible. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Tribunal in Kwality Fun Foods & Restaurants (P) Ltd. (108 ITD 274) wherein the assessee had advanced certain amounts to a…

REFEX INDUSTRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(3), CHENNAI

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 2938/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar (CA) – Ld ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Palani Kumar, Ld. CIT - DR
Section 143(3)Section 32

…ion in the value of the same could not be claimed as revenue expenditure and the loss thus suffered was not in the normal course of assessee’s business. 3.6 To reject the assessee’s claim, reliance was placed on the decision of Hasimara Industries Ltd Vs CIT [230 ITR 927 (SC)], wherein irrecoverable advances made by assessee to licensor / lessor was held to be capital loss since the investment was made to start new business and hence, not deductible. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Tribunal in Kwality Fun Foods & Restaurants (P) Ltd. (108 ITD 274) wherein the assessee had advanced certain amounts to a…

BCL SECURITIES PVT LTD,GURGAON vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1615/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr.DR
Section 14ASection 28Section 36Section 37

…f amounts written off which were earlier not taken into account as income. The provisions of Sec. 36(1)(vii) read with section 36(2) are very much clear in this regard. The apex court has also made it clear in the decision of Hasimara Industries Ltd. vs. CIT (231 ITR 842).” 5. Finally, the assessment was completed on the total income of Rs.9,13,82,440/- after making the following additions:- I.T.A. No.1615/DEL/2020 6 (i) “Addition on account of disallowances of advances written off Rs.7,39,00,401/- (ii) Addition on account of bank interest not disclosed. Rs. 19,15,791/- (iii) Disallowance u/s14A of the Income…

TATA CHEMICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(3), MUMBAI

ITA 2965/MUM/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2002-03 Tata Chemicals Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of Bombay House, Vs. Income Tax-2(3)(1), 5Th 24 Homi Mody Street, Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Fort, Mumbai-400001 M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan No. Aaact4059M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2002-03 Deputy Commissioner Tata Chemicals Ltd. Of Income Tax-2(3)(1), Vs. Bombay House, 5Th Floor, Aayakar 24 Homi Mody Street, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400001 Mumbai-400020 Pan No. Aaact4059M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Nitesh Joshi, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Choudhary Arun Kumar Singh, Date Of Hearing : 25/01/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 22/04/2019

For Appellant: Mr. Nitesh Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Choudhary Arun Kumar Singh
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…, the AO was not convinced with the said explanation as these expenses were capital in nature and thus not allowable u/s 37(1) of the Act. In this regard, the AO relied on the decision in Triveni Engineering Works Ltd. 232 ITR 639 (Del) and Hasmira Industries 230 ITR 927 (SC). 5.2 In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the above disallowances made by the AO. In respect of the disallowance of Rs.1,62,25,000/- (payment to L&T as compensation towards cancellation of construction contract), the Tata Chemicals Ltd. Ld. CIT(A) held that “such expenditure incurred by it for a new project which was in the nature of capital…

ACIT, MORADABAD vs. M/S. JUBILANT ORGANOSYES LTD., UTTAR PRADESH

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 4975/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Beena A. Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R.M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 43(1)

…rent year and the rest of the amount was to be recovered in the subsequent year (Refer page 175 of the Paper book) iii. The Ld. AO stated that the claim of the Appellant cannot be accepted in pursuance of the decision of Hasimara Industries Ltd. vs. CIT[1998] 230 ITR 927 (SC) wherein loss incurred on capital asset was termed as a capital loss. Further, the Ld. AO stated that Appellant could not claim the deduction unless the Appellant files revised return of income claiming such deduction. Hence, the claim of the Appellant is not admissible. iv. The Ld. CIT(A) concurred with the findings of the Ld. AO and dismiss…

ACIT, MORADABAD vs. M/S JUBLIANT ORGANOSYS LTD., UTTAR PRADESH

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 2596/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Beena A. Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R.M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 43(1)

…rent year and the rest of the amount was to be recovered in the subsequent year (Refer page 175 of the Paper book) iii. The Ld. AO stated that the claim of the Appellant cannot be accepted in pursuance of the decision of Hasimara Industries Ltd. vs. CIT[1998] 230 ITR 927 (SC) wherein loss incurred on capital asset was termed as a capital loss. Further, the Ld. AO stated that Appellant could not claim the deduction unless the Appellant files revised return of income claiming such deduction. Hence, the claim of the Appellant is not admissible. iv. The Ld. CIT(A) concurred with the findings of the Ld. AO and dismiss…

JUBILANT ORGANOSYS LTD.,NOIDA vs. ADDL. CIT, MORADABAD

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 2497/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Beena A. Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R.M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 43(1)

…rent year and the rest of the amount was to be recovered in the subsequent year (Refer page 175 of the Paper book) iii. The Ld. AO stated that the claim of the Appellant cannot be accepted in pursuance of the decision of Hasimara Industries Ltd. vs. CIT[1998] 230 ITR 927 (SC) wherein loss incurred on capital asset was termed as a capital loss. Further, the Ld. AO stated that Appellant could not claim the deduction unless the Appellant files revised return of income claiming such deduction. Hence, the claim of the Appellant is not admissible. iv. The Ld. CIT(A) concurred with the findings of the Ld. AO and dismiss…

DCIT, CIR-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ORGANON (INDIA) PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 751/KOL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 195Section 40

…ress. Once the expenses have been treated as capital expense the same cannot be treated as revenue expense just because no benefit could be derived from it. 2) The same view was taken by Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in case of Hasimara Industries Ltd. -Vs.- CIT 231 ITR 842. 3) The case laws relied upon by assessee is distinguishable on facts. 4) The payments are in the nature of consulting fees for land and engineering fees for formulation plant. The payment was attracting TDS, which was not made by the assessee.” 6. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who did not agree with the asses…

ORGANON (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT, CIR-12, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 677/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Aug 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 195Section 40

…ress. Once the expenses have been treated as capital expense the same cannot be treated as revenue expense just because no benefit could be derived from it. 2) The same view was taken by Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in case of Hasimara Industries Ltd. -Vs.- CIT 231 ITR 842. 3) The case laws relied upon by assessee is distinguishable on facts. 4) The payments are in the nature of consulting fees for land and engineering fees for formulation plant. The payment was attracting TDS, which was not made by the assessee.” 6. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who did not agree with the asses…

M/S. CHENNAI PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, both the assessee’s and the Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1858/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1858/Mds/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income Refinery House, Manali, Vs. Tax, Chennai – 600 068 Company Circle-I(3), [Pan: Aaacm 4392C] Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: 07.09.2017
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 28Section 36(1)(iii)

…963] 48 ITR 67 (SC) Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 65 (SC) Hasimara Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 230 ITR 927 (SC) 12 ITA Nos. 1858 & 1980/Mds/2011 (AY 2004-05) Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Hasimara Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 231 ITR 842 (SC) None of the decisions by the Hon'ble Apex Court, clarifying the law in the matter, have been considered in the case law relied upon by the assessee/ld. CIT(A). How could, then, the same be followed? Why, the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court, relying on the decisions by the Apex Court, including by its larger bench constitution in Swadeshi C…

BGR INVESTMENT HOLDINGS COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes; the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed; and the assessee’s CO is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 476/CHNY/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Sept 2017AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Ms. Vijayaprabha, Jt. CITFor Respondent: 31.08.2017
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 37(1)Section 40

…p taking place all the time, and does not cease to be the acquisition of a capital asset for that reason. The advance for machinery in Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd (supra); Kwality Fun Foods and Restaurants (supra); and Hasimara Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 231 ITR 842 (SC), relied upon by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court, was only for the existing business. The principle involved is well settled, and the assessee’s case in this regard is wholly without merit. The moot question, however, to be answered is if what was being acquired is indeed a capital asset, an acquisition of and, thus, an enhancement in t…

Showing 1–20 of 25 · Page 1 of 2