Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. CIT

121 ITR 951High Court1980#16558 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,356 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2024.

Judgments citing Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. CIT

Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. ACIT, Circle-4(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby partly allowed

ITA 1172/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi, With Shri DhrunalBhatt, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35Section 43BSection 80

…ges that the phrase ‘derived from’ covers receipts from the actual conduct of business of the specified industry as provided under section 80-IC of the Act. 23.3 Likewise, as per the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. CIT [1980] 121 ITR 951/3 Taxman 390, the word ‘derived’ as far as income-tax law is concerned, has been given a narrow meaning - a strict meaning, by the courts and has been understood in the restricted sense of a direct derivation and not understood in the broad sense as equivalent to be derived directly or indirectly. In other words, only the proximate source has to…

Shah Originals vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 24 Mumbai

C.A. No.-002664-002664 - 2011Supreme Court21 Nov 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.V.N. BHATTI

Section 80

…v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax18 The term ‘derived from’ has a definite but narrow meaning. It cannot receive a flexible or wider connotation. 12 (2003) 5 SCC 590. 13 (2008) 2 SCC 202. 14 (1980) 121 ITR 951 (Bom). 15 (1982) 137 ITR 616 (Guj). 16 (1995) 215 ITR 64 (Mad). 17 (2003) 261 ITR 737 (Mad). 18 2003 SCC OnLine ITAT 25. 23 11. We have taken note of the construction/interpretation of the expression “derived from” adopted by this Court and a few High Courts as stated in the above-mentioned table—the expressions “derived fro…

The ACIT, Circle-4(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Torrent Power Limited, Ahmedabad

ITA 2047/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Dec 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Parmar, CIT. D.R
Section 14ASection 36Section 80

…आयकरअपील"यअ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद"यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’ D’’BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORESHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos. 14& 2047/AHD/2018 With CO.Nos.41& 120/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रणवष"/Asstt. Years: 2012-13& 2013-14 A.C.I.T., M/s. Torrent Power Limited, Circle-4(1)(2), Vs. Torrent House, Ahmedabad. Off. Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380009. PAN: AACCT0294J (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Vartik Choksi, A.R Revenue by : Shri Ritesh Parmar, CIT. D.R सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 19/10/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement…

The ACIT, Circle-4(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Torrent Power Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 14/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Dec 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Parmar, CIT. D.R
Section 14ASection 36Section 80

…आयकरअपील"यअ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद"यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’ D’’BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORESHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos. 14& 2047/AHD/2018 With CO.Nos.41& 120/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रणवष"/Asstt. Years: 2012-13& 2013-14 A.C.I.T., M/s. Torrent Power Limited, Circle-4(1)(2), Vs. Torrent House, Ahmedabad. Off. Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380009. PAN: AACCT0294J (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Vartik Choksi, A.R Revenue by : Shri Ritesh Parmar, CIT. D.R सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 19/10/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement…

Torrent Power Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT., Range-8, Ahmedabad

In the result cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 776/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Dec 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 254

…it is clear that the phrase ‘derived from’ covers receipts from the actual conduct of business of the specified industry as provided under section 80-IA of the Act. 38.4 Likewise, as per the Bombay High Court in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. CIT [1980] 121 ITR 951/3 Taxman 390, the word ‘derived’ as far as income- tax law is concerned, has been given a narrow meaning - a strict meaning, by the courts and has been understood in the restricted sense of a direct derivation and not understood in the broad sense as equivalent to be derived directly or indirectly. In other words, only the proximate source has to…

Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. CIT (121 ITR 951) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax