Indian Cine Agencies v. CIT

308 ITR 98Supreme Court of India2009#1932 most cited

What is Indian Cine Agencies v. CIT authority for?

The activity of cutting jumbo roll films into flat and small rolls in desired sizes is considered manufacture or production for the purposes of the Income-tax Act.

59

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,459 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Indian Cine Agencies v. CIT · 308 ITR 98 · manufacture · production · cutting films · jumbo roll films · section 80IC · section 80IA

Sections most often in play

Section 80-IA(8)/(10)Section 80-ICSection 2(29BA)

Issues it is cited on

section 2(29ba)section 32asection 80icsection 80isection 80ibsection 32childsection 80transfersection 15assistant commissionerprevious year

Judgments citing Indian Cine Agencies v. CIT

Asstt. C.I.T, Central Cir, -2(1), Nagpur vs. M/S Gupta Coal(India) Ltd, Nagpur

In the result, cross objections No

ITA 480/NAG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

…hra Pradesh vs. NTPC 127 STC 280 (SC) has held that electricity falls within the definition of goods and the process involved is manufacture and production. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. 279 ITR 331 and CIT Vs. India Cine Agencies 308 ITR 98 has explained a broader test to determine whether manufacture is there or not, it is propounded that when a change or series of changes are brought out by application of processes which take the commodity to the point where, commercially, it cannot be regarded as the original commodity, but is, instead recognised as a distinct and new article that…

Asstt. C.I.T, Central Cir, -2(1), Nagpur vs. M/S Gupta Coal(India) Ltd, Nagpur

In the result, cross objections No

ITA 479/NAG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

…hra Pradesh vs. NTPC 127 STC 280 (SC) has held that electricity falls within the definition of goods and the process involved is manufacture and production. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. 279 ITR 331 and CIT Vs. India Cine Agencies 308 ITR 98 has explained a broader test to determine whether manufacture is there or not, it is propounded that when a change or series of changes are brought out by application of processes which take the commodity to the point where, commercially, it cannot be regarded as the original commodity, but is, instead recognised as a distinct and new article that…

Asstt. C.I.T, Central Cir, -2(1), Nagpur vs. M/S Gupta Coal(India) Ltd, Nagpur

In the result, cross objections No

ITA 478/NAG/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

…hra Pradesh vs. NTPC 127 STC 280 (SC) has held that electricity falls within the definition of goods and the process involved is manufacture and production. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. 279 ITR 331 and CIT Vs. India Cine Agencies 308 ITR 98 has explained a broader test to determine whether manufacture is there or not, it is propounded that when a change or series of changes are brought out by application of processes which take the commodity to the point where, commercially, it cannot be regarded as the original commodity, but is, instead recognised as a distinct and new article that…

Asstt. C.I.T, Central Cir, -2(1), Nagpur vs. M/S Gupta Coal(India) Ltd, Nagpur

In the result, cross objections No

ITA 477/NAG/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

…hra Pradesh vs. NTPC 127 STC 280 (SC) has held that electricity falls within the definition of goods and the process involved is manufacture and production. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. 279 ITR 331 and CIT Vs. India Cine Agencies 308 ITR 98 has explained a broader test to determine whether manufacture is there or not, it is propounded that when a change or series of changes are brought out by application of processes which take the commodity to the point where, commercially, it cannot be regarded as the original commodity, but is, instead recognised as a distinct and new article that…

Asstt.C, I, .T, Central Cir, -2(3), Nagpur vs. M/S Gupta Coalfields & Washeries Ltd., Nagpur

In the result, cross objections No

ITA 429/NAG/2014[2005-06]Status: FixedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

…hra Pradesh vs. NTPC 127 STC 280 (SC) has held that electricity falls within the definition of goods and the process involved is manufacture and production. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. 279 ITR 331 and CIT Vs. India Cine Agencies 308 ITR 98 has explained a broader test to determine whether manufacture is there or not, it is propounded that when a change or series of changes are brought out by application of processes which take the commodity to the point where, commercially, it cannot be regarded as the original commodity, but is, instead recognised as a distinct and new article that…

Astt.Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Cir 2(3) R, Nagpur vs. M Gupta Coalfields & Washeries Ltd., Nagpur

In the result, cross objections No

ITA 414/NAG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

…hra Pradesh vs. NTPC 127 STC 280 (SC) has held that electricity falls within the definition of goods and the process involved is manufacture and production. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. 279 ITR 331 and CIT Vs. India Cine Agencies 308 ITR 98 has explained a broader test to determine whether manufacture is there or not, it is propounded that when a change or series of changes are brought out by application of processes which take the commodity to the point where, commercially, it cannot be regarded as the original commodity, but is, instead recognised as a distinct and new article that…

M/S Bhole Baba Milk Food Industries Dholpur, Agra vs. J.C.I.T., Range -4, Agra

In the result appeal is dismissed

ITA 242/AGR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra11 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 80Section 80I

…ection 801. The question before the Civil Court was whether cutting of jumbo rolls of photographic films in to smaller marketable sizes would constitute 'manufacture' under section 801. the Apex Court following the ratio in Indian Cine Agencies Vs. CIT (2009) 308 ITR 98 (SC), held that the activity will amount to manufacture; accordingly, civil appeal of the assessee was allowed (A. Y. 1988-89). 4. In this connection, it is further submitted that Mumbai High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Beta Cosmetics P 31-683 (2012) 43-8 BCAJ (Bom) (High Court), held that assessee is engaged in the business of production of perf…

DCIT, Circle-10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Indian Oil Petronas (P) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1930/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr.A.L.Saini, Am D.C.I.T, Cir­10(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Indian Oil Petronas Pvt. Ltd. Pan: Aaaci5573R (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. Assessee/Revenue By : Shri P.K. Srihari, Cit, Ld. Dr Respondent/Assessee By : Shrid. S Damle, Fca, Ld.Ar सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 18/12/2018 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/03/2019 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: ShriD. S Damle, FCA, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Srihari, CIT, ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 2Section 37(1)Section 40

…ending of two different gases i.e. propane & butane for producing LPG constitutes 'production' or 'manufacture'. For that we rely on the judgment of the Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Sesa Goa Ltd (271 ITR 331) and CIT Vs India Cine Agencies Ltd (308 ITR 98). In the latter judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to its earlier judgment and the findings of the Apex Court having bearing on the assessee's case was as follows: "3. In Black's Law Dictionary (5th Edition), the word "manufacture' has been defined as, "the process or operation of making goods or any material produced by hand. by machin…

ITO, Dehradun vs. M/S. Rudra Woodpack Pvt. Ltd., Uttrakhand

Accordingly the appeal of the revenue is therefore, dismissed

ITA 71/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. K.N.Chary & Sh. O.P. Meenaita No.71/Del./2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 2Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. K.N.CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.71/Del./2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Vs M/s. Rudra Woodpack Pvt. Ltd. VIII, Ward-2(2), Dehradun Latherdeva Hoon, P.O.Jhaberera, Tehsil Roorkee, Distt. Haridwar PAN : AADCR6972N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Respondent by : Smt. Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 06.02.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 07.02.2019 ORDER PER O.P.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This appeal is filed by the revenue and is directed against…

ACIT, Cir-3(2), Gangtok, Sikkim vs. M/S Unicorn Industries, Sikkim

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 48/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jan 2019AY 2010-2011

Bench: Sri S.S. Godara & Sri M. Balaganesh) Assessment Year: 2010-11

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

…Ltd. (which was discussed by us in the preceding paragraphs) held that the assessee is entitled for exemption u/s 10B of the Act on account of blending of tea. 5.25 We have also gone through the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Indian Cine Agencies Vs CIT 308 ITR 98. In this case the question before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was: When the assessee was engaged in the activity of cutting jumbo roll films into flat and small rolls in desired sizes, whether such activity undertaken by the assessee was manufacture or production? In this case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court after discussing various cases, the provisions…

D.C.I.T./A.C.I.T., Circle-3(2), Gangtok, Sikkim vs. M/S Unicorn Industries, Sikkim

Appeals are allowed

ITA 1965/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

…Ltd. (which was discussed by us in the preceding paragraphs) held that the assessee is entitled for exemption u/s 10B of the Act on account of blending of tea. 5.25 We have also gone through the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Indian Cine Agencies Vs CIT 308 ITR 98. In this case the question before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was: When the assessee was engaged in the activity of cutting jumbo roll films into flat and small rolls in desired sizes, whether such activity undertaken by the assessee was manufacture or production? In this case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court after discussing various cases, the provisions…

D.C.I.T./A.C.I.T., Circle-3(2), Gangtok, Sikkim vs. M/S Unicorn Industries, Sikkim

Appeals are allowed

ITA 1964/KOL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

…Ltd. (which was discussed by us in the preceding paragraphs) held that the assessee is entitled for exemption u/s 10B of the Act on account of blending of tea. 5.25 We have also gone through the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Indian Cine Agencies Vs CIT 308 ITR 98. In this case the question before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was: When the assessee was engaged in the activity of cutting jumbo roll films into flat and small rolls in desired sizes, whether such activity undertaken by the assessee was manufacture or production? In this case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court after discussing various cases, the provisions…

D.C.I.T./A.C.I.T., Circle-3(2), Gangtok, Sikkim vs. M/S Unicorn Industries, Sikkim

Appeals are allowed

ITA 1963/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

…Ltd. (which was discussed by us in the preceding paragraphs) held that the assessee is entitled for exemption u/s 10B of the Act on account of blending of tea. 5.25 We have also gone through the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Indian Cine Agencies Vs CIT 308 ITR 98. In this case the question before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was: When the assessee was engaged in the activity of cutting jumbo roll films into flat and small rolls in desired sizes, whether such activity undertaken by the assessee was manufacture or production? In this case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court after discussing various cases, the provisions…

D.C.I.T./A.C.I.T., Circle-3(2), Gangtok vs. M/S Unicorn Industries, Sikkim

Appeals are allowed

ITA 1962/KOL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

…Ltd. (which was discussed by us in the preceding paragraphs) held that the assessee is entitled for exemption u/s 10B of the Act on account of blending of tea. 5.25 We have also gone through the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Indian Cine Agencies Vs CIT 308 ITR 98. In this case the question before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was: When the assessee was engaged in the activity of cutting jumbo roll films into flat and small rolls in desired sizes, whether such activity undertaken by the assessee was manufacture or production? In this case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court after discussing various cases, the provisions…

ACIT, Circle - 41, Kolkata vs. M/S. Anmol Textiles, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2031/KOL/2014[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Apr 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2031/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Acit, Circle-41, Kolkata -Vs- M/S Anmol Textiles [Pan: Aadfn 4059 K] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Srihari, CITFor Respondent: Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate
Section 10BSection 133ASection 14Section 143(3)Section 80ISection 9

…when process results into the emergence of a new and different article having distinctive name, character and use that "manufacturing" can be said to have taken place. Similarly production is wider than manufacture. (v) In Indian Cine Agencies vs. CIT (2009) 308 ITR 98 (SC) Hon'ble Supreme Court considered the case of an assessee who converted jumborolls of photography films into small flats and rolls in desired sizes. It was held that it amounted to manufacture or production for the purpose of allowances u/s 32AB, 80 HH and 80 I of the Act. (vi) In CIT vs. Prabhudas Kishordas tobacco Products P. Ltd. (2006) 28…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S. Jsw Steel Processing Centres Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed while the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1978/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Mar 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri. K. Kotresh, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Padmameenakshi, JCIT
Section 2(29)(BA)Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)Section 37Section 40

…ITA.1978 & 2001/Bang/2017 Page - 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENGALURU BENCH 'B', BENGALURU BEFORE SHRI. INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A No.1978/Bang/2017 (Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle – 4(1)(1), Bengaluru .. Appellant v. M/s. JSW Steel Processing Centres Ltd, No.121, “The Estate”, Dickenson Road, Bengaluru 560 042 .. Respondent PAN : AABCJ7646P I.T.A No.2001/Bang/2017 (Assessment Year : 2013-14) (By the Assessee) Assessee by : Shri. K. Kotresh, CA Revenue by : Smt. Padmameenakshi, JCIT Heard on : 01.03.2018…

West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd., Kolkata vs. The DCIT, Cir-2, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 872/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ...........................Appellant Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ....................Respondent Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Appearances By: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri N.K. Poddar, Sr. Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 12, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 31, 2017 Order Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am These Four Appeals, Two Filed By The Assessee Being Ita No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 & Two Filed By The Revenue Being Ita No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015, Are Cross-Appeals Which Are Directed Against Two

Section 2Section 32(1)(iia)

…ed counsel for the Revenue, that the mined ore most be commercially new product.... 3. The aforesaid principles with reference to the Larger Bench decision in Sesa Goa’s (supra) were reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in India Cine Agencies vs CIT (2009) 308 ITR 98, 102-104 (SC), in Vijay Ship Breaking Corporation vs CIT (2009) 314 ITR 309, 312 (SC), in ITO vs Arihant Tiles and Marbles Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 79, 87 (SC), also followed by the Hon’ble High Courts in Girnar Industries vs CIT (2010) 230 CTR 401 (Ker), in CIT vs Ramsons Organics Ltd. (2010) 228 CTR 502 (Del), by the learned Tribunal in ACIT vs…

West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd., Kolkata vs. The DCIT, Cir-2, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 871/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ...........................Appellant Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ....................Respondent Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Appearances By: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri N.K. Poddar, Sr. Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 12, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 31, 2017 Order Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am These Four Appeals, Two Filed By The Assessee Being Ita No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 & Two Filed By The Revenue Being Ita No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015, Are Cross-Appeals Which Are Directed Against Two

Section 2Section 32(1)(iia)

…ed counsel for the Revenue, that the mined ore most be commercially new product.... 3. The aforesaid principles with reference to the Larger Bench decision in Sesa Goa’s (supra) were reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in India Cine Agencies vs CIT (2009) 308 ITR 98, 102-104 (SC), in Vijay Ship Breaking Corporation vs CIT (2009) 314 ITR 309, 312 (SC), in ITO vs Arihant Tiles and Marbles Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 79, 87 (SC), also followed by the Hon’ble High Courts in Girnar Industries vs CIT (2010) 230 CTR 401 (Ker), in CIT vs Ramsons Organics Ltd. (2010) 228 CTR 502 (Del), by the learned Tribunal in ACIT vs…

DCIT, Cir-2(2), Kolkata vs. M/S West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1002/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ...........................Appellant Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ....................Respondent Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Appearances By: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri N.K. Poddar, Sr. Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 12, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 31, 2017 Order Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am These Four Appeals, Two Filed By The Assessee Being Ita No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 & Two Filed By The Revenue Being Ita No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015, Are Cross-Appeals Which Are Directed Against Two

Section 2Section 32(1)(iia)

…ed counsel for the Revenue, that the mined ore most be commercially new product.... 3. The aforesaid principles with reference to the Larger Bench decision in Sesa Goa’s (supra) were reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in India Cine Agencies vs CIT (2009) 308 ITR 98, 102-104 (SC), in Vijay Ship Breaking Corporation vs CIT (2009) 314 ITR 309, 312 (SC), in ITO vs Arihant Tiles and Marbles Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 79, 87 (SC), also followed by the Hon’ble High Courts in Girnar Industries vs CIT (2010) 230 CTR 401 (Ker), in CIT vs Ramsons Organics Ltd. (2010) 228 CTR 502 (Del), by the learned Tribunal in ACIT vs…

DCIT, Cir-2(2), Kolkata vs. M/S West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed while both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1001/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ...........................Appellant Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12 Dcit, Circle 2(2) Kolkata,...................…………………………………………Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. ....................Respondent Bidyut Bhawan, Sector – Ii, Block Dj, Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaacw6953H] Appearances By: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri N.K. Poddar, Sr. Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 12, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 31, 2017 Order Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am These Four Appeals, Two Filed By The Assessee Being Ita No. 871 & 872/Kol/2015 & Two Filed By The Revenue Being Ita No. 1001 & 1002/Kol/2015, Are Cross-Appeals Which Are Directed Against Two

Section 2Section 32(1)(iia)

…ed counsel for the Revenue, that the mined ore most be commercially new product.... 3. The aforesaid principles with reference to the Larger Bench decision in Sesa Goa’s (supra) were reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in India Cine Agencies vs CIT (2009) 308 ITR 98, 102-104 (SC), in Vijay Ship Breaking Corporation vs CIT (2009) 314 ITR 309, 312 (SC), in ITO vs Arihant Tiles and Marbles Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 79, 87 (SC), also followed by the Hon’ble High Courts in Girnar Industries vs CIT (2010) 230 CTR 401 (Ker), in CIT vs Ramsons Organics Ltd. (2010) 228 CTR 502 (Del), by the learned Tribunal in ACIT vs…