Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. v. CIT

330 ITR 363Supreme Court of India2011#1539 most cited

What is Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

For Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) under Section 115JB, the book profit must reflect the true working results of the company. Capital receipts that are not income cannot be included in book profit, and adjustments based on notes on accounts can be made to arrive at the real profit.

74

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,421 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. v. CIT · Indo Rama Synthetics · Section 115JB · Minimum Alternate Tax · MAT book profit computation · real profit · true working result · notes on accounts · capital receipts · allowances and deductions MAT · deemed total income

Also reported as

196 Taxmann 539

Sections most often in play

Section 115JBSection 14ASection 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 139(5)Section 153ASection 250Section 132
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 41(1)(a)section 207section 54eminimum alternate taxsection 94section 115jasection 211explanation to section 37section 38section 115jb(2)section 43(1)section 35(2ab)

Judgments citing Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. v. CIT

Everest Industries Ltd., Noida vs. Dy CIT Circle- 1, Thane

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the assessee are a...

ITA 720/MUM/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/For Respondent: Mr. Biswanath Das, CIT-DR/

…t. The the P&L Account prepared under the Companies Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Indo Rama Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Indo Rama Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Indo Rama Synthetics(1) Ltd vs CIT (33 Synthetics(1) Ltd vs CIT (330 ITR 363), has held that the 0 ITR 363), has held that the object of MAT Provisions is to bring out the real profits of the object of MAT Provisions is to bring out the real profits of the object of MAT Provisions is to bring out the real profits of the M/s Everest Industries Ltd. ITA Nos. 652, 1424, 719 & 720/Mum/2020 company. This has also been followe…

Everest Industries Ltd., Noida vs. Dy CIT Circle- 1, Thane

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the assessee are a...

ITA 719/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/For Respondent: Mr. Biswanath Das, CIT-DR/

…t. The the P&L Account prepared under the Companies Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Indo Rama Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Indo Rama Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Indo Rama Synthetics(1) Ltd vs CIT (33 Synthetics(1) Ltd vs CIT (330 ITR 363), has held that the 0 ITR 363), has held that the object of MAT Provisions is to bring out the real profits of the object of MAT Provisions is to bring out the real profits of the object of MAT Provisions is to bring out the real profits of the M/s Everest Industries Ltd. ITA Nos. 652, 1424, 719 & 720/Mum/2020 company. This has also been followe…

DCIT Circle-1, Thane vs. M/S Everest Industries Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the assessee are a...

ITA 652/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/For Respondent: Mr. Biswanath Das, CIT-DR/

…t. The the P&L Account prepared under the Companies Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Indo Rama Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Indo Rama Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Indo Rama Synthetics(1) Ltd vs CIT (33 Synthetics(1) Ltd vs CIT (330 ITR 363), has held that the 0 ITR 363), has held that the object of MAT Provisions is to bring out the real profits of the object of MAT Provisions is to bring out the real profits of the object of MAT Provisions is to bring out the real profits of the M/s Everest Industries Ltd. ITA Nos. 652, 1424, 719 & 720/Mum/2020 company. This has also been followe…

DCIT, Circle-1, Thane vs. Everest Industries Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the assessee are a...

ITA 1424/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/For Respondent: Mr. Biswanath Das, CIT-DR/

…t. The the P&L Account prepared under the Companies Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Indo Rama Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Indo Rama Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Indo Rama Synthetics(1) Ltd vs CIT (33 Synthetics(1) Ltd vs CIT (330 ITR 363), has held that the 0 ITR 363), has held that the object of MAT Provisions is to bring out the real profits of the object of MAT Provisions is to bring out the real profits of the object of MAT Provisions is to bring out the real profits of the M/s Everest Industries Ltd. ITA Nos. 652, 1424, 719 & 720/Mum/2020 company. This has also been followe…

Vgp Golden Beach Resorts Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 133/CHNY/2019[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Jun 2023AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)

…ility of the proviso thereto. Both parties have cited case law relying upon the decisions of the Supreme Court reported in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd ((2008 216 CTR 0915); Indorama Synthetics (I.) Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (330 ITR 363) and decisions of the High Court in Tamilnadu Cements Corporation Ltd Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax ((2012) 349 ITR 0058); Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. W.S.Industries (India) Ltd in TCA.No.200 of 2005 vide order dated 22.08.2011 and Southern Petro Chemicals Industry Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax in T.C.A.Nos.1109 of 2004 etc. bat…

M/S. Vgp Housing (P) Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 132/CHNY/2019[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Jun 2023AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)

…ility of the proviso thereto. Both parties have cited case law relying upon the decisions of the Supreme Court reported in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd ((2008 216 CTR 0915); Indorama Synthetics (I.) Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (330 ITR 363) and decisions of the High Court in Tamilnadu Cements Corporation Ltd Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax ((2012) 349 ITR 0058); Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. W.S.Industries (India) Ltd in TCA.No.200 of 2005 vide order dated 22.08.2011 and Southern Petro Chemicals Industry Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax in T.C.A.Nos.1109 of 2004 etc. bat…

DCIT Circle-1, Thane vs. M/S Everest Industries Ltd., Delhi

ITA 655/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap, D.R
Section 43(1)

…ther chargeable to tax under the Income Tax Act nor can be included in the profit & loss account prepared under Part-II and Part-III of Schedule- VI of the Companies Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in the case of Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. Vs. CIT (330 ITR 363) that object of MAT provisions is to bring out the real profits of the company. The similar view was taken by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of Hitkari Fibres Ltd. Vs. JCIT (90 ITD 654). If the capital receipts are included in the computation of MAT, the object of introduction of section 115JA/115JB would be defeated. The above exclusion is…

Everest Industrial Ltd., Noida vs. Dy CIT Circle-1, Thane

ITA 7792/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap, D.R
Section 43(1)

…ther chargeable to tax under the Income Tax Act nor can be included in the profit & loss account prepared under Part-II and Part-III of Schedule- VI of the Companies Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in the case of Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. Vs. CIT (330 ITR 363) that object of MAT provisions is to bring out the real profits of the company. The similar view was taken by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of Hitkari Fibres Ltd. Vs. JCIT (90 ITD 654). If the capital receipts are included in the computation of MAT, the object of introduction of section 115JA/115JB would be defeated. The above exclusion is…

ACIT Cent .Cir6(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Kenneth Builders & Developers Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2396/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhthe Asstt. Commissioner Vs. Kenneth Builders & Of Income Tax, Cc-6(4) Developers Limited Room No. 1925, 19Th 15Th Floor, Tower – 1, Floor, Air India Building, Indiabulls Finance Center Nariman Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai- 400021 Elphistone, Mumbai - 400013 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacck8268P Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Rakesh RanjanFor Respondent: K. Gopal & Om Kandalkar
Section 115JSection 143(2)

…115JB, the appellant has submitted that the compensation being capital receipt, it is to be reduced from the book profit. The appellant has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Indo Rama Synthetics (1) Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 330 ITR 363. 5.3.3 The main dispute is regarding the nature of the receipt- either capital or revenue. There is no thumb rule to decide whether the receipt is capital or revenue. Hon'ble Supreme court has on various occasion has dealt with this issue. The Apex Court in CIT v. Saurashtra Cement Ltd. [2010] 192 Taxman 300 observed that- "14. The question wheth…

Greenlam Industries Limited, Tinsukia vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-Tinsukia, Tinsukia

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per the terms indicated above

ITA 402/GTY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati19 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 25Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 31(3)(a)

…r to rework the book profit if the profits are computed not in accordance with Part II and Part III of Schedule VI to the Companies Act, 1956. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in their subsequent decision rendered in the case of Indo Rama Synthetics (!) Ltd vs. CIT (330 ITR 363) further held that, the object of MAT provisions is to bring out the true working result of the companies. As held in the preceding paras, the subsidies received by the assessee were capital in nature and therefore not liable to tax. In the circumstances therefore, inclusion of such capital receipt in the computation of book profit u/s 115JB woul…

Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT RG 2(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7287/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri H.P. MahajaniFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 92C

…g the capital receipt. It has been submitted that the book profit require any merit exclusion of tax free items for MAT purposes. In this regard, reliance has been praised upon decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. vs. CIT, [2011] 196 Taxmann 539 (SC). 89. We further find that in PCIT vs Ankit Metal and Power Ltd, [2019] 109 Taxmann.com 93 (Calcutta), inter-alia, following substantial question of law came up for consideration before the Hon‟ble Calcutta High Court: ―Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned Tribunal erred in law in accepting the claim of…

ACIT Central Cir6(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Mariana Infrastructurte Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2395/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhthe Asstt. Commissioner Vs. Mariana Infrastructure Of Income Tax, Central Limited, M-62 &63, Circle -6(4) 1St Floor, Connaught Room No. 1925, 19Th Place, New Delhi Floor, Air India Building, 110 001 Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aafcm2619H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ajay Chandra Respondent By : K. Gopal Date Of Hearing 13.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 31.10.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-54, Mumbai Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The A.O U/S 143(3) Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. Whether The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Allowing The Claim Of Deduction Of Revenue Of Cancelled Transaction Of Rs.27,78,65,132/- Cancelled In Subsequent Year From The Book Profit Though Section 115Jb Is A Self-Contained Code Where Even The Additions & Deductions From The Book Profit Are Specified The Provisions Of Section 115Jb Des Not Allow Any Such Deductions?."

For Appellant: Ajay ChandraFor Respondent: K. Gopal
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 194I

…e earned by the assessee even under section 115JB of the Act. The ratio of Apollo Tyres does not envisage a situation of receipts which are not taxable being subjected to MAT. Relying upon the decision in the case of Indo Rama Synthetics Ltd -vs- CIT [[(2011) 330 ITR 363 (SC), it is argued that inclusion of capital receipt in the computation of MAT would defeat two fundamental principles. Firstly, it would levy tax on receipt which is not in the nature of income at all and secondly it would not result in arriving at real working results of the company. It is also submitted that the AO can amend the book profit if…

ACIT, Circle - Tinsukia, Tinsukia vs. M/S. Greenply Industries Ltd., Tinsukia

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 359/GTY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 80ISection 92C

…y out expansion of existing unit and not for running the business more profitably. Such receipt does not have any income or profit element. Referring to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Limited –vs.- CIT (2011) 330 ITR 363 (SC), it was submitted that the object of MAT provisions is to bring out the real profit of the companies and inclusion of capital receipt in the form of 5 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 & Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Greenply Industries Limited, Tinsukia excise duty exemption in the computation of MAT would defeat the very objective of introductio…

Greenply Industries Limited, Tinsukia vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-Tinsukia, Tinsukia

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 232/GTY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 80ISection 92C

…y out expansion of existing unit and not for running the business more profitably. Such receipt does not have any income or profit element. Referring to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Limited –vs.- CIT (2011) 330 ITR 363 (SC), it was submitted that the object of MAT provisions is to bring out the real profit of the companies and inclusion of capital receipt in the form of 5 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 & Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Greenply Industries Limited, Tinsukia excise duty exemption in the computation of MAT would defeat the very objective of introductio…

Synchem Chemicals (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2753/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2021AY 2010-11
Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 45

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘E’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JM & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM M/s. Lupin Investments Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Private Limited Income Tax, 10(1), Mumbai (earlier known as Rahas Mercantile Pvt Ltd.,) (earlier known as Synchem Investments Private Limited) 159, C.S.T. Road Kalina, Santacruz (East) Mumbai- 400098 PAN/GIR No.AAECS5576Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Deputy Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Lupin Investments Private Income Tax, 10(1), Limited Mumbai (earlier known as Rahas Mercantile Pvt Ltd.,) (earlier known as Synchem Investments Private Limited) 159, C.S.T. Road…

Batliboi Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 5428/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm M/S. Batliboi Limited Vs. Dy. Cit, Circle 2(1) Bharat House, Aayakar Bhavan 5Th Floor, 104 5Th Floor, Mumbai-400001 Mumbai Samachar Marg Fort, Mumbai -400 001 Pan/Gir No. Aaacb4408L (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 40A

…urring transaction or transaction of exceptional nature. The waiver of loan can no way be reckoned as working result of the company for the period. He referred to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. v. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 363/196 Taxman 539/9 taxmann.com 25 wherein it has been held that object of the MAT provision is to bring out the 'real profits' of the companies and the main thrust is to find out the working result of the company. The real working result of a company can be arrived only after excluding the capital receipt and not otherwise. On the issue that assess…

M/S Kilara Power Pvt. Ltd vs. The Income -Tax Officer

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

ITA/356/2014HC Karnataka04 Nov 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 115JSection 260Section 260ASection 41(1)

…, the reduction under clause (i) cannot be applied. In support of aforesaid submissions, reliance has been placed on APOLLO TYRES LTD. VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, 255 ITR 273 (SC), and 'INDO RAMA SYNTHETICS (I) LTD. VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX', 330 ITR 363. 9 6. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. The relevant extract of Section 115JB, which deals with special provisions for payment of tax by certain companies as it was in existence at the relevant time, reads as under: 115JB. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in…

DCIT, Ltu-2, Kolkata vs. M/S Century Plyboards (I), Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objections of assessee are allowed

ITA 2149/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 14A

…r to rework the book profit if the profits are computed not in accordance with Part II and Part III of Schedule VI to the Companies Act, 1956. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in their subsequent decision rendered in the case of Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd vs. CIT (330 ITR 363) further held that, the object of MAT provisions is to bring out the true working result of the companies. As held in the 28 ITA No. 2149/Kol/2019 & C.O. No. 22/Kol/2020 M/s Century Plyboards (I) Ltd. A.Y. 2014-15 preceding paras, the subsidies received by the assessee were capital in nature and therefore not liable to tax. In the circumstances…

Krishi Rasayan Export Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. PCIT, 4, Kolkata

Appeals are allowed

ITA 743/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.742&743/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Krishi Rasayan Exports(P) Ltd. Vs. Pcit-4, Kolkata 29, Lala Lajpath Rai Sarani (Elgin Road), Kolkata – 700020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacck4124G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri S.D. Verma, Advocate Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/02/2020

For Appellant: Shri S.D. Verma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 263

…ture of share warrants amounting to Rs. 12,65,75,000/-, being a capital receipt, would be liable for taxation u/s 115JB. The tribunal after referring to several decisions on the issue viz., the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd vs CIT 330 ITR 336 (SC), Apollo Tyres Ltd. 255 ITR 273 (SC), Special Bench ITAT in the case of Rain Commodities Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2010) 131 TTJ (Hyd)(SB) 514, ITAT Luknow Bench in the case of ACIT vs. L.H.Sugar Factory Ltd and vice versa in ITA Nos. 417 , 418 & 339/LKW/2013 dated 9.2.2016 and decision of Mumbai ITAT in the case of Shivalik Venture (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2…

Krishi Rasayan Export Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. PCIT, 4, Kolkata

Appeals are allowed

ITA 742/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.742&743/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Krishi Rasayan Exports(P) Ltd. Vs. Pcit-4, Kolkata 29, Lala Lajpath Rai Sarani (Elgin Road), Kolkata – 700020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacck4124G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri S.D. Verma, Advocate Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/02/2020

For Appellant: Shri S.D. Verma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 263

…ture of share warrants amounting to Rs. 12,65,75,000/-, being a capital receipt, would be liable for taxation u/s 115JB. The tribunal after referring to several decisions on the issue viz., the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd vs CIT 330 ITR 336 (SC), Apollo Tyres Ltd. 255 ITR 273 (SC), Special Bench ITAT in the case of Rain Commodities Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2010) 131 TTJ (Hyd)(SB) 514, ITAT Luknow Bench in the case of ACIT vs. L.H.Sugar Factory Ltd and vice versa in ITA Nos. 417 , 418 & 339/LKW/2013 dated 9.2.2016 and decision of Mumbai ITAT in the case of Shivalik Venture (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2…