IPCA Laboratories Ltd. v. DCIT

266 ITR 521Supreme Court of India2004#854 most cited

What is IPCA Laboratories Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

When the provisions of a fiscal statute are unambiguous, they must be interpreted strictly, and benefits not explicitly provided cannot be conferred by ignoring or misinterpreting the clear words in the section.

122

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,514 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

IPCA Laboratories Ltd. v. DCIT · 266 ITR 521 · statutory interpretation · fiscal statutes · unambiguous provisions · tax benefits · deductions · Section 80IB · Section 80HHC · strict construction · legislative intent

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80IBSection 80IB(2)Section 80IB(4)

Issues it is cited on

section 80hhc(3)section 80hsection 28(iv)section 80hhsection 80hhcsection 115jamat creditretrospective amendmentsection 72section 36(2)deduction under section 80iasection 245

Judgments citing IPCA Laboratories Ltd. v. DCIT

The ACIT, 3(1), Indore vs. M/S. Kalani Industries Pvt. Ltd., Indore

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 16/IND/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271A

…no ambiguity under the law therefore, the liberal interpretation of the provision is not to be adopted. The Ld. DR has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of IPCA Laboratory Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 266 ITR 521 and also in the case of CIT vs. N.C. Budharaja & CO. 204 ITR 412 (SC) further reliance is placed on the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Smt. Ritu Singal 403 ITR 97(Del). 6. On the contrary Ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee supported the order of the ld. CIT(A). He submitted that during the course of…

M/S Nanda Nagar Sahkari Sakh Santha, Indore vs. The ITO 3(3), Indore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

ITA 1054/IND/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 Aug 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2006-07 M/S Nanda Nagar Ito-3(3) Sahkari Sakh Sanstha Range-3 बनाम/ C/O M. Mehta & Co., Indore Vs. 11/5, South Tukoganj, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aaaan1784B

Section 143(3)Section 6Section 80P(2)(a)

…Ld. Counsel submitted that the authorities were not justified in declining the exemption claimed u/s 80P(2)(a)(ia) of the Act. Per contra Ld. DR opposed the submission of AR. He submitted that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of IPCA Laboratory Ltd. v. DCIT 266 ITR 521 (Hon'ble Supreme Court) has held that if the wordings of the section are clear then benefits, which are not available under the section, cannot be conferred by ignoring or misinterpreting words in the section. The Ld. DR further submitted that in the case of Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT 262 ITR 278 (SC) it has been held that the rules of interpr…

Movement Impex Trading Co., Mumbai vs. ACIT 21(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5085/MUM/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Shri T.A. Khan
Section 143(3)

…ed on record. We find that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was delivered on 08.02.2012, judgment was reported on 26.03.2012 in part 2 of ITR Volume 342 wherein the order of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court relied on by AO in the case of IPCA Laboratory 266 ITR 521, was set aside and Supreme Court has followed the formula laid down in the case of CIT vs. Ravindranathan Nair 295 ITR 228 (SC). 14. In the substantial interest of justice, when the issue is clearly covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the delay was sufficiently explained by placing on record the medical certificate and death…

ITO, Ward-4(2), Hyderabad vs. Subrahmanyam Kotikalapudi, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 269/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2013-14 Income-Tax Officer, Vs. Subrahmanyam Kotikalapudi, Ward – 4(2), Hyderabad. Hyderabad.

For Appellant: Smt Geetinder MannFor Respondent: Smt. Komali Krishna
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 54Section 54BSection 54E

…biguous, we have no hesitation in holding that the assessee is entitled to get exemption upto Rs. 1 Crore in this case. This view of ours gets support from the following finding of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of IPCA Laboratory Ltd. v. Dy. CIT[2004] 266 ITR 521 /135 Taxman 594 (SC), wherein it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that - "even though a liberal interpretation has to be given to such a provision the interpretation has to be as per the wording of the section. If the wording of the section is clear, then benefits which are not available cannot be conferred by ignoring or misinterpretin…

R.Smitha Sharma Represented by Dr.P.Venugopal, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, (International Taxation), Visakhapatanam

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 74/VIZ/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam06 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.69/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) V.Pratima Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. Assessee By Dr.P.Venugopal (International Taxation) 49-35-7, Akkayyapalem Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam {Pan :Aempp5934Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.70/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) V.Gautam Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. Assessee By Dr.P.Venugopal (International Taxation) 49-35-7, Akkayyapalem Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam {Pan :Aempp5934Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.71/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) V.Ujvala Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. Assessee By Dr.P.Venugopal (International Taxation) 49-35-7, Akkayyapalem Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam {Pan :Aempp5934Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 147Section 148Section 234A

…etation giving rise to another view as the said explanation clarifies the position and leaves no scope, whatsoever, for any confusion or doubt.” The Ld.CIT(A) has taken support of Hon’ble Apex Court’s decision in the case of IPCA Laboratory Ltd. Vs. DCIT (SC) 266 ITR 521 and Gem Granites Vs. CIT (SC) 271 ITR 322 and accordingly upheld the issue of notice u/s 148. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. During the appeal hearing, the Ld.AR argued that in this case, the property was purchased by the Rep.Assessee by document bearing No.2174/2006 dated 04.05.2006 relevant to t…

R.Mani Kumar Represented by Dr.P.Venugopal, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, (International Taxation), Visakhapatnam

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 73/VIZ/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam06 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.69/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) V.Pratima Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. Assessee By Dr.P.Venugopal (International Taxation) 49-35-7, Akkayyapalem Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam {Pan :Aempp5934Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.70/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) V.Gautam Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. Assessee By Dr.P.Venugopal (International Taxation) 49-35-7, Akkayyapalem Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam {Pan :Aempp5934Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.71/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) V.Ujvala Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. Assessee By Dr.P.Venugopal (International Taxation) 49-35-7, Akkayyapalem Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam {Pan :Aempp5934Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 147Section 148Section 234A

…etation giving rise to another view as the said explanation clarifies the position and leaves no scope, whatsoever, for any confusion or doubt.” The Ld.CIT(A) has taken support of Hon’ble Apex Court’s decision in the case of IPCA Laboratory Ltd. Vs. DCIT (SC) 266 ITR 521 and Gem Granites Vs. CIT (SC) 271 ITR 322 and accordingly upheld the issue of notice u/s 148. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. During the appeal hearing, the Ld.AR argued that in this case, the property was purchased by the Rep.Assessee by document bearing No.2174/2006 dated 04.05.2006 relevant to t…

Lalitha D.V.Rao Represented by Dr.P.Venugopal, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, (International Taxation), Visakhapatnam

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 72/VIZ/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam06 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.69/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) V.Pratima Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. Assessee By Dr.P.Venugopal (International Taxation) 49-35-7, Akkayyapalem Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam {Pan :Aempp5934Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.70/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) V.Gautam Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. Assessee By Dr.P.Venugopal (International Taxation) 49-35-7, Akkayyapalem Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam {Pan :Aempp5934Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.71/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) V.Ujvala Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. Assessee By Dr.P.Venugopal (International Taxation) 49-35-7, Akkayyapalem Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam {Pan :Aempp5934Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 147Section 148Section 234A

…etation giving rise to another view as the said explanation clarifies the position and leaves no scope, whatsoever, for any confusion or doubt.” The Ld.CIT(A) has taken support of Hon’ble Apex Court’s decision in the case of IPCA Laboratory Ltd. Vs. DCIT (SC) 266 ITR 521 and Gem Granites Vs. CIT (SC) 271 ITR 322 and accordingly upheld the issue of notice u/s 148. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. During the appeal hearing, the Ld.AR argued that in this case, the property was purchased by the Rep.Assessee by document bearing No.2174/2006 dated 04.05.2006 relevant to t…

V.Ujavala Rao Represented by Dr.P.Venugopal, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, (International Taxation), Visakhapatnam

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 71/VIZ/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam06 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.69/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) V.Pratima Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. Assessee By Dr.P.Venugopal (International Taxation) 49-35-7, Akkayyapalem Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam {Pan :Aempp5934Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.70/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) V.Gautam Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. Assessee By Dr.P.Venugopal (International Taxation) 49-35-7, Akkayyapalem Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam {Pan :Aempp5934Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.71/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) V.Ujvala Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. Assessee By Dr.P.Venugopal (International Taxation) 49-35-7, Akkayyapalem Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam {Pan :Aempp5934Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 147Section 148Section 234A

…etation giving rise to another view as the said explanation clarifies the position and leaves no scope, whatsoever, for any confusion or doubt.” The Ld.CIT(A) has taken support of Hon’ble Apex Court’s decision in the case of IPCA Laboratory Ltd. Vs. DCIT (SC) 266 ITR 521 and Gem Granites Vs. CIT (SC) 271 ITR 322 and accordingly upheld the issue of notice u/s 148. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. During the appeal hearing, the Ld.AR argued that in this case, the property was purchased by the Rep.Assessee by document bearing No.2174/2006 dated 04.05.2006 relevant to t…

V.Gautam Rao Represented by Dr.P.Venugopal, Visakhpatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, (International Taxation), Visakhapatnam

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 70/VIZ/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam06 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.69/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) V.Pratima Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. Assessee By Dr.P.Venugopal (International Taxation) 49-35-7, Akkayyapalem Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam {Pan :Aempp5934Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.70/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) V.Gautam Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. Assessee By Dr.P.Venugopal (International Taxation) 49-35-7, Akkayyapalem Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam {Pan :Aempp5934Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.71/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) V.Ujvala Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. Assessee By Dr.P.Venugopal (International Taxation) 49-35-7, Akkayyapalem Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam {Pan :Aempp5934Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 147Section 148Section 234A

…etation giving rise to another view as the said explanation clarifies the position and leaves no scope, whatsoever, for any confusion or doubt.” The Ld.CIT(A) has taken support of Hon’ble Apex Court’s decision in the case of IPCA Laboratory Ltd. Vs. DCIT (SC) 266 ITR 521 and Gem Granites Vs. CIT (SC) 271 ITR 322 and accordingly upheld the issue of notice u/s 148. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. During the appeal hearing, the Ld.AR argued that in this case, the property was purchased by the Rep.Assessee by document bearing No.2174/2006 dated 04.05.2006 relevant to t…

V.Pratima Rao, Represented by Dr. P.Venugopal, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, (International Taxation), Visakhapatnam

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 69/VIZ/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam06 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.69/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) V.Pratima Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. Assessee By Dr.P.Venugopal (International Taxation) 49-35-7, Akkayyapalem Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam {Pan :Aempp5934Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.70/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) V.Gautam Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. Assessee By Dr.P.Venugopal (International Taxation) 49-35-7, Akkayyapalem Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam {Pan :Aempp5934Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.71/Viz/2018 (धनधाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) V.Ujvala Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. Assessee By Dr.P.Venugopal (International Taxation) 49-35-7, Akkayyapalem Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam {Pan :Aempp5934Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 147Section 148Section 234A

…etation giving rise to another view as the said explanation clarifies the position and leaves no scope, whatsoever, for any confusion or doubt.” The Ld.CIT(A) has taken support of Hon’ble Apex Court’s decision in the case of IPCA Laboratory Ltd. Vs. DCIT (SC) 266 ITR 521 and Gem Granites Vs. CIT (SC) 271 ITR 322 and accordingly upheld the issue of notice u/s 148. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. During the appeal hearing, the Ld.AR argued that in this case, the property was purchased by the Rep.Assessee by document bearing No.2174/2006 dated 04.05.2006 relevant to t…

ACIT, Ludhiana vs. M/S Vardhman Textiles Ltd., Ludhiana

In the result appeals of the Assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 575/CHANDI/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 May 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri. Subhash AggarwalFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Abrol
Section 10BSection 14ASection 80H

…its of the business. The Assessing Officer omitted to adjust the profits of the business by the amount of loss on sale of trading exports. 12.3 Before us the Ld. DR relied on the assessment while Ld. AR relied on the case of IPCL Laboratories Vs. DCIT (2004) 266 ITR 521 (Supreme Court). With the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court the matter stand settled, the relevant portion of the Hon’ble Supreme Court is as under: “ With the adoption of the dual system for computing export profit, the computation of the disclaimed export turnover also required modification. The Finance Act has therefore amended section 80…

M/S Vardhman Textiles Ltd., Ludhiana vs. Addl. CIT, Ludhiana

In the result appeals of the Assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 528/CHANDI/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 May 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri. Subhash AggarwalFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Abrol
Section 10BSection 14ASection 80H

…its of the business. The Assessing Officer omitted to adjust the profits of the business by the amount of loss on sale of trading exports. 12.3 Before us the Ld. DR relied on the assessment while Ld. AR relied on the case of IPCL Laboratories Vs. DCIT (2004) 266 ITR 521 (Supreme Court). With the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court the matter stand settled, the relevant portion of the Hon’ble Supreme Court is as under: “ With the adoption of the dual system for computing export profit, the computation of the disclaimed export turnover also required modification. The Finance Act has therefore amended section 80…

ACIT, Ludhiana vs. M/S Vardhman Textiles Ltd., Ludhiana

In the result appeals of the Assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 981/CHANDI/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 May 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri. Subhash AggarwalFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Abrol
Section 10BSection 14ASection 80H

…its of the business. The Assessing Officer omitted to adjust the profits of the business by the amount of loss on sale of trading exports. 12.3 Before us the Ld. DR relied on the assessment while Ld. AR relied on the case of IPCL Laboratories Vs. DCIT (2004) 266 ITR 521 (Supreme Court). With the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court the matter stand settled, the relevant portion of the Hon’ble Supreme Court is as under: “ With the adoption of the dual system for computing export profit, the computation of the disclaimed export turnover also required modification. The Finance Act has therefore amended section 80…

Vardhman Textiles Ltd., Ludhiana vs. JCIT, Ludhiana

In the result appeals of the Assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 938/CHANDI/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 May 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri. Subhash AggarwalFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Abrol
Section 10BSection 14ASection 80H

…its of the business. The Assessing Officer omitted to adjust the profits of the business by the amount of loss on sale of trading exports. 12.3 Before us the Ld. DR relied on the assessment while Ld. AR relied on the case of IPCL Laboratories Vs. DCIT (2004) 266 ITR 521 (Supreme Court). With the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court the matter stand settled, the relevant portion of the Hon’ble Supreme Court is as under: “ With the adoption of the dual system for computing export profit, the computation of the disclaimed export turnover also required modification. The Finance Act has therefore amended section 80…

ACIT, Ludhiana vs. M/S Vardhman Textiles Ltd., Ludhiana

In the result appeals of the Assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 530/CHANDI/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 May 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri. Subhash AggarwalFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Abrol
Section 10BSection 14ASection 80H

…its of the business. The Assessing Officer omitted to adjust the profits of the business by the amount of loss on sale of trading exports. 12.3 Before us the Ld. DR relied on the assessment while Ld. AR relied on the case of IPCL Laboratories Vs. DCIT (2004) 266 ITR 521 (Supreme Court). With the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court the matter stand settled, the relevant portion of the Hon’ble Supreme Court is as under: “ With the adoption of the dual system for computing export profit, the computation of the disclaimed export turnover also required modification. The Finance Act has therefore amended section 80…

Vardhman Textile Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT, Ludhiana

In the result appeals of the Assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 475/CHANDI/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 May 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri. Subhash AggarwalFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Abrol
Section 10BSection 14ASection 80H

…its of the business. The Assessing Officer omitted to adjust the profits of the business by the amount of loss on sale of trading exports. 12.3 Before us the Ld. DR relied on the assessment while Ld. AR relied on the case of IPCL Laboratories Vs. DCIT (2004) 266 ITR 521 (Supreme Court). With the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court the matter stand settled, the relevant portion of the Hon’ble Supreme Court is as under: “ With the adoption of the dual system for computing export profit, the computation of the disclaimed export turnover also required modification. The Finance Act has therefore amended section 80…

ACIT, Ludhiana vs. Vardhman Textiles Ltd., Ludhiana

In the result appeals of the Assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 691/CHANDI/2007[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 May 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri. Subhash AggarwalFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Abrol
Section 10BSection 14ASection 80H

…its of the business. The Assessing Officer omitted to adjust the profits of the business by the amount of loss on sale of trading exports. 12.3 Before us the Ld. DR relied on the assessment while Ld. AR relied on the case of IPCL Laboratories Vs. DCIT (2004) 266 ITR 521 (Supreme Court). With the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court the matter stand settled, the relevant portion of the Hon’ble Supreme Court is as under: “ With the adoption of the dual system for computing export profit, the computation of the disclaimed export turnover also required modification. The Finance Act has therefore amended section 80…

M/S Vardhman Textiles Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT, Ludhiana

In the result appeals of the Assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 681/CHANDI/2007[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 May 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri. Subhash AggarwalFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Abrol
Section 10BSection 14ASection 80H

…its of the business. The Assessing Officer omitted to adjust the profits of the business by the amount of loss on sale of trading exports. 12.3 Before us the Ld. DR relied on the assessment while Ld. AR relied on the case of IPCL Laboratories Vs. DCIT (2004) 266 ITR 521 (Supreme Court). With the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court the matter stand settled, the relevant portion of the Hon’ble Supreme Court is as under: “ With the adoption of the dual system for computing export profit, the computation of the disclaimed export turnover also required modification. The Finance Act has therefore amended section 80…

Manjeera Projects, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-6(1), Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 1082/HYD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Dr. K. Srinivas Reddy, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 80Section 801B(10)Section 80I

…ITA Nos 1704 1082 and 1230 Manjeera Projects Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member AND Shri S.Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member ITA Nos.1704/Hyd/2014, 1230/Hyd/2015 & 1082/Hyd/2016 (Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Manjeera Projects Vs ITO Ward – 6 ( 2 ) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:AAOFM 0872 C (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri K.C. Devdas For Revenue : Dr. K. Srinivas Reddy, DR Date of Hearing: 13.02.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 27.04.2018 O R D E R Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. These are all as…

Manjeera Projects, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-6(2), Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 1230/HYD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Dr. K. Srinivas Reddy, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 80Section 801B(10)Section 80I

…ITA Nos 1704 1082 and 1230 Manjeera Projects Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member AND Shri S.Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member ITA Nos.1704/Hyd/2014, 1230/Hyd/2015 & 1082/Hyd/2016 (Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) Manjeera Projects Vs ITO Ward – 6 ( 2 ) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:AAOFM 0872 C (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri K.C. Devdas For Revenue : Dr. K. Srinivas Reddy, DR Date of Hearing: 13.02.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 27.04.2018 O R D E R Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. These are all as…