ITO v. Frigsales (India) Ltd.

4 SOT 376Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2005#3113 most cited

What is ITO v. Frigsales (India) Ltd. authority for?

Capital gains arising on a depreciable asset, which are exempt under Section 50, are to be excluded from the calculation of deemed profits under Section 115JA, as the exemption is preserved by Section 115JA(4).

38

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

ITO v. Frigsales (India) Ltd. · 2005 · ITAT · Section 115JA · Section 50 · capital gains · depreciable asset · exempt income · deemed profits · Mumbai ITAT

Sections most often in play

Section 115JBSection 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(3)Section 201(1A)Section 234CSection 32(1)(ii)

Issues it is cited on

section 144b(1)section 92f(ii)section 41(1)(a)profit split methodsection 54esection 115jcsection 80ia(8)section 54ecsection 80ib(10)section 92baminimum alternate taxsection 112

Judgments citing ITO v. Frigsales (India) Ltd.

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BANGUR NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee - appellant in ITA No

ITA 1517/JPR/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jun 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dilip B. Desai, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 254Section 36(1)(va)Section 80Section 801A

…rovision raised a controversy as to the legal implication of insertion of sub-sec (5) and sub-sec (4) in sec 115JB and 115JA respectively. This legal issue has been considered by Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO v. Frigsales (India) Ltd. [2005] 4 SOT 376 (Mum). The issue related to capital gains arising on a depreciable asset which is exempt u/s 50 of the Act. Taking notice of sub-sec (4) of sec 115JA which provisions, as stated above, was not available in sec 115J, the tribunal held that the exempt income under sec 50 would remain exempted as per provisions of sub-sec (4) of sec 115JA and therefor…

GURUVASTU PROPERTIES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 1(1)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5850/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Guruvastu Properties P. Ltd. Dcit – 1(1)(4) 47, 7Th Floor, Tardeo Ac Market 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Tardeo, Mumbai – 400 034 M K Road, Mumbai-400 020

For Appellant: Shri Hiten M. VasantFor Respondent: Shri H. M. Bhatt
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 15JSection 250Section 45Section 54E

…itled to deduction u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act while computing the book profit u/s. 115JB of the Act which again supports the contention of the assessee. It is pertinent to point out that the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Frigsales (India) Ltd. [2005] 4 SOT 376 (Mum) has held that exemption u/s. 50 of the Act is not a taxable income and the same cannot be taxed u/s. 115JA of the Act as per sub section (4) of the provision. 7 Guruvastu Properties P. Ltd. vs. DCIT 12. The Revenue, on the other hand, has relied on the Special Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of Rain Commodities Ltd. (supra) which…

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 500/JPR/2023[215-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

For Appellant: Sh. Dilip B Desai(C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Alka Gautam (CIT) (V.H) &
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

…rovision raised a controversy as to the legal implication of insertion of sub-sec (5) and sub-sec (4) in sec 115JB and 115JA respectively. This legal issue has been considered by Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO v. Frigsales (India) Ltd. [2005] 4 SOT 376 (Mum). The issue related to capital gains arising on a depreciable ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. asset which is exempt u/s 50 of the Act. Taking notice of sub-sec (4) of sec 115JA which provisions, as stated above, was not available in sec 115J, the tribunal held that the exempt income under sec 50 would remain exempted as per provisions of sub-sec…

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2, AJMER, AJMER

ITA 498/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Sh. Dilip B Desai(C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Alka Gautam (CIT) (V.H) &
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

…on raised a controversy as to the legal implication of insertion \nof sub-sec (5) and sub-sec (4) in sec 115JB and 115JA respectively. \nThis legal issue has been considered by Mumbai Bench of the \nTribunal in the case of ITO v. Frigsales (India) Ltd. [2005] 4 SOT 376 \n(Mum). The issue related to capital gains arising on a depreciable\nasset which is exempt u/s 50 of the Act. Taking notice of sub-sec (4) \nof sec 115JA which provisions, as stated above, was not available in \nsec 115J, the tribunal held that the exempt income under sec 50 \nwould remain exempted as per provisions of sub-sec (4) of sec \n115JA a…

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, AJMER, AJMER

ITA 497/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024AY 2017-18
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

…rovision raised a controversy as to the legal implication of insertion of sub-sec (5) and sub-sec (4) in sec 115JB and 115JA respectively. This legal issue has been considered by Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO v. Frigsales (India) Ltd. [2005] 4 SOT 376 (Mum). The issue related to capital gains arising on a depreciable asset which is exempt u/s 50 of the Act. Taking notice of sub-sec (4) of sec 115JA which provisions, as stated above, was not available in sec 115J, the tribunal held that the exempt income under sec 50 would remain exempted as per provisions of sub-sec (4) of sec 115JA and therefor…

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2, AJMER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 496/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

For Appellant: Sh. Dilip B Desai(C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Alka Gautam (CIT) (V.H) &
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

…rovision raised a controversy as to the legal implication of insertion of sub-sec (5) and sub-sec (4) in sec 115JB and 115JA respectively. This legal issue has been considered by Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO v. Frigsales (India) Ltd. [2005] 4 SOT 376 (Mum). The issue related to capital gains arising on a depreciable ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. asset which is exempt u/s 50 of the Act. Taking notice of sub-sec (4) of sec 115JA which provisions, as stated above, was not available in sec 115J, the tribunal held that the exempt income under sec 50 would remain exempted as per provisions of sub-sec…

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. SHREE CEMENT LTD, BEAWAR

ITA 490/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024AY 2016-17
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

…rovision raised a controversy as to the legal implication of insertion of sub-sec (5) and sub-sec (4) in sec 115JB and 115JA respectively. This legal issue has been considered by Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO v. Frigsales (India) Ltd. [2005] 4 SOT 376 (Mum). The issue related to capital gains arising on a depreciable asset which is exempt u/s 50 of the Act. Taking notice of sub-sec (4) of sec 115JA which provisions, as stated above, was not available in sec 115J, the tribunal held that the exempt income under sec 50 would remain exempted as per provisions of sub-sec (4) of sec 115JA and therefor…

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. SHREE CEMENT LTD, BEAWAR

ITA 489/JPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sh. Dilip B Desai(C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Alka Gautam (CIT) (V.H) &
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

…rovision raised a controversy as to the legal implication of insertion of sub-sec (5) and sub-sec (4) in sec 115JB and 115JA respectively. This legal issue has been considered by Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO v. Frigsales (India) Ltd. [2005] 4 SOT 376 (Mum). The issue related to capital gains arising on a depreciable ITA Nos. 489 to 492/JP/2023 ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. 23 asset which is exempt u/s 50 of the Act. Taking notice of sub-sec (4) of sec 115JA which provisions, as stated above, was not available in sec 115J, the tribunal held that the exempt income under sec 50 would remain exempted…

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 152/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT
Section 115JSection 250Section 32(1)(ii)Section 80Section 80I

…vision raised a controversy as to the legal implication of insertion of sub-s. (5) and sub-s. (4) in s. 115JB and s. 115JA, respectively. This legal issue has been considered by Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Frigsales (India) Ltd. (2005) 4 SOT 376 (Mumbai). The issue related to capital gains arising on a depreciable asset which is exempt under s. 50 of the Act. Taking notice of sub-s. (4) of s. 115JA which provision, as stated above, was not available in s. 115J, the Tribunal held that the exempt income under s. 50 would remain exempted as per provisions of sub-s. (4) of s. 115JA and therefo…

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/

…y the Hon'ble was in the nature of capital receipt.Similarly the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Frigsales (India) Ltd. Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Frigsales (India) Ltd. Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Frigsales (India) Ltd. (4 SOT 376) held that he capital gain on sale of depreciable (4 SOT 376) held that he capital gain on sale of depreciable (4 SOT 376) held that he capital gain on sale of depreciable asset was exempt us 50, could asset was exempt us 50, could not be taxed as income not be taxed as income under the provision of section 115JA. Similar view was under the provisi…

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/

…y the Hon'ble was in the nature of capital receipt.Similarly the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Frigsales (India) Ltd. Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Frigsales (India) Ltd. Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Frigsales (India) Ltd. (4 SOT 376) held that he capital gain on sale of depreciable (4 SOT 376) held that he capital gain on sale of depreciable (4 SOT 376) held that he capital gain on sale of depreciable asset was exempt us 50, could asset was exempt us 50, could not be taxed as income not be taxed as income under the provision of section 115JA. Similar view was under the provisi…

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/

…y the Hon'ble was in the nature of capital receipt.Similarly the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Frigsales (India) Ltd. Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Frigsales (India) Ltd. Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Frigsales (India) Ltd. (4 SOT 376) held that he capital gain on sale of depreciable (4 SOT 376) held that he capital gain on sale of depreciable (4 SOT 376) held that he capital gain on sale of depreciable asset was exempt us 50, could asset was exempt us 50, could not be taxed as income not be taxed as income under the provision of section 115JA. Similar view was under the provisi…

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/

…y the Hon'ble was in the nature of capital receipt.Similarly the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Frigsales (India) Ltd. Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Frigsales (India) Ltd. Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Frigsales (India) Ltd. (4 SOT 376) held that he capital gain on sale of depreciable (4 SOT 376) held that he capital gain on sale of depreciable (4 SOT 376) held that he capital gain on sale of depreciable asset was exempt us 50, could asset was exempt us 50, could not be taxed as income not be taxed as income under the provision of section 115JA. Similar view was under the provisi…

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)

…ITAT Jaipur), it was held that Sales Tax Incentive was required to be excluded while computing the book profits U/s 115JB since the same was in the nature of capital receipt. Similarly the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Frigsales (India) Ltd. (4 SOT 376) held that the capital gain on sale of depreciable asset which was exempt U/S 50, could not be taxed as income under the provision of section 115JA. Similar view was taken by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of ITO Vs. Suraj Jewellery (India) Ltd. (21 SOT 79). These grounds of appeal are accordingly allowed.” 21. The Ld. CIT(A) has also passed…

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)

…ITAT Jaipur), it was held that Sales Tax Incentive was required to be excluded while computing the book profits U/s 115JB since the same was in the nature of capital receipt. Similarly the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Frigsales (India) Ltd. (4 SOT 376) held that the capital gain on sale of depreciable asset which was exempt U/S 50, could not be taxed as income under the provision of section 115JA. Similar view was taken by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of ITO Vs. Suraj Jewellery (India) Ltd. (21 SOT 79). These grounds of appeal are accordingly allowed.” 21. The Ld. CIT(A) has also passed…

ACIT 2(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. MAHIMA STOCKS PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to the extent it is against the assessee are hereby quashed

ITA 2486/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhacit – 2(2)(1) Vs. M/S Mahima Stocks Room No. 545, 5Th Floor Pvt Ltd Aayakarbhavan, 1,Gaureshapartments, M.K.Road, Old Police Line, Mumbai – 400020. Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400069. Pan/Gir No. : Aaecm2983K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Smt.Mahita Nair.Dr Respondent By : Shri.Vimal Punmiya.Ar Date Of Hearing 10.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24.08.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Cit(A)- National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Passed U/S143(3) & U/Sec250 Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Smt.Mahita Nair.DRFor Respondent: Shri.Vimal Punmiya.AR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 48

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACIT – 2(2)(1) Vs. M/s Mahima Stocks Room No. 545, 5th Floor Pvt Ltd AayakarBhavan, 1,GaureshApartments, M.K.Road, Old Police Line, Mumbai – 400020. Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400069. PAN/GIR No. : AAECM2983K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Smt.Mahita Nair.DR Respondent by : Shri.Vimal Punmiya.AR Date of Hearing 10.08.2022 Date of Pronouncement 24.08.2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: The revenue has filed the appeal against the order of the CIT(A)- Natio…

TOLANI SHIPPING CO. P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CC- 17&18, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1729/MUM/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2007-08 Tolani Shipping Co. P. Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income - Flat No. 10-A, Bakhtawar Tax, Building, R.P. Goenka Marg, Cen. Circle 17 & 18, Mumbai - 400021 Vs. Room No. 573, Aayakar Pan: Aaact4127C Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Satyaprakash Singh (Ar) Revenue By : Shri B.K. Bagchi (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 02/12/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 05/01/2022

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash Singh (AR)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi (DR)
Section 115JSection 14A

…come-tax rules sale price is deductible from written down value of Block of Assets and therefore there is no profit on sate of assets and further erred in not following the judgement of jurisdictional bench of MUMBAI ITAT in the case of FRIGSALES (INDIA) LTD. 4 SOT 376 and Shivalik Ventures Pvt Ltd. 60 Taxmann.com 314 (Mum ITAT) wherein it is held 3 Assessment Year: 2007-08 that Profit on sale of depreciable assets cannot be included in Book Profit u/s.115JB. 6. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming addition of Rs.75,87,317 in Book Profit under MAT on account of disallowance under section 14A of the Act a…

ROCKLINE DEVELOPERS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 9(3)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, ground “A” raised in the appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 6595/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2021AY 2011-12
Section 115JSection 80Section 80I

…DCW Ltd. vs. DCIT 12(5 TTJ (Mumbai) 416 is having different contexts. Here in this case there is taxable income as mentioned earlier as per book profit, hence provision of law U/S.115JB is applicable. Further, the fact of the case of ITO vs, Frigsales (India) 4 SOT 376 (Mumbai) is altogether different as in that case issue was that capital gains arising on depreciable assets exempt u/s.15 was to be taken as part and parcel of the book profit or not. In that case it was held by Hon'ble Tribunal that receipt which is not in the nature of income cannot be taxed as income u/s 115JA. Here, is not the case alike. There…

DCIT-11(1)(2),, MUMBAI vs. M/S. SANGAM INDIA LTD.,, MUMBAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee‟s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1490/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.1490/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Dcit-11(1)(2) M/S. Sangam India Ltd. Gf, Room No.1 306, „B‟ Wing बिाम/ Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Dynasty Business Park Vs. Mumbai-400 020 J.B. Nagar, A.K. Road Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 059 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaccs-0486-K (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & Co No.01/Mum/2021 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S. Sangam India Ltd. Dcit-11(1)(2) 306, „B‟Wing Gf, Room No.1 बिाम/ Dynasty Business Park Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. J.B. Nagar, A.K. Road Mumbai-400 020 Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 059 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaccs-0486-K (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Dharmesh Shah-Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Ajit Kumar Shrivastava-Ld. Cit-Dr ुनवाई की तारीख/ : 02/07/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 26/07/2021 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajit Kumar Shrivastava-Ld
Section 2(24)

…com 314 (Mum.)] (Para 28 of decision) [Page 203-214 of PB No. 2] (iii) DCIT v. Degree Orchards Pvt. Ltd [ITA No. 4613/Mum/2016 & CO No. 166/Mum/2018] dated 08.08.2018. (Para 14 of decision) [Page 215-223 of PB No. 2] (iv) ITO v. Frigsales (India) Ltd. [2005] [4 SOT 376] (Para 3 of decision) [Page 224-226 of PB No. 2] 11.3 We concur with the submissions that the aforesaid decisions are squarely applicable to the facts of the case. Therefore, we direct Ld. AO to verify the claim and allow deduction thereof while computing income under normal provisions as well as while computing book-profits u/s 115JB of the Act. T…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. STANDARD INDUSTRIES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, these appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7338/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

Section 250Section 28Section 37Section 48

…. vs. ITO (2009) 121 TTJ Mumbai 641 Further, while calculating the Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT), on book profit, the company has considered profit on sale of TDR as not taxable. Reliance in this connection is placed on the decision in case of Frigsales (India) 4 SOT 376 wherein Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal has upheld the view that capital gains which is exempt as per the provisions of Income-tax Act, is not in the nature of income and it cannot be taxed under the provisions of section 115JA of the Act. Applying the same analogy, under the facts of the case, the profit on sale of TDR has been excluded from Book Profits…

Showing 1–20 of 38 · Page 1 of 2