ITO v. Kewal Construction

354 ITR 13High Court2013#2644 most cited

What is ITO v. Kewal Construction authority for?

When a disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act increases the profit of the assessee, deductions under Chapter VIA of the Act should be allowed on this enhanced profit.

44

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

ITO v Kewal Construction · section 40(a)(ia) · Chapter VIA deduction · enhanced profit · deduction on increased profit · section 14A · section 80IA · 115JB · Gujarat High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 115JBSection 14ASection 80IASection 143(3)Section 14A read with Rule 8DSection 250Section 270ASection 80P

Issues it is cited on

section 80ia(13)section 22(1)(b)proximate nexussection 10(15)section 10(33)section 22(1)section 5(b)section 115jasection 80ia(4)infrastructure facilitydeduction u/s 80iasection 80p(1)

Judgments citing ITO v. Kewal Construction

Cibersites India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. ITO, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 1051/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Jason P.Boaz, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sampath Raghunathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Padmameenakshi, JCIT
Section 10ASection 195Section 40

…submitted that the said decision of the Ahmedabad bench 5 ITA No.1051/Bang/2016. M/s.CIBER Sites India Private Limited. of the Tribunal relied upon by the revenue has been reversed by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of ITO v. Keval Construction [2013] 354 ITR 13/217 Taxman 96 (Mag.) / 33 taxmann.com 277. Therefore this issue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of Keval Construction (supra) and submitted that the Hon’ble High Court has held that even if certain expenditure which were incurred by the assessee for the purpose of developing house project was not allowable by virtu…

M/S Dreamcity Developers, Mumbai vs. ITO - 23(2)-2, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2652/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2009-10 Dreamcity Developers, Ito -23(2)-2 A/35-36, Patil Bhuvan, C-10, 2Nd Floor, बनाम/ Nsb Road, Mulund (W), Pratyakshar Bhavan Bkc, Vs. Mumbai-400080 Bandra (E) Mumbai- (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aaffd1884L "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri R.G. Tralshawala (Ar) Shri Jitendra Kumar (Dr) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2015 18/11/2015 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order: आदेश / O R D E R Per Ashwani Taneja ():

Section 143(3)Section 801Section 801BSection 801B(10)Section 80ISection 80l

…with M/s. Kalyan Development Corporation. Further, he placed reliance on following judgments: i.CIT v. Radhe Developers 341 ITR 403 (Guj) ii.CIT v. Shital Corp. 369 ITR 476 (Guj) iii.CIT v. Sahajanand Associates 367 ITR 645 (Guj) iv.ITO v. Kewal Construction 354 ITR 13 (Guj) v. ACIT v. Vijay Mallya (Mum), ITA No.2339/Mum/2008 vi. ITO vs. Bhoomi Developers (Mum) ITA No.5633/Mum/2010 vii. Shri Umeya Corp. v. ITO (Ahd), ITA No.211/Ahd/2010 5. On the other hand, Ld. DR has relied upon the orders of the lower authorities and placed reliance upon the judgment of Hyderabad Bench in the case of M/s. Vertex Private Limi…

M/S Grain Merchant Society, Tumkur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward.2, Tumkur

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2008-09 is allowed

ITA 1183/BANG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Apr 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, C.AFor Respondent: Dr.P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT (D.R.)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40Section 80Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

…ld not be denied that such disallowance would go to increase the assessee's profit / income from business and would qualify for deduction as provided under the law, was upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of ITO V Keval Construction (2013) 354 ITR 13 (Guj) rendered in the context that the eligible deduction under Section 80IB of the Act and by a co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of V S Lad & Sons V CIT in ITA No.560 & 561/Bang/2012 dt.12.7.2013 rendered in the context of the extent of deduction to be allowed under Section 80HHC of the Act. The learned Authorised Representative sub…

Broadcom India Research Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result the appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1180/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jan 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri Sreeram Seshadri, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri.C.H. Sundar Rao, CIT-I (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 92Section 92C

…ct and that the assessee should be allowed deduction u/s. 10A of the Act on such enhanced profits. In support of the claim of assessee as aforesaid, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High court in the case of ITO v. Keval Construction, 354 ITR 13 (Guj). In the aforesaid decision, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court was dealing with a case, where the assessee claimed deduction u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act in respect of profits derived from the business of developing housing projects. In the course of assessment, certain expenses claimed as deduction while computing profits on developing housing proj…