ITO v. Suraj Jewellary (India) Ltd. (

21 SOT 79Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#5707 most cited

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

Receipts that are not income in nature should be excluded from the profit and loss account before computing Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) under section 115JB.

20

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

ITO v. Suraj Jewellary · 21 SOT 79 · section 115JB · MAT · book profit · exclusion of non-income receipts · profit and loss account

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 41(1)(a)section 54esection 94profit split methodsection 115jcsection 54ecsection 38section 80ib(10)section 115jafunctional analysisminimum alternate taxsection 40(a)(ii)

Judgments citing ITO v. Suraj Jewellary (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

…115JA -Held, yes - Whether, therefore, capital gain arising to an assessee under section 50 on a depreciable asset is liable to be excluded from calculation of deemed profits under section 115JA - Held, yes.” (i) In ITO v. Suraj Jewellery (India) Ltd. [2008] 21 SOT 79 (Mum.), Mumbai Tribunal again held that capital receipts which do not constitute income under the Act cannot be brought to tax net by employing the mechanism of section 115JB. The Tribunal further held that section 115JB has not intended to bring all non-income items within the domain of the Act. (j) By inserting sub-sec. (4) in sec. 115JA and sub…

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

…of exemption u/s. 54EC is correctly reduced while computing the book profit u/s. 115JB of the Act. The assessee also placed reliance on the cases of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. ACIT 45 ITD 22 (Cal.) (SB) (1993) and ITO vs. Suraj Jewellery (I) P. Ltd. (2008) 21 SOT 79 (Mum). 7. The ld. A.O. not being convinced with the assessee’s submission relied on the amendment to definition of the book profit as per Explanation [1] to section 115JB of the 4 Guruvastu Properties P. Ltd. vs. DCIT Act and also the amendment in section 10(38) of the Act vide insertion of proviso by Finance Act, 2006 w.e.f. 01.04.2007, thereby h…

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

…115JA -Held, yes - Whether, therefore, capital gain arising to an assessee under section 50 on a depreciable asset is liable to be excluded from calculation of deemed profits under section 115JA - Held, yes.” (i) In ITO v. Suraj Jewellery (India) Ltd. [2008] 21 SOT 79 (Mum.), Mumbai Tribunal again held that capital receipts which do not constitute income under the Act cannot be brought to tax net by employing the mechanism of section 115JB. The Tribunal further held that section 115JB has not intended to bring all non-income items within the domain of the Act. (j) By inserting sub-sec. (4) in sec. 115JA and sub…

Shree Cement Limited, Beawar vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Deputy Commissionerof Income Tax, Circle -2, 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

…115JA -Held, yes - Whether, therefore, capital gain arising to an assessee under section 50 on a depreciable asset is liable to be excluded from calculation of deemed profits under section 115JA - Held, yes.” (i) In ITO v. Suraj Jewellery (India) Ltd. [2008] 21 SOT 79 (Mum.), Mumbai Tribunal again held that capital receipts which do not constitute income under the Act cannot be brought to tax net by employing the mechanism of section 115JB. The Tribunal further held that section 115JB has not intended to bring all non-income items within the domain of the Act. (j) By inserting sub-sec. (4) in sec. 115JA and sub…

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

…. (4) of s. 115JA - Held, yes—Whether, therefore, capital gain arising to an assessee under s. 50 on a depreciable asset is liable to be excluded from calculation of deemed profits under s. 115JA—Held, yes." 22. In ITO vs. Suraj Jewellery (India) Ltd. (2008) 21 SOT 79 (Mumbai), Mumbai Tribunal again held that capital receipts which do not constitute income under the Act cannot be brought to tax net by employing the mechanism of s. 115JB. The Tribunal further held that s. 115JB is not intended to bring all non-income items within the domain of the Act. 23. By inserting sub-s. (4) in s. 115JA and sub-s. (5) in s.…

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/

…ew was under the provision of section 115JA. Similar view was taken by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of ITO Vs. taken by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of ITO Vs. taken by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of ITO Vs. Suraj Jewellary (India) Ltd. (21 SOT 79). It was held by the Suraj Jewellary (India) Ltd. (21 SOT 79). It was held by the Suraj Jewellary (India) Ltd. (21 SOT 79). It was held by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of Shivalik Venture (P.) Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of Shivalik Venture (P.) Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of Shivalik Venture (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (60 taxmann.com 314) t…

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/

…ew was under the provision of section 115JA. Similar view was taken by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of ITO Vs. taken by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of ITO Vs. taken by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of ITO Vs. Suraj Jewellary (India) Ltd. (21 SOT 79). It was held by the Suraj Jewellary (India) Ltd. (21 SOT 79). It was held by the Suraj Jewellary (India) Ltd. (21 SOT 79). It was held by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of Shivalik Venture (P.) Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of Shivalik Venture (P.) Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of Shivalik Venture (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (60 taxmann.com 314) t…

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/

…ew was under the provision of section 115JA. Similar view was taken by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of ITO Vs. taken by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of ITO Vs. taken by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of ITO Vs. Suraj Jewellary (India) Ltd. (21 SOT 79). It was held by the Suraj Jewellary (India) Ltd. (21 SOT 79). It was held by the Suraj Jewellary (India) Ltd. (21 SOT 79). It was held by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of Shivalik Venture (P.) Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of Shivalik Venture (P.) Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of Shivalik Venture (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (60 taxmann.com 314) t…

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/

…ew was under the provision of section 115JA. Similar view was taken by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of ITO Vs. taken by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of ITO Vs. taken by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of ITO Vs. Suraj Jewellary (India) Ltd. (21 SOT 79). It was held by the Suraj Jewellary (India) Ltd. (21 SOT 79). It was held by the Suraj Jewellary (India) Ltd. (21 SOT 79). It was held by the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of Shivalik Venture (P.) Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of Shivalik Venture (P.) Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of Shivalik Venture (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (60 taxmann.com 314) t…

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)

…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 the order following the decision rendered by co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in case of ACIT Vs. Shree Cement Ltd. (2012 TIOL-02-ITAT Jaipur) wherein it is held that sales tax incentive and excise duty exemption are required to be excluded while computing the…

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)

…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 the order following the decision rendered by co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in case of ACIT Vs. Shree Cement Ltd. (2012 TIOL-02-ITAT Jaipur) wherein it is held that sales tax incentive and excise duty exemption are required to be excluded while computing the…

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

…se 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. Therefore, this decision is misplaced by Ld. A.R. Similarly, the fact of ITO vs. Suraj Jewellery India) Ltd. 21 SOT 79 (Mum) is altogether different. The issue was whether capital receipts which do not constitute income under the I.T.Act can be brought to tax u/s.H5JB. Here in this case there is revenue receipt duly taxable and such income under reference is only entitle for some deduction. Hence such cases are having different context. Similarly, the ratio of Sutl…

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)

…d that the receipts being capital in nature, would also not be taxed as part of the book-profits while computing tax u/s 115JB of the Act as per various decisions of the Tribunal, few of which are as follows: - (i) ITO v. Su-raj Jewellery (India) Ltd. [2008] [21 SOT 79 (Mum.)] (Para 12 of decision) [Page 197-202 of PB No. 2] (ii) Shivalik Venture (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT [2015] [60 taxmann.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. Frigs…

Rockline Developers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 13(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 5125/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singhm/S. Rockline Developers P. Ltd. Income Tax Officer-13(3)(2) 801, Hubtown Solaris Mumbai Vs. N.S. Phadke Marg, Off. Teli Gali Andheri (E), Mumbai 400069 Pan – Aaacr4467F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunamiyaFor Respondent: Ms. S. Padmaja
Section 115JSection 80HSection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "F" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri B.R. Baskaran, Accountant Member and Shri Pawan Singh, Judicial Member M/s. Rockline Developers P. Ltd. Income Tax Officer-13(3)(2) 801, Hubtown Solaris Mumbai Vs. N.S. Phadke Marg, Off. Teli Gali Andheri (E), Mumbai 400069 PAN – AAACR4467F Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Vimal Punamiya Respondent by: Ms. S. Padmaja Date of Hearing: 13.06.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 06.07.2018 O R D E R Per B.R. Baskaran, AM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.06.2016 passed by the learned CIT(A)-21, Mumbai and it…

DCIT, Cir-3(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Tata Metaliks Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 478/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Apr 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 234C

…in it was held that the AO has limited powers of adjustment to book profit to the extent provided in section 115JB. The appellant has also placed reliance upon the case laws in ITO v. Frigsales (India) Ltd. (2005)4 SOT 376 (Mum), ITO v. Suraj Jewellary (2008) 21 SOT 79 (Mum), CIT v. India Discounts Company Ltd. (1970) 75 ITR 191 (SC), CIT v. M/s Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co. [1962] 46 ITR 144 (Hon'ble Supreme Court) and Sutlej Cotton Mills v. CIT [1979] 116 ITR 1 (SC) After careful consideration, it is found that facts of the appellant’s case are different from those in the case of laws cited. The appellant has itse…

Tata Metaliks Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-3(2), Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 439/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 234C

…in it was held that the AO has limited powers of adjustment to book profit to the extent provided in section 115JB. The appellant has also placed reliance upon the case laws in ITO v. Frigsales (India) Ltd. (2005)4 SOT 376 (Mum), ITO v. Suraj Jewellary (2008) 21 SOT 79 (Mum), CIT v. India Discounts Company Ltd. (1970) 75 ITR 191 (SC), CIT v. M/s Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co. [1962] 46 ITR 144 (Hon'ble Supreme Court) and Sutlej Cotton Mills v. CIT [1979] 116 ITR 1 (SC) After careful consideration, it is found that facts of the appellant’s case are different from those in the case of laws cited. The appellant has itse…

Neha Home Builders Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. CIT - 13, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2964/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm M/S. Neha Home Builders Pvt. Vs. Cit-13, Mumbai Ltd., 801, Hubtown Solaris, N.S.Phadke Marg Off. Teli Galli, Near Andheri Flyover Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400 069 Pan/Gir No. Aaccn7092E Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 115JSection 263Section 80Section 80I

…ction 115JA - Held, yes - Whether, therefore, capital gain arising to an assessee under section 50 on a depreciable asset is liable to be excluded from calculation of deemed profits under section 115JA - Held, yes.” 22. In ITO V. SURAJ JEWELLERY (INDIA) LTD. 21 SOT 79 (MUM), Mumbai Tribunal again held that capital receipts which do not constitute income under the Act cannot be brought to tax net by employing the mechanism of section 115JB. The Tribunal further held that section 115JB has not intended to bring all non-income items within the domain of the Act. 23. By inserting sub-sec. (4) in sec. 115JA and sub-s…

DCIT 5(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Tolani Shipping Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1251/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singhassessment Year : 2006-07 Dy Cit 5(3)(2) Tolani Shipping Co. Ltd., Mumbai 10-A, Bakhtawar, Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai 400 021

For Appellant: Shri V JustinFor Respondent: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal
Section 115JSection 115VSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 92C

…on record can only be one where there cannot be any two conceivable opinions. This is a case where even the Special Bench has taken two different views. We further noted that the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Su-ra Jeweller India Ltd 21 SOT 79, took a view that capital receipt which do not constitute income under the Act cannot be brought to tax net by employing the mechanism of Section 115JB. Since the issue involved is a debatable one and different Special Bench has taken different views, therefore, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) deleting the en…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Cornell Overseas (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 2166/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 2166/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Dcit, Vs Cornell Overseas (P) Ltd., Circle-3(1), B-235, Okhla Indl. Area, Phase-I, New Delhi New Delhi-110020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacc0034F Assessee By : Ms. Vandana Bhandari, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Neeraj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.05.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 28.02.2011 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xx, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Ms. Vandana Bhandari, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Neeraj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 28Section 32Section 80HSection 90C

…ission, interest, rent, etc.” 14. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Bangalore Clothing Co. (2003) 127 Taxman 637 (Bom) " CIT, Coimbatore Vs Kiran Processors (2007) 158 Taxman 407 " ITO-3(3)(3) Vs Su-raj Jewellery (India) Ltd. (2008) 21 SOT 79 (Mum. ITAT) 17 Cornell Overseas (P) Ltd. " ACIT Vs Herbal Isolates (P) Ltd. (2002) 83 ITD 310 (Cochin) 15. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee held that the reimbursement of sample design and development charges constitute export turnover of the business and hence represent business income of the assessee, the same cou…

DCIT, Circle - 1, Kolkata vs. M/S. Gloster Jute Mills Limited, Kolkata

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 95/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No.95/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sital Chandra Das, JCIT

…sales (India) Ltd. 4 SOT 376 (Mum) wherein it had been held that capital gain on sale of depreciable asset exempt u/s 50 cannot be taxed as income under the provisions of section 115JA. The appellant has also placed reliance on the decision of Suraj Jewellary 21 SOT 79 (Mum.) wherein it was held that even where for computing MAT profit u/s 115JB of the Act, the business profit shown in the Profit and Loss Account is to be adopted, in case the said profit includes certain receipts which are not in the nature of income, the same are to excluded before making any calculation on this account. 25 26 M/s. Gloster Jute…

ITO v. Suraj Jewellary (India) Ltd. ( (21 SOT 79) — Cited in 20 Judgments | BharatTax