ITO vs. Arihant Tiles and Marbles P. Ltd. 320 ITR 79 (SC) B) CIT v. Datacons (P) Ltd.

107 ITR 822High Court1977#16447 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2022.

Judgments citing ITO vs. Arihant Tiles and Marbles P. Ltd. 320 ITR 79 (SC) B) CIT v. Datacons (P) Ltd.

DCIT, Circle-1, Thane vs. M/S Ace Plastics, Mumbai

ITA 947/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80Section 80I

…ted as industrial companies for the purpose of section 104 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Reference has been made in this connection to the decisions of the Madras and Calcutta High Courts in the cases of CIT, Madras v. Commercial Laws of India Pvt. Ltd. [1977] 107 ITR 822, and Addl. CIT, West Bengal-11 v. A. Mukherjee & Co. (P.) Ltd. [1978] 113 ITR 718, respectively. In the Madras decision it has been held that folding and stitching the printed sheets and converting them into parts or books, as the case may be, constituted processing of goods. In the Calcutta decision it was held that it is wholly unnecessary for…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Mrs. Cryogas Equipomnet Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 1228/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Mukund Bakshi, A.R
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 195Section 5(2)(b)Section 9(1)(i)

…ich are also goods.--CIT vs. Casino (P) Ltd. (1973) 91 ITR 289 ITA Nos.1228 & 2025/Ahd/2017 The DCIT/ACIT vs. M/s. Cryogas Equipment Pvt. Ltd. Asst.Years –2012-13 & 2013-14 (Ker) : TC24R.272#1 concurred with; CIT vs. Commercial Laws of India Pvt Ltd. (1977) 107 ITR 822 (Mad) : TC24R.246 dissented from. 11. Respectfully following the judgment of Hon. Bombay High Court and that of Calcutta High Court and also the decision of the Co- ordinate Bench and in view of our above discussion we are of the considered view that assessee in the course of running its undertaking in SEZ is allowed to send raw material outside…

M/S. Healthcare Global Enterprises Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year 2010-11 is dismissed

ITA 1901/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Srinivas, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.R. Ramesh, JCIT (DR)
Section 72ASection 79

…t of this contention that in the present case, the assessee has to be accepted as an industrial undertaking A) ITO vs. Arihant Tiles and Marbles P. Ltd. 320 ITR 79 (SC) B) CIT v. Datacons (P) Ltd. 155 ITR 66 (Kar) C) CIT Vs. Commercial Laws of India (P.) Ltd. 107 ITR 822 (MAD.) D) CIT Vs. Suresh Amin Family Trust 288 ITR 101 (Gujarat) 10. As against this, ld. DR of revenue supported the orders of authorities below. He placed reliance on a judgment of Hon’ble madras High Court rendered in the case of ACIT Vs. Apollo Hospitals Enterprises Ltd. as reported in 171 TAXMAN 397. 11. We have considered the rival submiss…

M/S. Healthcare Global Enterprises Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year 2010-11 is dismissed

ITA 1900/BANG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Dec 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Srinivas, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.R. Ramesh, JCIT (DR)
Section 72ASection 79

…t of this contention that in the present case, the assessee has to be accepted as an industrial undertaking A) ITO vs. Arihant Tiles and Marbles P. Ltd. 320 ITR 79 (SC) B) CIT v. Datacons (P) Ltd. 155 ITR 66 (Kar) C) CIT Vs. Commercial Laws of India (P.) Ltd. 107 ITR 822 (MAD.) D) CIT Vs. Suresh Amin Family Trust 288 ITR 101 (Gujarat) 10. As against this, ld. DR of revenue supported the orders of authorities below. He placed reliance on a judgment of Hon’ble madras High Court rendered in the case of ACIT Vs. Apollo Hospitals Enterprises Ltd. as reported in 171 TAXMAN 397. 11. We have considered the rival submiss…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mehta Print Arts Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 550/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Ita No. 550/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S Mehta Print Arts Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Circle-6(1), E-27, Basement, Naraina Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi-110028 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco8042K Assessee By : Sh. Pranshu Goel, Ca & Ms. Priyanka Mongia, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 23.05.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.05.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Pranshu Goel, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154

…the following case laws: " CIT Vs Delhi Press Patra Prakashan Ltd. (2013) 253 CTR 260 (Del.) " Kadarkarai V CWT (1988) 176 ITR 121, (Mad. HC) " Empire Industries Ltd. (1986) 162 ITR 846 (SC) " Aspinwall Vs CIT 251 ITR 323 (SC) " CIT Vs Commercial Law of India 107 ITR 822 " CIT Vs Datacons 155 ITR 66 " CIT Vs Oswal 223 ITGR 735 " CIT Vs Computterised Accounting 235 ITR 502 " CIT Vs Technotive Eastern 255 ITR 253 " CIT Vs Oracle Software India (SC) CA No. 235/2010 @ SLP(C) No. 4719/2008 6. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee observed that an identical issue was decided by his predecesso…

ITO vs. Arihant Tiles and Marbles P. Ltd. 320 ITR 79 (SC) B) CIT v. Datacons (P) Ltd. (107 ITR 822) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax