Jindal Aluminium Ltd. v. ACIT

54 SOT 283Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#25228 most cited

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

Judgments citing Jindal Aluminium Ltd. v. ACIT

The Dy.CIT., Circle-1(1)(2), Surat vs. Gujarat Jhm Hotels Ltd., Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 27/SRT/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) D.C.I.T. M/S Gujarat Jhm Hotels Ltd., Circle-1(1)(2), Hotel Holiday In, Near Ambica Vs. Surat. Niketan, Athwalines, Surat- 395001. Pan : Aaacg 8562 E Appellant Respondednt C.O. No. 02/Srt/2022 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 27/Srt/2017)(Ay: 2010-11) M/S Gujarat Jhm Hotels Ltd., D.C.I.T. Hotel Holiday In, Near Bharti Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. Park, Ambikaniketan, Surat. Athwalines, Surat-395007. Pan : Aaacg 8562 E Appellant Respondednt

Section 143Section 254(1)Section 80I

…ders 377 ITR 631 (Guj) (g) P.C. Patel & Co. 379 ITR 151 (Guj) (h) Sahajanand Medical Technologies (P) Ltd. 397 ITR 607 (Guj) (i) Eastern Medikit Ltd. 100 TTJ 382 (Del Trib) (j) Eastern Medikit Ltd. 153 Taxmann 48 (Del Trib)(Magazine) (k) Jindal Aluminium Ltd. 54 SOT 283 (Bang Trib) (l) Meera Cotton & Synthetics Mills Ltd. 29 SOT 177) (Mum Trib) (m) Sona Koyo Seering Systems Ltd. 35 DTR 273 (Del) (n) Rangamma Steels & Malleables 132 TTJ 365 (Che Trib) (o) Metal Powder Co Ltd. 51 Taxmann.co, 304 (Che Trib) 12. We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and have gone through the orders of the auth…

Dy. C.I.T.1(2), Raipur (Cg) vs. M/S Godawari Power & Ispat Ltd., Raipur (Cg)

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 365/BIL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur01 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit- 1(2), Godawari Power & Ispat Ltd., Raipur (Cg). Plot No.482/2, Industrial Growth Vs. Centre, Phase- 1, Siltara, Raipur (Cg).

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. K. Mishra, CIT(DR)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 3Section 80Section 80I

…12/RPR/2018 10. The ld. DR heavily relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. 11. The ld. counsel for the assessee on the other hand relied on the decision of the Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Jindal Aluminium Ltd. vs. ACIT reported in 54 SOT 283, decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Meera Cotton & Synthetic Mills (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT reported in 29 SOT 177 and the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Sona Koyo Steering Systems Ltd. reported in 321 ITR 463. Referring to the above decisions, he submitted that while computing the deduction…

M/S. Topaz Investments Pvt., Ltd., Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Bangalore

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

ITA 1687/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaassessment Year :2011-12

For Appellant: Shri R.G. Nahar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT (DR)

Section 4Section 80I

…and therefore, the quantum of deduction u/s 80IA (4) cannot be restricted to the business income assessed by the AO. In support of this contention, he placed reliance on the tribunal order rendered in the case of Jindal Aluminium Ltd. vs. ACIT as reported in 54 SOT 283 (Bangalore), copy available on pages 99 to 106 of paper book. He also placed reliance on a judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Tridoss Laboratories Ltd. as reported in 328 ITR 448, copy available on pages 107 to 109 of paper book. The ld. DR of revenue supported the orders of authorities below. 5. We have conside…