Ltd. (256 ITR 395) (Bom); CIT v Berger Paints (India) Ltd (254 ITR 503) (Cal); CIT v. Bhor Industries Ltd. (

292 ITR 605Reported decision#20336 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Judgments citing Ltd. (256 ITR 395) (Bom); CIT v Berger Paints (India) Ltd (254 ITR 503) (Cal); CIT v. Bhor Industries Ltd. (

Economic Explosives Limited, Nagpur vs. National E Assessment Centre, New Delhi

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 242/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…g. Co. Ltd. v CIT (82 ITR 363) (SC) Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. v CIT (116 ITR 1) (SC); CIT v Tata Chemicals Ltd. (256 ITR 395) (Bom); CIT v Berger Paints (India) Ltd (254 ITR 503) (Cal); CIT v Bhor Industries Ltd. (264 ITR 180) (Bom); CIT v Fenner (India) Ltd. (292 ITR 605); CIT v Saravana Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. (292 ITR 655)(Mad); and CIT v Darius Pandole (330 ITR 485) (Bom). From the ratio laid down by the courts in the aforesaid decisions it is very clear that entries in the books of account would not be a decisive factor for determining the tax implications under the Act. Economic Explosives Ltd. ITA no.177/Na…

Economic Explosives Limited, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1 (2), Nagpur

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 177/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…g. Co. Ltd. v CIT (82 ITR 363) (SC) Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. v CIT (116 ITR 1) (SC); CIT v Tata Chemicals Ltd. (256 ITR 395) (Bom); CIT v Berger Paints (India) Ltd (254 ITR 503) (Cal); CIT v Bhor Industries Ltd. (264 ITR 180) (Bom); CIT v Fenner (India) Ltd. (292 ITR 605); CIT v Saravana Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. (292 ITR 655)(Mad); and CIT v Darius Pandole (330 ITR 485) (Bom). From the ratio laid down by the courts in the aforesaid decisions it is very clear that entries in the books of account would not be a decisive factor for determining the tax implications under the Act. Economic Explosives Ltd. ITA no.177/Na…

Mc Nally Sayaji Engineering Limited, North 24 Parganas vs. D.C.I.T Cir - 1, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 927/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

For Appellant: Smt. Shreya Loyalka, CAFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…which makes it possible for the existing set up to function efficiently, the cost incurred on such replacement would be revenue expenditure. We also draw support from the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Fenner India Limited [292 ITR 605] wherein it was held that the question whether the 10 ITA Nos.2776/A/2011,1575/K/2011 & 927/K/.2013 Mc Nally Sayaji Engg. Ltd.., AY 2008-09 & 2009-10 expenditure on replacement of machinery is capital or revenue expenditure is not determined by treatment given in the books of account and that the claim has to be determined only by the provisions…

DCIT, Circle - 1, Kolkata vs. M/S. Mcnally Sayaji Engineering Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1575/KOL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Mar 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

For Appellant: Smt. Shreya Loyalka, CAFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…which makes it possible for the existing set up to function efficiently, the cost incurred on such replacement would be revenue expenditure. We also draw support from the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Fenner India Limited [292 ITR 605] wherein it was held that the question whether the 10 ITA Nos.2776/A/2011,1575/K/2011 & 927/K/.2013 Mc Nally Sayaji Engg. Ltd.., AY 2008-09 & 2009-10 expenditure on replacement of machinery is capital or revenue expenditure is not determined by treatment given in the books of account and that the claim has to be determined only by the provisions…

Ltd. (256 ITR 395) (Bom); CIT v Berger Paints (India) Ltd (254 ITR 503) (Cal); CIT v. Bhor Industries Ltd. ( (292 ITR 605) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax