Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise, (1990) 183 ITR 577 (SC), CIT v. N.C. Budhiraja & Co. & Another

223 ITR 776Supreme Court of India1997#13816 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2018.

Judgments citing Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise, (1990) 183 ITR 577 (SC), CIT v. N.C. Budhiraja & Co. & Another

ASST.C.I.T., BELLARY vs. M/S HOTHUR TRADERS 100% EOU, BELLARY

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for asst

ITA 32/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boazita No.32/Bang/2016 (Asst. Years 2010-11 & 2011-12) The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-1, Bellary. . Appellant Vs. M/S Hothur Traders 100% Eou, No.85,6,7&8, Infantry Road, Cantonment, Bellary. . Respondent Pan –Aaefh7705H. Co No.55/Bang/2016 (By Assessee) Appellant By : Shri Nagendra Prasad, Cit Respondent By : Shri B.S Balachandran, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 22-11-2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 19-01-2018

For Appellant: Shri Nagendra Prasad, CITFor Respondent: Shri B.S Balachandran, Advocate

Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH “C” BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.32/Bang/2016 (Asst. Years 2010-11 & 2011-12) The Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1, Bellary. . Appellant Vs. M/s Hothur Traders 100% EOU, No.85,6,7&8, Infantry Road, Cantonment, Bellary. . Respondent PAN –AAEFH7705H. CO No.55/Bang/2016 (By assessee) Appellant by : Shri Nagendra Prasad, CIT Respondent by : Shri B.S Balachandran, Advocate Date of Hearing : 22-11-2017 Date of Pronouncement : 19-01-2018 O R D E R PER SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. AUTO IGNITION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 6646/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2012-13

Section 143Section 80

…consideration of all relevant factors such as the quality and nature of the original article, the extent and magnitude of the operations carried out on, or in relation to, it and the commercial identity, character and use of the article produced. [137 QTR 4F, 223 ITR 776,90 TAXMAN 26] 1 CIT Vs. Darshak Ltd. Manufacture 2001 Kerala High I Court i The word manufacture is to be understood in a wide sense. Manufacture would imply a change and a transformation. A new and a different article must emerge having a distinct and different character and use. (ii) Meaning of Produce Page 8 of 13 ITA 6646/Del/15 Assessmen…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. AUTO IGNITION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4488/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuin Ita No. 4488/Del/2014 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit Vs. Auto Ignition Ltd. Circle-2(1), New Delhi The Bahar, 37, Dera Mandi Road, New Delhi (Applicant) (Respondent) (Pan: Aaaca5390E)

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Melhotra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 260ASection 80I

…consideration of all relevant factors such as the quality and nature of the original article, the extent and magnitude of the operations carried out on, or in relation to, it and the commercial identity, character and use of the article produced. [137 QTR 4F, 223 ITR 776,90 TAXMAN 26] 1 CIT Vs. Darshak Ltd. Manufacture 2001 Kerala High I Court i Page 8 of 15 The word manufacture is to be understood in a wide sense. Manufacture would imply a change and a transformation. A new and a different article must emerge having a distinct and different character and use. (ii) Meaning of Produce Produce 1988 AP-High CIT…

ACIT, FARIDABAD vs. SH SUNIL PARKASH, FARIDABAD

ITA 5683/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 194Section 40Section 80I

…de", in view of the decisions of the Apex Court in the cases of Name Tulaman Manufacturers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise, (1990) 183 ITR 577 (SC), CIT Vs. N.C. Budhiraja & Co. & Another, (1993) 209 ITR 412 (SC), and Arthur E. Newell Vs. CIT (1997) 223 ITR 776. The A.O's reference to the words "manufacture"," manufacture/produce" and “article or thing" explained in para 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 of her order, is only general, and rather proves the case of the assessee in all respects, and entitles the assessee to claim deduction u/s 80 IB of the I.T. Act, 1961. It can be seen that the assessee has produced cert…

ACIT, FARIDABAD vs. SH. SUNIL PARKASH, FARIDABAD

ITA 2955/DEL/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 194Section 40Section 80I

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M.R.WARDLE

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/398/2004HC Delhi07 Sept 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

Section 10Section 10(6)Section 260A

…ld be granted only if the employer of the assessee carried on business in India – a condition precedent for application of Section 10 (6) (viia). The ITAT on further appeal followed the decision of the authority for advance ruling in Re: Arthur E Newell (223 ITR 776) and held that firstly the status of the employer was not relevant and that the assessee’s employer could be said in the overall circumstances to have carried on business in India. 3. Mr.Manchanda, counsel for the revenue contends that ITAT’s decision is flawed. He firstly urges that reliance placed on Arthur E. Newell’s case (supra) was…

TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 2(3), MUMBAI

The appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6820/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Nov 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jain & Sh. Rajendraassessment Year: 2005-06 Pan : Aaacr4849R M/S. Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. Vs. Addl. Commr. Of Income-Tax, 9Th Floor, Nirmal Building, Range 2(3), Nariman Point, Mumbai. Mumbai. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By:Sh. Dinesh Vyas, Sr. Advocate Respondent By:Sh. N.K. Chand, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 30/07/2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 04/11/2015 Order Per A.D. Jain, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Dinesh Vyas, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. N.K. Chand, CIT(DR)

Section 14ASection 30Section 40Section 70Section 90Section 91

…settled provisions of law, any expenditure in relation to increase in share capital of any assessee is capital expenditure. The AO placed reliance on “Punjab State Industrial Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT”, 225 ITR 792 (SC) and “Brook Bond India Ltd. vs. CIT”, 223 ITR 776 (SC), wherein, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that though increase in the capital results in expansion in the capital base of the company and incidently that would help in the business of the company and may also help in profit making, the expenses incurred in that connection still retain the character of a capital in nature, since the expendit…