M/s Punjab State Industrial Corporation Ltd. v. DCIT

102 ITD 1Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2006#7331 most cited
15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2019.

Judgments citing M/s Punjab State Industrial Corporation Ltd. v. DCIT

BANK OF MAHARASHTRA,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 635/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan with Mrs. Lalitha RFor Respondent: Mrs. Kesang Y. Sherpa

…e created in the subsequent assessment year, as well. The ld. AR in support of his contentions placed reliance on following decisions : i. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation, 323 ITR 495 (P&H); ii. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation, 102 ITD 1 (CHD)(SB); iii. Nizamabad District Co-Operative Bank Ltd., 2014 (12) TMI 562 – ITAT, Hyderabad; iv. Vijaya Bank Vs. JCIT in ITA No. 915/Bang/2017 for assessment year 2012-13 decided on 05-01-2018. 6.2 On the other hand ld. DR vehemently defended the action of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in restricting the disallowance u/s. 36(1)(viii) to t…

BANK OF MAHARASHTRA,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 634/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan with Mrs. Lalitha RFor Respondent: Mrs. Kesang Y. Sherpa

…e created in the subsequent assessment year, as well. The ld. AR in support of his contentions placed reliance on following decisions : i. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation, 323 ITR 495 (P&H); ii. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation, 102 ITD 1 (CHD)(SB); iii. Nizamabad District Co-Operative Bank Ltd., 2014 (12) TMI 562 – ITAT, Hyderabad; iv. Vijaya Bank Vs. JCIT in ITA No. 915/Bang/2017 for assessment year 2012-13 decided on 05-01-2018. 6.2 On the other hand ld. DR vehemently defended the action of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in restricting the disallowance u/s. 36(1)(viii) to t…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE vs. BANK OF MAHARASHTRA,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 581/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan with Mrs. Lalitha RFor Respondent: Mrs. Kesang Y. Sherpa

…e created in the subsequent assessment year, as well. The ld. AR in support of his contentions placed reliance on following decisions : i. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation, 323 ITR 495 (P&H); ii. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation, 102 ITD 1 (CHD)(SB); iii. Nizamabad District Co-Operative Bank Ltd., 2014 (12) TMI 562 – ITAT, Hyderabad; iv. Vijaya Bank Vs. JCIT in ITA No. 915/Bang/2017 for assessment year 2012-13 decided on 05-01-2018. 6.2 On the other hand ld. DR vehemently defended the action of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in restricting the disallowance u/s. 36(1)(viii) to t…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE vs. BANK OF MAHARASHTRA,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 579/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan with Mrs. Lalitha RFor Respondent: Mrs. Kesang Y. Sherpa

…e created in the subsequent assessment year, as well. The ld. AR in support of his contentions placed reliance on following decisions : i. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation, 323 ITR 495 (P&H); ii. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation, 102 ITD 1 (CHD)(SB); iii. Nizamabad District Co-Operative Bank Ltd., 2014 (12) TMI 562 – ITAT, Hyderabad; iv. Vijaya Bank Vs. JCIT in ITA No. 915/Bang/2017 for assessment year 2012-13 decided on 05-01-2018. 6.2 On the other hand ld. DR vehemently defended the action of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in restricting the disallowance u/s. 36(1)(viii) to t…

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 2(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed as above

ITA 681/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Singh
Section 1Section 115WSection 147Section 36

…rom the decision of he Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Orient Express Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. IAC (1985) 14 ITD 506 (Delhi), the decision of the Special Bench of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of M/s Punjab State Industrial Corporation Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 102 ITD 1 (Chd)(SB) and the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Karimjee Pvt. Ltd vs DCIT (2005) 193 CTR (SC) 55. The I.T.A.T., therefore, held that the assessee is entitled to deduction u/s 36(1)(viii) of the Act though the reserve is created in the subsequent year provided the same is created before the claim of the assessee is considered and…

DCIT CIR 3(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. TULIP HOTELS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5151/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Dcit Cir 3(3)(2) Vs. M/S. Tulip Hotels Pvt.Ltd., R.No.609, 6Th Floor Chandermukhi Building Aayakar Bhavan (Basement), Behind The M.K.Road, Oberoi Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021 Pan/Gir No. Aaact9446Q Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 10Section 143Section 143(3)Section 14A

…Hotels Pvt.Ltd., assumed to have been incurred for the purpose of earning the tax free income. (c) B.S.E.S. Ltd. v. DCIT (Mum.), wherein the Hon'ble Members following the Special Bench decision in Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. v. DCIT, 102 ITD 1, held that when the AO has not placed any material on record to controvert the contention of the assessee that no expenditure has been incurred for earning the exempt income, there is no justification to disallow proportionate business expenses on estimate basis. (d) CIT vs. M/s. Hero Cycles Ltd. 323 ITR 518 wherein Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Co…

THE STATE BANK OF INDIA,PATIALA vs. ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 861/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Feb 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe State Bank Of India, Vs. The A.C.I.T., (Successor Of State Bank Of Patiala) Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D & The A.C.I.T., Vs. The State Bank Of India, Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D The A.C.I.T., Vs. The State Bank Of India, Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D The State Bank Of India, Vs. The A.C.I.T., (Successor Of State Bank Of Patiala) Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D & The A.C.I.T., Vs. The State Bank Of India, Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D The State Bank Of India, Vs. The A.C.I.T., (Successor Of State Bank Of Patiala) Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D

For Appellant: Shri C. Naresh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Alok Kumar,CIT DR
Section 36(1)(viii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH ‘B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER The State Bank of India, Vs. The A.C.I.T., (Successor of State Bank of Patiala) Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. PAN: AACCS0143D & The A.C.I.T., Vs. The State Bank of India, Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. PAN: AACCS0143D The A.C.I.T., Vs. The State Bank of India, Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. PAN: AACCS0143D The State Bank of India, Vs. The A.C.I.T., (Successor of State Bank of Patiala) Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. PAN: AACCS0143D & The A.C.I.T.,…

ACIT, PATIALA vs. M/S THE STATE BANK OF PATIALA, PATIALA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 721/CHANDI/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Feb 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe State Bank Of India, Vs. The A.C.I.T., (Successor Of State Bank Of Patiala) Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D & The A.C.I.T., Vs. The State Bank Of India, Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D The A.C.I.T., Vs. The State Bank Of India, Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D The State Bank Of India, Vs. The A.C.I.T., (Successor Of State Bank Of Patiala) Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D & The A.C.I.T., Vs. The State Bank Of India, Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D The State Bank Of India, Vs. The A.C.I.T., (Successor Of State Bank Of Patiala) Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. Pan: Aaccs0143D

For Appellant: Shri C. Naresh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Alok Kumar,CIT DR
Section 36(1)(viii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH ‘B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER The State Bank of India, Vs. The A.C.I.T., (Successor of State Bank of Patiala) Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. PAN: AACCS0143D & The A.C.I.T., Vs. The State Bank of India, Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. PAN: AACCS0143D The A.C.I.T., Vs. The State Bank of India, Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. PAN: AACCS0143D The State Bank of India, Vs. The A.C.I.T., (Successor of State Bank of Patiala) Circle Patiala, The Mall, Patiala. PAN: AACCS0143D & The A.C.I.T.,…

ACIT 3(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. EDELWEISS TRADING & HOLDINGS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 4259/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4259/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit-3(1)(2) बिधम/ M/S. Edelweiss Trading & Room No. 607, 6Th Floor, Holding Ltd. (Formerly Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Edelweiss Commodities 400020 Ltd.) 1, Edelweiss House, Off, Cst Road, Kalina, Santacruz (E) Mumbai- 400098 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce3819M (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Saurabh Deshpande (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Rajan Vora सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26.10.2017 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17. 01.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 16.03.2016 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 8, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2011- 12. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:- “1. "On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit{A) Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.12,74,59,362/- Made By Assessing Officer On Account Of Mark To Market Loss A.Y.2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rajan VoraFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande (DR)
Section 10(34)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…xpenditure which is assumed to have been incurred for the purpose of earning the tax free income. • B.S.E.S, Ltd. v. DCIT (Mum.), wherein the Hon'ble Members following the Special Bench decision in Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. v. DCIT, 102 ITD 1, held that when the AO has not placed any material on record to controvert the contention of the assessee that no .expenditure has been incurred for earning the exempt income, there is no justification to disallow proportionate business expenses on estimate basis. 6 A.Y.2011-12 • CIT vs. M/s. Hero Cycles Ltd. 323 ITR 518 wherein Hon'ble Punjab &…

VIJAYA BANK ,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LARGE TAX PAYER UNIT , BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 is dismissed

ITA 915/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Pramod Kumar Singh, JCIT (D.R)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

…r. It is submitted that this issue has been settled in favour of the assessee by the following judicial pronouncements :- i. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation (2010) 323 ITR 495 (P & H) ii. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation (2006) 102 ITD 1 (VHD) (SB) iii. Corporation Bank in ITA No.1352/Bang/2013 dt.11.3.2015 for Assessment Year 2011-12. 8.2.2 The learned Authorised Representative further submitted that for Assessment Year 2011-12 on the same issue, the learned CIT (Appeals) had upheld the assessee's claim following the decision of the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case o…

GE CAPITAL SERVICES INDIA vs. ADDL CIT RANGE 2,

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and Revenue are partly allowed for

ITA 2898/DEL/2007[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2016AY 2000-2001

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.L.P.Sahu

Section 14ASection 234DSection 45J

…the expenditure which the AO seeks to disallow u/s 14A should be actually incurred and so incurred with a view to producing non taxable income". Similar view in the context of section 80M is available in the case of Punjab State Industrial Corp. Ltd. Vs DCIT 102 ITD 1 (Chd.)(SB). I agree with the views of the appellant that since the dividend received during the year under appeal related to investment of A. Y. 94-95 to 97-98, the AO was not right in deciphering the source of all investments (including the investment for A.Y. 94-95 to 97-98) with reference to the availability of own funds and borrowed funds as on…

DCIT CIRCLE 12 (1) vs. G.E. CAPITAL SERVICES INDIA,

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and Revenue are partly allowed for

ITA 2808/DEL/2007[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2016AY 2001-2002

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.L.P.Sahu

Section 14ASection 234DSection 45J

…the expenditure which the AO seeks to disallow u/s 14A should be actually incurred and so incurred with a view to producing non taxable income". Similar view in the context of section 80M is available in the case of Punjab State Industrial Corp. Ltd. Vs DCIT 102 ITD 1 (Chd.)(SB). I agree with the views of the appellant that since the dividend received during the year under appeal related to investment of A. Y. 94-95 to 97-98, the AO was not right in deciphering the source of all investments (including the investment for A.Y. 94-95 to 97-98) with reference to the availability of own funds and borrowed funds as on…

DCIT, CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. NEWDEAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1558/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Mar 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2007-08

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…g of the aforesaid Section, it is clear that no deduction is disallowable in respect of expenditure incurred by the assessee for earning exempt income. In this regard, a Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Punjab State Industrial Corporation v. DCIT 102 ITD 1 (SB) held that no disallowance can be made in this regard on estimate basis. In our opinion, this ratio is very much applicable in this case also. In view of the above decision of the Special Bench, the decision of ITAT Chennai relied upon by the Ld. CIT(A) will not be applicable. Both the counsels fairly agreed that they will not have any objectio…

VIJAYA BANK,BANGALORE vs. ADDL.C.I.T., BANGALORE

In the result the appeal by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 653/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Feb 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri S.Ananthan and Smt.Lalitha Rameswaran, CAsFor Respondent: Shri O.P.Yadav, CIT-III (DR)
Section 36(1)(viia)

…ecision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation 323 ITR 495 ( Pun.& Har.) and the Special Bench ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. 102 ITD 1 ITA Nos. 578 & 653/Bang/2012 Page 14 of 49 (Chd.)(SB). In the aforesaid decisions the Assessee claimed deduction u/s.36(1)(viii) of the Act in respect of special reserve created and maintained by a specified entity, an amount not exceeding twenty per cent of the profits derived from eligible business computed under the head "Profits and gains of…

JCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S VIJAYA BANK, BANGALORE

In the result the appeal by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 578/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Feb 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri S.Ananthan and Smt.Lalitha Rameswaran, CAsFor Respondent: Shri O.P.Yadav, CIT-III (DR)
Section 36(1)(viia)

…ecision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation 323 ITR 495 ( Pun.& Har.) and the Special Bench ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. 102 ITD 1 ITA Nos. 578 & 653/Bang/2012 Page 14 of 49 (Chd.)(SB). In the aforesaid decisions the Assessee claimed deduction u/s.36(1)(viii) of the Act in respect of special reserve created and maintained by a specified entity, an amount not exceeding twenty per cent of the profits derived from eligible business computed under the head "Profits and gains of…