Madras Machine Tools Manufacturers Ltd. v. CIT

98 ITR 119High Court1975#4726 most cited

What is Madras Machine Tools Manufacturers Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

An 'undertaking' is distinct from the 'legal entity' that owns it, meaning tax benefits related to an undertaking must be assessed on a per-undertaking basis, not for the company in general, especially when a company operates multiple undertakings.

25

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Madras Machine Tools Manufacturers Ltd. v. CIT · 98 ITR 119 · undertaking vs company · section 84 · tax benefit · eligible undertaking · multiple undertakings · separate assessment

Sections most often in play

Section 10ASection 10A(2)Section 10A(2)(iii)Section 10BSection 10B(2)Section 10B(2)(iii)Section 115BBESection 133A

Issues it is cited on

section 32asection 80jsection 80ia(4)going concernsection 80ictax benefitsection 10bdeduction under section 80iaeligible businesssection 80hhsection 10asection 80ia

Judgments citing Madras Machine Tools Manufacturers Ltd. v. CIT

Saf Yeast Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai

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

ITA 1635/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: J.P. Bairagra, ARFor Respondent: B.C.S. Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…igure or a loss no deduction would be available to the assessee. 32. The AO also of the view that no “undertakings’ was set up and for this he relied on decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Madras Machine Tools Manufacturers Ltd vs CIT (1975) 98 ITR 119 for the meaning of the word undertaking. He further held that no separate undertaking was set up by the assessee for generation of power as: (a) Name in Form 10CCB was Saf Yeast Company Pvt Ltd which is the name of assessee company and it is engaged in production of yeast (b) Address mentioned is the same as that of assessee for producing yeast.…

Saf Yeast Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai

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

ITA 1634/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: J.P. Bairagra, ARFor Respondent: B.C.S. Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…igure or a loss no deduction would be available to the assessee. 32. The AO also of the view that no “undertakings’ was set up and for this he relied on decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Madras Machine Tools Manufacturers Ltd vs CIT (1975) 98 ITR 119 for the meaning of the word undertaking. He further held that no separate undertaking was set up by the assessee for generation of power as: (a) Name in Form 10CCB was Saf Yeast Company Pvt Ltd which is the name of assessee company and it is engaged in production of yeast (b) Address mentioned is the same as that of assessee for producing yeast.…

Cambridge Solutions Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1469/BANG/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Feb 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri. Vijay Pal Rao & Shri. S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. Chavali Narayan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. G. R. Reddy, CIT, DR-I
Section 10Section 10ASection 144C(5)

…ITA.1469/Bang/2010 Page - 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENGALURU BENCH 'A', BENGALURU BEFORE SHRI. VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A No.1469/Bang/2010 (Assessment Year : 2006-07) Xchanging Solutions Ltd, (Formerly Cambridge Solutions Ltd) Plot No.13, 14, 15, SJR iPark, EPIP Industrial Area, Phase-1, Whitefield, Bengaluru 560 066 .. Appellant PAN : AAFCS9303L v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -11(2), Bengaluru .. Respondent Assessee by : Shri. Chavali Narayan, CA Revenue by : Shri. G. R. Reddy, CIT, DR-I Heard on : 09.11.2017 Pronounced on…

Asst CIT Cir 1, Kalyan vs. Asb International P. Ltd, Ambernath

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 7034/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7034/Mum/2013 & 7035/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 & 2006-07) Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S Asb International बनाम/ Income Tax – Circle 1, Pvt. Ltd., V. Kalyan, E-9, Addl Ambernath Indl. 1St Floor,, Area, Mohan Plaza, Midc Anand Nagar, Wayale Nagar, Ambernath. Khadakpada, Kalyan. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan :Aaaca8424F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Girish Dave &For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Bora
Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 32(2)Section 72

…to be reopened is contrary to the plain language of section 10B." The aforesaid principle equally applies to a case falling under section 10A of the Act. 26. The Madras High Court in the case Madras Machine Tool Manufacturers Ltd. v. CIT reported in [1975] 98 ITR 119 (Mad) has explained the difference between a company and an undertaking which is owned or run by such company. It was held as under (page 127) : ITA 7034/Mum/2013 and 15 ITA 7035/Mum/2013 "A company may own or run many undertakings, some of which may be entitled to the benefit of section 84 and others may not be so entitled. It is not, therefo…

Sidwal Refrigeration Ind. Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-8(1)

ITA/1154/2009HC Delhi23 Dec 2009
Section 80I

…rom the following: “As regards the year of manufacture, on the question whether there can be an experimental period, a reference was made to the case of CIT v. Hindustan Antibiotics Limited, 93 ITR 548 and Madras Machine Tools Manufacturers Ltd. v. CIT, 98 ITR 119 in both of which it was held that manufacturing for the purpose of section 15C of the 1922 Act and section 84 of the 1961 Act was the date of "commercial" manufacture and the period during which experimental work, particularly manufacture, was effected had to be disregarded. It, therefore, appears that there is an authoritative view that s…