Maral Overseas Ltd. v. ACIT

136 ITD 177Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2012#3546 most cited
34

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also reported as

16 ITR 565

Sections most often in play

Section 10BSection 115JBSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 234CSection 234DSection 43B

Issues it is cited on

section 108perquisite valueconvertible foreign exchangeactual payment basisinterest u/s 234cinterest under section 234csection 10bsection 234dsection 80hhcsection 80hhcomputer softwaresection 80ib

Judgments citing Maral Overseas Ltd. v. ACIT

HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 5465/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2026AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 10ASection 143Section 144Section 144C(13)

…although it did not partake the character of profit and gains from the sale of an ar"cle, “it is income which is derived from the considera"on realized by export of ar"cles.” The Special bench of the Tribunal in the case of Maral Overseas Ltd vs ACIT: [2012] 136 ITD 177 (Indore Trib.) (SB) on the interpreta"on of sec"on 10B(4) of the Act [pari materia to sub-sec"on (7) of sec"on 10AA] held that sub-sec"on (4) of sec"on 10B does not require an assessee to establish a direct nexus with the business of the undertaking and once an income forms part of the of the business of the undertaking, the same would be include…

HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 5624/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 10ASection 143Section 144Section 144C(13)

…although it did not partake the character of profit and gains from the sale of an ar"cle, “it is income which is derived from the considera"on realized by export of ar"cles.” The Special bench of the Tribunal in the case of Maral Overseas Ltd vs ACIT: [2012] 136 ITD 177 (Indore Trib.) (SB) on the interpreta"on of sec"on 10B(4) of the Act [pari materia to sub-sec"on (7) of sec"on 10AA] held that sub-sec"on (4) of sec"on 10B does not require an assessee to establish a direct nexus with the business of the undertaking and once an income forms part of the of the business of the undertaking, the same would be include…

DCIT-4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. MARAL OVERSEAS LTD, KHARGONE

In the result appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 571/IND/2025[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Feb 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshidcit-4(1), Indore Maral Overseas Ltd., बनाम/ Maral Sarovar, V& Po Vs. Khalbujurg, Kasrawad, Khargone, Bhopal

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 36Section 40A(7)Section 40A(7)(b)Section 40A(9)

…B in respect ,645/- Para 6 to considered as separate industrial undertaking. The issue of unit IV. Finding: 6.5 raised by the AO in AY 2001-02 and 2002-03 was finally page 6 to decided by Hon’ble Special Bench of ITAT vide order 7 dated 28/03/2012 reported in 136 ITD 177 (Indore Page 10 of 20 Maral Overseas Ltd. ITA No. 571/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2006-07 Special bench) wherein the claim of exemption in respect of Unit III and Unit IV was allowed. The order of Hon’ble Special bench of ITAT has attained finality as the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed by High Court on account of low tax effect. The CIT(A) a…

JINDAL SAW LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-13(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 504/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Dcit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) New Delhi-110015. (Earlier Addl.Cit Range-4), Pan-Aabcs7280C C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002. Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Dcit, Vs Jindal Saw Ltd. Circle-13(2), (Formerly Known As M/S. Saw Pipes Room No.316A, Ltd.), 28, Najafgarh Road, C.R.Building, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Jindal Saw Ltd., Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Shivaji Marg, Circle-13(2), New Delhi-110015. New Delhi. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) P.O.Ramesh Nagar, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi-110002. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 43B

…on of the order of AO. ITA Nos.826 & 1000/Del/2016, 4693 & 4760/Del/2019 & 504/Del/2022 49. On the other hand, Ld.AR for the assessee supported the order of Ld.CIT(A) and the submissions that Special Bench of ITAT in case of Maral Overseas Ltd. vs ACIT [2012] 16 ITR 565 (Indore-Trib.) [SB] after considering the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India vs CIT [2009] 317 ITR 218 (SC) has held that “there is a distinction between the provision of section 10A & 10B vis-a-vis section 80IA & 80IB & 80HH of the Act inasmuch as wherein for the purpose of computing deduction u/s 10A & 10B, entire bus…

DCIT CIRCLE-13(2), NEW DELHI vs. JINDAL SAW LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 4760/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Dcit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) New Delhi-110015. (Earlier Addl.Cit Range-4), Pan-Aabcs7280C C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002. Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Dcit, Vs Jindal Saw Ltd. Circle-13(2), (Formerly Known As M/S. Saw Pipes Room No.316A, Ltd.), 28, Najafgarh Road, C.R.Building, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Jindal Saw Ltd., Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Shivaji Marg, Circle-13(2), New Delhi-110015. New Delhi. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) P.O.Ramesh Nagar, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi-110002. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 43B

…on of the order of AO. ITA Nos.826 & 1000/Del/2016, 4693 & 4760/Del/2019 & 504/Del/2022 49. On the other hand, Ld.AR for the assessee supported the order of Ld.CIT(A) and the submissions that Special Bench of ITAT in case of Maral Overseas Ltd. vs ACIT [2012] 16 ITR 565 (Indore-Trib.) [SB] after considering the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India vs CIT [2009] 317 ITR 218 (SC) has held that “there is a distinction between the provision of section 10A & 10B vis-a-vis section 80IA & 80IB & 80HH of the Act inasmuch as wherein for the purpose of computing deduction u/s 10A & 10B, entire bus…

JINDAL SAW LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-13(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 4693/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Dcit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) New Delhi-110015. (Earlier Addl.Cit Range-4), Pan-Aabcs7280C C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002. Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Dcit, Vs Jindal Saw Ltd. Circle-13(2), (Formerly Known As M/S. Saw Pipes Room No.316A, Ltd.), 28, Najafgarh Road, C.R.Building, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Jindal Saw Ltd., Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Shivaji Marg, Circle-13(2), New Delhi-110015. New Delhi. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) P.O.Ramesh Nagar, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi-110002. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 43B

…on of the order of AO. ITA Nos.826 & 1000/Del/2016, 4693 & 4760/Del/2019 & 504/Del/2022 49. On the other hand, Ld.AR for the assessee supported the order of Ld.CIT(A) and the submissions that Special Bench of ITAT in case of Maral Overseas Ltd. vs ACIT [2012] 16 ITR 565 (Indore-Trib.) [SB] after considering the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India vs CIT [2009] 317 ITR 218 (SC) has held that “there is a distinction between the provision of section 10A & 10B vis-a-vis section 80IA & 80IB & 80HH of the Act inasmuch as wherein for the purpose of computing deduction u/s 10A & 10B, entire bus…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. HSBC ELECTRONIC DATA PROCESSING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, , HYDERABAD

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

ITA 1632/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, C.AFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 115Section 115JSection 251(1)(a)Section 37(1)Section 41(1)

…a direct result of export but from the Bank Deposits etc., and is therefore eligible for 100% deduction." 34. In this regard, the Appellant wishes to place reliance on the decision of Special Bench of Hon'ble Tribunal in case of Maral Overseas Limited [2012] 136 ITD 177 (Indore - Trib.) (SB) (Refer page 699 to 728 of Legal Paper Book) wherein it has been held that the word "derived by an undertaking of the business" in Section 10A and 10B are far wider to include ancillary income as well within its ambit. The relevant findings of the Hon'ble Special Bench is as under: "It is clear from the plain reading of secti…

THE ACIT, CIRCLE 2,, BHARUCH vs. M/S. JAYSHREE AROMATICS PVT. LTD.,, BHARUCH

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

ITA 2277/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) The Assistant Commissioner Jayshree Aromatics Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, Plot No.4703, 4704, 4705/1-4, Vs Circle-2, Bharuch. Gidc Estate, Ankleshwar, Dist. Bharch – 393002. Pan: Aabcj 8258 R Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 254(1)

…reased. The ld.AR for the assessee also relied on the CBDT Circular No.1/2013. To support his submission, the ld.AR of the assessee relied upon the following decisions: i. Patni Computer System Ltd Vs. DCIT – 135ITD 398 (Pune) ii. Maral Overseas Ltd Vs ACIT – 136 ITD 177 (Indore SB) iii. Jayant Agro Organics Ltd, Vs JCIT – ITA No.5439/Mum/2001 iv. Birlasoft (India) Ltd vs. DCIT – (2015) 152 ITD 677 (Del) 10 Jayshree Aromatics Pvt. Ltd., Bharuch v. ITO(OSC) vs. DSM Soft (P) Ltd – 115 TTJ 469 (Chennai) 7. The ld.AR of the assessee further submits that in a various decisions, the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the Hon’bl…

M/S. KIRI DYES AND CHEMICALS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1849/AHD/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri T.P. Hemani, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parimal Sinh Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, C.I.T.D.R with Shri Raj Deep Singh, Sr.D.R
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 234ASection 80I

…income are business income of the assessee which was duly recorded in the books of account and offered to tax as business income of the eligible undertaking. Accordingly in view of the decision of Special Bench of ITAT in case of Maral Overseas Ltd. vs. ACIT, 136 ITD 177 every income forming part of the business income will be eligible for deduction under section 10B as per the ratio provided therein. 7. However, the learned CIT (A) with respect to the income shown by the assessee for DEPB, duty drawback and DEPB rate difference aggregating to Rs. 2,49,32,201/- held that the above income has already been decided…

THE DCIT,(OSD)-1, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. MIDVALLEY HEALTHCARE SERVICES PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the CO of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 204/AHD/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Mar 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Respondent: Shri Virendra Ojha, CIT. D.R
Section 10BSection 80ISection 92C

…may ultimately ITA No.204/Ahd/2013 with C.O.No.45/Ahd/2015 and 7 others A.Y. 2008-09 27 be referable. The decision relied upon by the appellant i.e. Kadam Exports Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO bearing ITA No.2890/A/2011 of Ahmedabad Tribunal and Maral Overseas vs. ACIT 136 ITD 177 of Indore Tribunal relate to the exemption u/s 10B on export incentives. These decisions are not in respect of interest income and hence the facts of the case of the appellant are j distinguishable. 9.2.2 There are various decisions of Hon'ble Apex Court wherein it has been held that the interest earned on Fixed deposits is not income derived fro…

UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INFORMATION SERVICES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 9, NEW DELHI

ITA 6665/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anupham Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 154Section 254Section 92C

…f 2014 (CIT v. XLNC Fashions). While declining to frame a question of law in the Revenue's appeal, this Court inHritnik Exports (P.) Ltd. (supra) quoted with approval the observations of the Special Bench of the ITAT in Maral Overseas Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [2012] 136 ITD 177/20 taxmann.com 346 (Indore) on the interpretation of Section 10B(4) of the Act as under: '79. Thus, sub-section (4) of section 10B stipulated that deduction under that section shall be computed by apportioning the profits of the business of the undertaking in the ratio of turnover to the total turnover. Thus, not- withstanding the fact that sub-…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1)(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S EYGBS INDIA PVT LTD , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2984/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri G Manjunathaassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), BengaluruFor Respondent: Shri Rajan Vora, Sr. Counsel
Section 10ASection 2(24)Section 92Section 92CSection 92C(4)

…s well within its ambit:- • Hewlett Packard Global Soft Ltd. [2018] 403 ITR 453 (Karnataka) (FB); • Motorola India Electronics (P.) Ltd. [2014] 265 CTR 94 (Karnataka) • Riviera Home Furnishing [2016] 65 taxmann.com 287 (Delhi) • Maral Overseas Limited [2012] 136 ITD 177 (Indore - Trib.) (SB) • Hrithik Exports (P.) Ltd. [IT Appeal No. 219 of 2014, dated 13.11.2014 • Mercer Consulting (India) (P.) Ltd. [2014] 150 ITD 1'(Delhi Trib.) 16. We therefor hold that income offered to tax pursuant to voluntary Transfer Pricing adjustment should be regarded as profits of business for the purpose of computing deduction u/s.…

UNITED HEALTH GROUP INFORMATION SERVICES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 473/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Amit Shuklaassessment Year: 2011-12 Optum Global Solutions (India) Vs Dcit, Private Limited Circle-27(1), (Formerly Known As United Health Cr Building, Group Information Services Pvt. New Delhi. Ltd.), 11Th Floor, Tower A, Dlf Towers Jasola, Jasola District Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aadca6769Q Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit, Vs Optum Global Solutions (India) Circle-27(1), Private Limited Cr Building, (Formerly Known As United Health New Delhi Group Information Services Pvt. Ltd.), 11Th Floor, Tower A, Dlf Towers Jasola, Jasola District Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aadca6769Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nageshwar Rao & Shri S. Chakraborty, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Anupam Kant Garg, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.06.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.08.2020

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao &For Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT, DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C

…f 2014 (CIT v. XLNC Fashions). While declining to frame a question of law in the Revenue's appeal, this Court inHritnik Exports (P.) Ltd. (supra) quoted with approval the observations of the Special Bench of the ITAT in Maral Overseas Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [2012] 136 ITD 177/20 taxmann.com 346 (Indore) on the interpretation of Section 10B(4) of the Act as under: '79. Thus, sub-section (4) of section 10B stipulated that deduction under that section shall be computed by apportioning the profits of the business of the undertaking in the ratio of turnover to the total turnover. Thus, not- withstanding the fact that sub-s…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S UNITED HEALTH GROUP INFORMATION SERVICES PVT. LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 193/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Amit Shuklaassessment Year: 2011-12 Optum Global Solutions (India) Vs Dcit, Private Limited Circle-27(1), (Formerly Known As United Health Cr Building, Group Information Services Pvt. New Delhi. Ltd.), 11Th Floor, Tower A, Dlf Towers Jasola, Jasola District Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aadca6769Q Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit, Vs Optum Global Solutions (India) Circle-27(1), Private Limited Cr Building, (Formerly Known As United Health New Delhi Group Information Services Pvt. Ltd.), 11Th Floor, Tower A, Dlf Towers Jasola, Jasola District Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aadca6769Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nageshwar Rao & Shri S. Chakraborty, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Anupam Kant Garg, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.06.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.08.2020

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao &For Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT, DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C

…f 2014 (CIT v. XLNC Fashions). While declining to frame a question of law in the Revenue's appeal, this Court inHritnik Exports (P.) Ltd. (supra) quoted with approval the observations of the Special Bench of the ITAT in Maral Overseas Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [2012] 136 ITD 177/20 taxmann.com 346 (Indore) on the interpretation of Section 10B(4) of the Act as under: '79. Thus, sub-section (4) of section 10B stipulated that deduction under that section shall be computed by apportioning the profits of the business of the undertaking in the ratio of turnover to the total turnover. Thus, not- withstanding the fact that sub-s…

EMERSON ELECTRIC COMPANY ( INDIA) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 372/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm M/S. Emerson Electric Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Company (India) Private Income Tax Circle – 3(1) Limited Aayakar Bhavan 301, Solitaire Corporate Park M.K.Road, 151, M.V.Road Mumbai – 400 020 Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400 093

Section 10ASection 143(3)

…s or things or computer software bears to the total turnover of the business carried on by the undertaking.” 12.2. We also find that the reliance placed on the Special Bench of Indore Tribunal in the case of Maral Overseas Ltd. vs. Additional CIT reported in 136 ITD 177 (Indore Tribunal) also supports the case of the assessee in this regard. Accordingly, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) in granting relief to the assessee. Accordingly, the ground No.5 raised by the revenue is dismissed. 13. In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical…

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. YAMAI FASHION PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed as involving lower than the prescribed tax effect of ₹20 lac therefore

ITA 1831/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 10Section 108Section 10BSection 10B(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 801BSection 80HSection 80l

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member and Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member ITA No.61/Kol/2016, 1830- 1831/Kol/2018 Assessment Year :2011-12 DCIT, Circle-10(2), V/s. M/s Yamai Fashion Pvt. P-7, Chowringhee Ltd., 6, Dover Lane, Square, 3rd Floor, Kolkat-29 Kolkata-69 [PAN No.AAACT 9526 F] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Dilip S Damle, FCA आवेदक क" ओर से/By Assessee Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT-SR-DR राज"व क" ओर से/By Revenue 15-11-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 30-11-2018 घोषणा क" त…

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. YAMAI FASHION PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed as involving lower than the prescribed tax effect of ₹20 lac therefore

ITA 1830/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 10Section 108Section 10BSection 10B(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 801BSection 80HSection 80l

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member and Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member ITA No.61/Kol/2016, 1830- 1831/Kol/2018 Assessment Year :2011-12 DCIT, Circle-10(2), V/s. M/s Yamai Fashion Pvt. P-7, Chowringhee Ltd., 6, Dover Lane, Square, 3rd Floor, Kolkat-29 Kolkata-69 [PAN No.AAACT 9526 F] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Dilip S Damle, FCA आवेदक क" ओर से/By Assessee Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT-SR-DR राज"व क" ओर से/By Revenue 15-11-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 30-11-2018 घोषणा क" त…

DCIT, CIR-10(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S YAMAI FASHION PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

Appeals are dismissed as involving lower than the prescribed tax effect of ₹20 lac therefore

ITA 61/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 10Section 108Section 10BSection 10B(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 801BSection 80HSection 80l

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member and Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member ITA No.61/Kol/2016, 1830- 1831/Kol/2018 Assessment Year :2011-12 DCIT, Circle-10(2), V/s. M/s Yamai Fashion Pvt. P-7, Chowringhee Ltd., 6, Dover Lane, Square, 3rd Floor, Kolkat-29 Kolkata-69 [PAN No.AAACT 9526 F] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Dilip S Damle, FCA आवेदक क" ओर से/By Assessee Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT-SR-DR राज"व क" ओर से/By Revenue 15-11-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 30-11-2018 घोषणा क" त…

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GE MEDICAL SYSTEMS INDIA PVT.LTD

ITA/78/2016HC Karnataka25 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 10ASection 10A(3)Section 260

…as the Tribunal, in the case of GE BE Pvt. Ltd., in ITA No.815/Bang/2010 dated 06/12/2013 for the assessment year has considered the issue by following the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal, Indore in the case of Maral Overseas Ltd. vs. ACIT (136 ITD 177)(SB)(Indore) to hold that the claim of the assessee that profits from trading activity of the spare parts is also to be considered for the purpose of deduction u/s 10B of the Act should be accepted. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India…

DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, (OSD),RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

ITA 3086/AHD/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Maurya, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

…e eligible profit for deduction under section 10B. The ld.counsel for the assessee at the very outset submitted that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the order of Special Bench of the ITAT in the case of Maral Overseas Ltd. Vs. CIT, 136 ITD 177. He further contended that ITAT, Ahmedabad has followed this decision in the case of Sonic Technology P.Ltd. rendered in ITA NO.2665 & 2720/Ahd/2011. On the other hand, the ld.DR relied upon the orders of the ld.CIT(A). 54. We have duly considered rival submissions and gone through the record. We find that Special Bench of ITAT in the case of Ma…

Showing 1–20 of 34 · Page 1 of 2