Mepco Industries Ltd. v. CIT

319 ITR 208Supreme Court of India2009#2316 most cited

What is Mepco Industries Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

A mistake rectifiable under Section 154 must be obvious and apparent from the record, not one that requires a long process of reasoning or constitutes a mere change of opinion.

50

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Mepco Industries Ltd. v. CIT · Section 154 · rectification of mistake · mistake apparent from record · change of opinion · obvious error · patent mistake · long drawn process of reasoning · 319 ITR 208

Also reported as

185 Taxmann 409

Sections most often in play

Section 154Section 250Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 10(20A)Section 11Section 13(3)Section 2(15)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 17(1)section 10(20a)section 4(2)section 10(20)section 58section 12aa(3)section 60section 116section 11(5)mistake apparent from recordsection 55section 13(3)

Judgments citing Mepco Industries Ltd. v. CIT

Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax(OSD), Central Cirlce-1(4), Hyderabad vs. Medha Servo Drives Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 655/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri V. Shiva KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “A”, HYDERABAD (Through Virtual Hearing) BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.654 & 655/Hyd/2018 AYs: 2013-14 and 2014-15 JCIC (OSD), VS. Medha Servo Drives Central Circle-1(4), Private Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN: AABCM 3917 A PAN: AABCM 3917 A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri V. Shiva Kumar Revenue by: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR C.O. No. 23/Hyd/2018 (A.Y.: 2014-15) (In ITA No.655/Hyd/2018) JCIC (OSD), VS. Medha Servo Drives Central Circle-1(4), Private Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. P…

Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax(OSD), Central Cirlce-1(4), Hyderabad vs. Medha Servo Drives Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 654/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri V. Shiva KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “A”, HYDERABAD (Through Virtual Hearing) BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.654 & 655/Hyd/2018 AYs: 2013-14 and 2014-15 JCIC (OSD), VS. Medha Servo Drives Central Circle-1(4), Private Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN: AABCM 3917 A PAN: AABCM 3917 A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri V. Shiva Kumar Revenue by: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR C.O. No. 23/Hyd/2018 (A.Y.: 2014-15) (In ITA No.655/Hyd/2018) JCIC (OSD), VS. Medha Servo Drives Central Circle-1(4), Private Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. P…

Bharatpur Royal Family Religious & Ceremonial Trust, Bharatpur vs. CIT(E), Jaipur

In the result, we upheld the order of the ld PCIT in exercise of his powers u/s 263 in setting aside the order so passed by the AO and the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 290/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Jul 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Rajendra Singh (CIT)
Section 10Section 12ASection 154Section 24Section 263Section 297

…atpur Vs. CIT(E), Jaipur exemption and such exemption is not allowed in computation of total income, such Act is a mistake apparent from the record and can be rectified u/s 154 of the Act. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of MEPCO Industries Ltd. Vs. CIT 319 ITR 208 (SC) had occasion to examine. The scope of the section 154 of the Act and following the earlier judgments of Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of Dena Metal Powder (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, Trade Tax [2008] 2 sec 439 and Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta [2003] 151 ECTM 81 held that under the facts of that case it was not open to AO recti…

Modern Papers, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 34(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 3931/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. S.S. Nagar, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. DR
Section 139(5)

…and (v) it was for running the business profitably. On appeal by the assessee, the High Court (333 ITR 335) reversed the lower authorities and held as follows: (i) The ratio of Sahney Steel 228 ITR 253 (SC), Ponni Sugars 306 ITR 392 (SC) and Mepco Industries 319 ITR 208 (SC) is that to determine whether incentives & subsidies are revenue or capital receipts, the purpose underlying the incentives is the determinative test. If the object of the subsidy scheme is to enable the assessee to run the business more profitably then the receipt is on revenue account. On the other hand, if the object of the subsidy scheme…

Income Tax Officer 1 (1), Indore vs. M/S Agya Auto Limited, Indore

In the result Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 540/IND/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Feb 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Agya Auto Ltd, The Income Tax Vs. 121 A.B. Road, Vijay Nagar, Officer 1(1), Indore Scheme No.54, Indore (Revenue ) (Respondent) Pan No.Aacca6203C Revenue By Smt. Vinita Dubey, Sr.Dr Respondent By S/Shri Manoj Gupta & Pankaj Shah, Cas Date Of Hearing 04.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2021 O R D E R

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/s. Agya Auto Ltd, The Income Tax Vs. 121 A.B. Road, Vijay Nagar, Officer 1(1), Indore Scheme No.54, Indore (Revenue ) (Respondent) PAN No.AACCA6203C Revenue by Smt. Vinita Dubey, Sr.DR Respondent by S/Shri Manoj Gupta & Pankaj Shah, CAs Date of Hearing 04.01.2021 Date of Pronouncement 09.02.2021 O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, AM. The above captioned appeal filed at the instance of revenue pertaining to Asse…

Luxora Infrastructure P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(3)2 (Restructured Designation Central Circle-2(1)), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4768/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 35D

…was Tribunal decision in the case of JCIT Vs. Srihind Steel Ltd. (supra) which supported the case of the assessee. Hence assessee’s claim cannot be labeled to be ex facie wrong. The Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Mepco Industries Ltd. Vs. CIT (319 ITR 208) supports this point. In that case Hon'ble Supreme Court has referred with approval the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court decision in the case of Jiyajeerao Cotton Mills Ltd. (310 ITR 710) that subsequent decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court did not obliterate the conflict of opinion prior to it. Hence, the assessee’s claim cannot be said to be not bonafi…

Tricom India Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 7444/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…tion it can be argued that assessee should have abided by Hon'ble Supreme Court decision, which is not in existence at that time. It is settled law that nobody can asked to do the impossible. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mepco Industries Ltd. Vs. CIT (319 ITR 208) has referred with approval the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Jiyajeerao Cotton Mills Ltd. (130 ITR 710) that subsequent decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court did not obliterate the conflict of opinion prior to it. In this view of the matter in our considered opinion the issue was debatable when the assessee filed its return of income. T…

M/S.Vellanad Service Co-Op Bank Ltd, Trivandrum vs. The ITO, Trivandrum

ITA 39/COCH/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 Mar 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K, Jm Asst.Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Mritunjaya Sharma, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

…Tea and Coffee Estates Co Ltd Vs ITAT(174 ITR 579) (Kerala)to invoke s.154 is not in order.The Commissioner (Appeals) should have appreciated that the decision in KilKotagiri (supra) has been distinguished by the Supreme Court in Mepco Industries Ltd Vs CIT (319 ITR 208) (SC) where it has been held that s.154 will be valid only in a case where there was mistake of law when the order sought to be rectified was originally passed. In the instant case there is no such mistake of law but only a review of the procedure in identifying a Primary Agricultural Credit Society. Rectification carried out by the Commissioner…

M/S.the Chombal Service Co-Op Bank Ltd, Kozhikkode vs. The ITO, WD-2(2), Kozhikkode

ITA 89/COCH/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: --- None ---For Respondent: Sri.Sudhanshu Shekhar Jha
Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

…. 250. 5) The rectification u/s 154 r.w.s. 250 by the Hon’ble CIT(Appeals) is not in consonance with the Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of T S Balaram ITO v. Volkat Brothers (1971) 82 ITR 50 (SC) and Mepco Industries Ltd. v. CIT and another (2009) 319 ITR 208 SC. 6) The decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in the case of Kilkothagiri Tea & Coffee Estate Co. Ltd., relied upon by the Hon’ble CIT (Appeals) is not applicable to your appellant’s case. 4 M/s.The Chombal SCB Ltd. 7) For the above and other grounds that may be submitted at the time of hearing it is prayed to the Honorable Tribunal to…

M/S Crystal Crop Protection Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1539/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1539/Del./2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 M/S Crystal Crop Protection (P) Ltd. Vs Dcit, Gi-17, G.T. Karnal Road, Azadpur, Circle-6(2) Delhi-110033 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcj3574E Assessee By : Sh. S. S. Nagar, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.12.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.12.2019

For Appellant: Sh. S. S. Nagar, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 2Section 254

…and (v) it was for running the business profitably. On appeal by the assessee, the High Court (333 ITR 335) reversed the lower authorities and held as follows: (i) The ratio of Sahney Steel 228 ITR 253 (SC), Ponni Sugars 306 ITR 392 (SC) and Mepco Industries 319 ITR 208 (SC) is that to determine whether incentives & subsidies are revenue or capital receipts, the purpose underlying the incentives is the determinative test. If the object of the subsidy scheme is to enable the assessee to run the business more profitably then the receipt is on revenue account. On the other hand, if the object of the subsidy scheme…

Income Tax Officer, Bangalore vs. Late Smt. Lakshmamma, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1696/BANG/2016[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Feb 2019AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Vp & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Respondent: Miss Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B”, BANGALORE Before Shri N.V.Vasudevan, VP & Shri B.R.Baskaran, AM ITA No.1693/Bang/2016 :Asst.Year2006-2007 ITA No.1694/Bang/2016 :Asst.Year2007-2008 The Income Tax Officer Late Sri.A.S.Narayana Raju Ward 6(3)(2) Vs. Represented by L/R Bangalore. Sri.S.N.Ravi Kumar No.401, Stanberry Court No.12, 60 Feet Road Sanjayanagar Bangalore – 560 094. PAN :ADPPN5795H. (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.1695/Bang/2016 :Asst.Year2006-2007 ITA No.1696/Bang/2016 :Asst.Year2007-2008 The Income Tax Officer Late Smt.Lakshmamma Ward 6(3)(2) Vs. Represented by L/R Bangalor…

Income Tax Officer, Bangalore vs. Late Smt. Lakshmamma, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1695/BANG/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Feb 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Vp & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Respondent: Miss Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B”, BANGALORE Before Shri N.V.Vasudevan, VP & Shri B.R.Baskaran, AM ITA No.1693/Bang/2016 :Asst.Year2006-2007 ITA No.1694/Bang/2016 :Asst.Year2007-2008 The Income Tax Officer Late Sri.A.S.Narayana Raju Ward 6(3)(2) Vs. Represented by L/R Bangalore. Sri.S.N.Ravi Kumar No.401, Stanberry Court No.12, 60 Feet Road Sanjayanagar Bangalore – 560 094. PAN :ADPPN5795H. (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.1695/Bang/2016 :Asst.Year2006-2007 ITA No.1696/Bang/2016 :Asst.Year2007-2008 The Income Tax Officer Late Smt.Lakshmamma Ward 6(3)(2) Vs. Represented by L/R Bangalor…

Income Tax Officer, Bangalore vs. Late Sri.A.S.Narayana Raju, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1694/BANG/2016[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Feb 2019AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Vp & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Respondent: Miss Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B”, BANGALORE Before Shri N.V.Vasudevan, VP & Shri B.R.Baskaran, AM ITA No.1693/Bang/2016 :Asst.Year2006-2007 ITA No.1694/Bang/2016 :Asst.Year2007-2008 The Income Tax Officer Late Sri.A.S.Narayana Raju Ward 6(3)(2) Vs. Represented by L/R Bangalore. Sri.S.N.Ravi Kumar No.401, Stanberry Court No.12, 60 Feet Road Sanjayanagar Bangalore – 560 094. PAN :ADPPN5795H. (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.1695/Bang/2016 :Asst.Year2006-2007 ITA No.1696/Bang/2016 :Asst.Year2007-2008 The Income Tax Officer Late Smt.Lakshmamma Ward 6(3)(2) Vs. Represented by L/R Bangalor…

Income Tax Officer, Bangalore vs. Late Sri.A.S.Narayana Raju, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1693/BANG/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Feb 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Vp & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Respondent: Miss Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B”, BANGALORE Before Shri N.V.Vasudevan, VP & Shri B.R.Baskaran, AM ITA No.1693/Bang/2016 :Asst.Year2006-2007 ITA No.1694/Bang/2016 :Asst.Year2007-2008 The Income Tax Officer Late Sri.A.S.Narayana Raju Ward 6(3)(2) Vs. Represented by L/R Bangalore. Sri.S.N.Ravi Kumar No.401, Stanberry Court No.12, 60 Feet Road Sanjayanagar Bangalore – 560 094. PAN :ADPPN5795H. (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.1695/Bang/2016 :Asst.Year2006-2007 ITA No.1696/Bang/2016 :Asst.Year2007-2008 The Income Tax Officer Late Smt.Lakshmamma Ward 6(3)(2) Vs. Represented by L/R Bangalor…

Spectrochem Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Pr.CIT-4, Mumbai

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

ITA 3930/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2018AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Mehulle V. ChoksiFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Singh,CIT D.R
Section 143(3)Section 263

…ssist the case of the assessee before us. We shall now advert to the reliance placed by the learned A.R. on the judgements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of DCIT vs. Simplex India Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 129 (SC) and Mapco Industries Ltd. vs. CIT (2009) 319 ITR 208 (SC), to canvas before us that a subsequent reversal of 8 M/s. Spectrochm P. Ltd. the legal position by a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court would not authorise the Department to rectify or reopen a concluded assessment which had been framed on the basis of extant law. In the backdrop of the aforesaid settled position of law it is the contenti…

M/S. A.P. Fashions Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-11(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2072/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. A.P. Fashions Pvt. Ltd....…..…….……………………..……………………………………………….…..Appellant 227, A.J.C. Bose Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Aacca 0846 K] Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(1), Kolkata...........................................................……………..Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. Jhajharia & Shri Sujoy Sen, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit, D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 18Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 27Th, 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 250

…ord. Rectification is not possible if the question is debatable. Moreover, the point which is not examined on fact or in law cannot be dealt with as mistake apparent on the record. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mepco Industries Ltd. vs. CIT (2009) 319 ITR 208 (SC), held that the right to rectify mistake apparent on record u/s 154 cannot be made on mere change of opinion. 6 Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/s. A.P. Fashions Pvt. Ltd 9. Applying the propositions of law laid down in these case laws to the facts of the case, we hold that the issue in question is a debatable issue and requires examination of la…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Atlas Copco (India) Ltd., Pune

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2286/PUN/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jan 2018AY 2005-06

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

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 154

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण “ए” न्यायऩीठ ऩुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE श्री डी. करुणाकरा राव, ऱेखा सदस्य, एवं श्री ववकास अवस्थी, न्याययक सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / ITA No. 2286/PUN/2014 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 8, Pune .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Atlas Copco (India) Ltd., Mumbai – Pune Road, Dapodi, Pune-411012 PAN : AAACA4074D ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue by : Shri Rajeev Kumar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 1…

DCIT Cir 4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Harinagar Sugar Mills P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA N0

ITA 5584/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Accountnat Member & Shri Pawan Singhdcit-4(2)(2), M/S Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd. Room No. 640, 6Th Floor, 207, Kalbadevi Road, Vs. Mumbai-400002 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan: Aaach2831H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Jayesh Desai (AR)
Section 253Section 254(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “H”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT-4(2)(2), M/s Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd. Room No. 640, 6th Floor, 207, Kalbadevi Road, Vs. Mumbai-400002 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACH2831H (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen : (DR) Assessee by : Shri Jayesh Desai (AR) Date of hearing : 18.09.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 18.09.2017 Order Under Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by Revenue under section 253 of the Income-tax…

DCIT, Circle-1(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Skj Coke Industries Limited, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 72/KOL/2015[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Aug 2017AY 2006-2007

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 80HSection 80I

…o adjustments were carried out in computing the deduction u/s. 80IC of the Act in the proceedings u/s. 154 of the Act dated 04.03.2013. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) by placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in MEPCO Industries Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 319 ITR 208 held that the issue of transport charges and the transport subsidy being eligible for deduction u/s. 80IC of the Act, is a debatable issue and hence, the same cannot be subject matter of rectification proceedings u/s. 154 of the Act. Aggrieved, the revenue preferred an appeal before us on the following ground: “1. On the facts and in the circum…

M/S the State Fisheries Development Corporation Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T Cir - 2, Kolkata.

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 165/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…not tenable. There is no straight jacket principle to distinguish a capital receipt from a revenue receipt. It depends on the facts and circumstances of each case. This view is supported by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mepco Industries 319 ITR 208 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble’ble Apex Court held that in each case one has to determine the nature of subsidy based on the its own facts. We find that in the instant case the Government being hundred percent shareholder of the assessee company has given grant in aid for holding the employment. The grant-in-aid was given specifically to the assessee c…