National Engg. Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax

236 ITR 577High Court1999#7066 most cited
16

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 250Section 263Section 37(1)

Issues it is cited on

buyback of shareswaiver of loansection 145(1)section 43asection 28(iv)section 145(2)section 35dsection 43(1)section 271(l)(c)written down valuesection 41(1)rule of consistency

Judgments citing National Engg. Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax

JCIT (OSD), CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, JAHANDEWALAN vs. AVANTHA REALTY LTD. (EARLIER KNOW AS JANPATH INVESTMENT HOLDING LTD.), DELHI

Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 566/KOL/2024[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2025AY 1999-00

Bench: Appropriate

Section 250Section 263

…bentures at the beginning of the period is answered by Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of National Engineering 4 Avantha Realty Ltd. (Earlier known as Janpath Investment Holding Ltd.) Industries... vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 3 September, 1998 (236 ITR 577 Cal). The relevant part of the decision is as under: 7. It was specifically observed by the Supreme Court that any other view of deduction, like taking the entire liability as amassed in the year of issue or in the year of redemption would give a distorted picture of the profits of that particular year of assessment. In saying this Supreme Court…

ACIT SPL. RANGE-2, NEW DELHI vs. CLETA REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

ITA 5312/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahaya & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: ShriLaxmi Narayan Aggarwal, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Ms.YagyaSainiKakkar, Ld. CIT/DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 250Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHAYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 ACIT, Special Range-2, VersuS Cleta Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. 296, Forest Lane Sainik Farms, New Delhi. . PAN: AAECC3876H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : ShriLaxmi Narayan Aggarwal, Ld. Adv. Respondent by : Ms.YagyaSainiKakkar, Ld. CIT/DR Date of hearing : 07/07/2022 Date of order : 28/07/2022 ORDER PER N.K. CHOUDHRY, J.M. This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 19.03.2019, impugned herein,…

63 MOONS TECHNOLOGIES LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) LTD.),MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENT. CIR. - 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 4775/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2021AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Chetan A.KariaFor Respondent: Shri Vatsalya Saxena
Section 14ASection 14A(1)Section 40Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Amarjit Singh (JM) ITA Nos.4775 & 4776/Mum/2016 (Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 10-11) 63 Moon Technologies Limited DCIT, CC-8(3) (formerly Financial Technologies Room No.659, Aaykar Bhawan (India) Limited) M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 021 FT Tower, CTS No.256-257, Vs. Suren Road, Chakala, Andheri(E) Mumbai-400 093 PAN/GIR No. AAACF5737C (Assessee) (Revenue) : Assessee by : Shri Chetan A.Karia Revenue by : Shri Vatsalya Saxena Date of Hearing : 27.09.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 16 .12.2021 O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya(A.M.).: The…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PARAMOUNT COMMUNICATION PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA No.767/Del/2014 is partly allowed,

ITA 2288/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

Section 43A

…e Investments of (India) Ltd.[2003] 261 ITR 753, held that pro-rata annual allocation of premium payable on redemption of debentures is allowable as revenue expenditure. The Calcutta High Court, in the case of National Engineering Industries Ltd. v. CIT[1999] 236 ITR 577, held as below: "9. In our case, we are concerned not with debentures issued at a discount from the face value but with debentures which carry a premium to be paid at the end of the entire period, if the debentures are held throughout. We do not see any distinction between a discount and a premium. The result in both is that something over and ab…

PARAMOUNT COMMUNICATIONS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA No.767/Del/2014 is partly allowed,

ITA 1378/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

Section 43A

…e Investments of (India) Ltd.[2003] 261 ITR 753, held that pro-rata annual allocation of premium payable on redemption of debentures is allowable as revenue expenditure. The Calcutta High Court, in the case of National Engineering Industries Ltd. v. CIT[1999] 236 ITR 577, held as below: "9. In our case, we are concerned not with debentures issued at a discount from the face value but with debentures which carry a premium to be paid at the end of the entire period, if the debentures are held throughout. We do not see any distinction between a discount and a premium. The result in both is that something over and ab…

M/S. PARAMOUNT COMMUNICTIONS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA No.767/Del/2014 is partly allowed,

ITA 767/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

Section 43A

…e Investments of (India) Ltd.[2003] 261 ITR 753, held that pro-rata annual allocation of premium payable on redemption of debentures is allowable as revenue expenditure. The Calcutta High Court, in the case of National Engineering Industries Ltd. v. CIT[1999] 236 ITR 577, held as below: "9. In our case, we are concerned not with debentures issued at a discount from the face value but with debentures which carry a premium to be paid at the end of the entire period, if the debentures are held throughout. We do not see any distinction between a discount and a premium. The result in both is that something over and ab…

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. JCT LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 84/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S. Godara]

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Shri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 84/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-11(1), Kolkata..............................................................................................Appellant Vs. M/s. JCT Limited.……………………………………………………………………………………..Respondent [PAN: AAACJ 6733 E] I.T.A. No. 2389/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. JCT Limited.………………………………………………………………………………………….Appellant [PAN: AAACJ 6733 E] Vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), Kolkata.........................................…

JCT LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2389/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S. Godara]

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Shri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 84/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-11(1), Kolkata..............................................................................................Appellant Vs. M/s. JCT Limited.……………………………………………………………………………………..Respondent [PAN: AAACJ 6733 E] I.T.A. No. 2389/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. JCT Limited.………………………………………………………………………………………….Appellant [PAN: AAACJ 6733 E] Vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), Kolkata.........................................…

M/S KANORIA CHEMICALS & INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 238/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Smt. Madhumita Roy]

Section 250

…d earlier, in our view, the liability is not a contingent liability. Deduction is liable on yearly basis as the liability accrues on time basis. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of National Engg. Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1999] 236 ITR 577 (Calcutta) is relied in this regard. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Industrial Investment Corpn. Ltd. (supra), laid down the principle that, deduction should be allowed on pro-rata basis over the terms of the bond. 14.1. Applying the propositions of law in these case-law to the facts of this case, we hold that the deduction in q…

DCIT, CIRCLE-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. KANORIA CHEMICALS & INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 2086/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Smt. Madhumita Roy]

Section 250

…d earlier, in our view, the liability is not a contingent liability. Deduction is liable on yearly basis as the liability accrues on time basis. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of National Engg. Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1999] 236 ITR 577 (Calcutta) is relied in this regard. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Industrial Investment Corpn. Ltd. (supra), laid down the principle that, deduction should be allowed on pro-rata basis over the terms of the bond. 14.1. Applying the propositions of law in these case-law to the facts of this case, we hold that the deduction in q…

M/S. KANORIA CHEMICALS & INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 1880/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Smt. Madhumita Roy]

Section 250

…d earlier, in our view, the liability is not a contingent liability. Deduction is liable on yearly basis as the liability accrues on time basis. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of National Engg. Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1999] 236 ITR 577 (Calcutta) is relied in this regard. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Industrial Investment Corpn. Ltd. (supra), laid down the principle that, deduction should be allowed on pro-rata basis over the terms of the bond. 14.1. Applying the propositions of law in these case-law to the facts of this case, we hold that the deduction in q…

DCIT, CIR-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. KANORIA CHEMICALS & INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 271/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Smt. Madhumita Roy]

Section 250

…d earlier, in our view, the liability is not a contingent liability. Deduction is liable on yearly basis as the liability accrues on time basis. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of National Engg. Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1999] 236 ITR 577 (Calcutta) is relied in this regard. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Industrial Investment Corpn. Ltd. (supra), laid down the principle that, deduction should be allowed on pro-rata basis over the terms of the bond. 14.1. Applying the propositions of law in these case-law to the facts of this case, we hold that the deduction in q…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SICAL LOGISTICS LTD., CHENNAI

ITA 1697/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Milind Madhukar, JCIT &For Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 10Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos. 1695, 1696 & 1697/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 & CO No.84/Mds/2014 (in ITA No.1697/Mds/2014) The Deputy Commissioner of M/s. Sical Logistics Ltd., Income-tax, v. South India House, Company Circle-V(1), 73, Armenian Street, Chennai – 34. Chennai – 600 001. PAN AAACS3789B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respo…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SICAL LOGISTICS LTD., CHENNAI

ITA 1696/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Milind Madhukar, JCIT &For Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 10Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos. 1695, 1696 & 1697/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 & CO No.84/Mds/2014 (in ITA No.1697/Mds/2014) The Deputy Commissioner of M/s. Sical Logistics Ltd., Income-tax, v. South India House, Company Circle-V(1), 73, Armenian Street, Chennai – 34. Chennai – 600 001. PAN AAACS3789B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respo…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SICAL LOGISTICS LTD., CHENNAI

ITA 1695/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Milind Madhukar, JCIT &For Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 10Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos. 1695, 1696 & 1697/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 & CO No.84/Mds/2014 (in ITA No.1697/Mds/2014) The Deputy Commissioner of M/s. Sical Logistics Ltd., Income-tax, v. South India House, Company Circle-V(1), 73, Armenian Street, Chennai – 34. Chennai – 600 001. PAN AAACS3789B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respo…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S OSWAL AGRO MILLS LTD.

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/158/2006HC Delhi27 Oct 2010

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT

…n which such liability was incurred. 7. Mr. Sawhney, learned counsel for the Revenue, referred to another decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of National Engineering Industries Ltd. v. ITA No.158/06 Page 6 of 6 Commissioner of Income-Tax, 236 ITR 577 wherein the Calcutta High Court has held that in view of the Apex Court‟s judgment in Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. (supra), judgment in Tungabharda Industries Ltd. (supra) is no longer a good law. With respect to Calcutta High Court, we are of the opinion that the two judgments operate in different fields and without apprec…