National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. v. CIT

357 ITR 253High Court2013#8823 most cited
13

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 119Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 246a(1)(a)section 80ia(4)(i)section 2(45)initial assessment yearsection 43(1)section 80ia(4)ddtinfrastructure facilitydeduction under section 80iadividend distribution taxput to usesection 36(1)(vii)

Judgments citing National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. v. CIT

SHILPI SARDANA,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 31, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1425/DEL/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1425/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 बनाम Shilpi Sardana, Deputy Commissioner Of B-99, Swastya Vihar, Vs. Income Tax, Lakshmi Nagar, Central Circle-31, S.O. East Delhi. Room No.343, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn., Pan No.Bwups9736E Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…has been accepted by various courts. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following judgments: — Jute Corporation of India Ltd v CIT [(1991) 187 ITR 688 (SC)] — National Thermal Power Co Ltd v CIT [(1998) 229 ITR 393 (SC)] — Maruti Udyog Limited v CIT [252 ITR 482 (Delhi)] In the interest of justice, the Appellant prays that this Hon’ble ITAT may be pleased to admit and adjudicate the above-stated additional ground of appeal for which it shall remain most grateful.” 3. Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submits that additional ground of appeal filed by the assessee is a legal ground going to th…

M/S POORNACHAND AGRAWAL, BILASPUR,BILASPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

ITA 104/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 104/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Pooranchand Agrawal C/O. Bagadia Enterprises, Near Shiv Talkies, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495001 Pan : Aaifp8483G

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

…order to fortify his aforesaid contention, had relied on the judgments of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of (i). CIT Vs. Refrigeration & Allied Industries Ltd., (2001) 247 ITR 12 (Del); (ii) National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. Vs. CIT, (2013) 357 ITR 253 (Delhi) and (iii). CIT Vs. Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. (2012) 341 ITR 467 (Del.). 13. We have given thoughtful consideration to the contention of the assessee and are unable to persuade ourselves to concur with the same. In our considered view, the Ld. AR had misconceived the term “passive use of the asset,” which had been looked into by the Hon’ble H…

SAMBHAV ENERGY LIMITED ,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 258/JODH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosain

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 257 & 258/Jodh/2019 (ASSESSMENT YEARS- 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s Sambhav Energy Vs ACIT, Limited Central Circle-01, 5, 1st Floor, Damodaran Jodhpur Street, Kellys, Chennai (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN NO. AAJCS 8821 R Assessee By Sh. Amit Kothari (CA) Revenue By Smt. Alka Rajvanshi Jain, CIT-DR Date of hearing 01/11/2022 Date of 02/11/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R PER: B.R. BASKARAN, AM Both the appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the orders dated…

SAMBHAV ENERGY LIMITED ,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 257/JODH/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosain

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 257 & 258/Jodh/2019 (ASSESSMENT YEARS- 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s Sambhav Energy Vs ACIT, Limited Central Circle-01, 5, 1st Floor, Damodaran Jodhpur Street, Kellys, Chennai (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN NO. AAJCS 8821 R Assessee By Sh. Amit Kothari (CA) Revenue By Smt. Alka Rajvanshi Jain, CIT-DR Date of hearing 01/11/2022 Date of 02/11/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R PER: B.R. BASKARAN, AM Both the appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the orders dated…

INDIANOIL SKYTANKING PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 407/BANG/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)Section 80Section 80I

…rely a legal ground on the facts already on record of the department and requires no fresh investigation into facts. Reliance is placed on the following case laws:- • National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. v. CIT, 229 ITR 383 (SC) • Maruti Udyog Ltd. v. CIT, 252 ITR 482 (Del) ITA Nos.583/Bang/2019, 299 & 407/Bang/2020 Page 5 of 43 5. It is prayed that the additional ground ought to be admitted in light of the precedents cited above. 6. In this additional ground, the assessee has raised a legal issue contending that DDT liability on the dividend amount paid to its AE in Germany should be restricted to the rate…

M/S. INDIANOIL SKYTAKING PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 299/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)Section 80Section 80I

…rely a legal ground on the facts already on record of the department and requires no fresh investigation into facts. Reliance is placed on the following case laws:- • National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. v. CIT, 229 ITR 383 (SC) • Maruti Udyog Ltd. v. CIT, 252 ITR 482 (Del) ITA Nos.583/Bang/2019, 299 & 407/Bang/2020 Page 5 of 43 5. It is prayed that the additional ground ought to be admitted in light of the precedents cited above. 6. In this additional ground, the assessee has raised a legal issue contending that DDT liability on the dividend amount paid to its AE in Germany should be restricted to the rate…

M/S INDIANOIL SKYTANKING PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 583/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)Section 80Section 80I

…rely a legal ground on the facts already on record of the department and requires no fresh investigation into facts. Reliance is placed on the following case laws:- • National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. v. CIT, 229 ITR 383 (SC) • Maruti Udyog Ltd. v. CIT, 252 ITR 482 (Del) ITA Nos.583/Bang/2019, 299 & 407/Bang/2020 Page 5 of 43 5. It is prayed that the additional ground ought to be admitted in light of the precedents cited above. 6. In this additional ground, the assessee has raised a legal issue contending that DDT liability on the dividend amount paid to its AE in Germany should be restricted to the rate…

GARG ACRYLIC LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6965/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Gurmil Singh, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 32

…me Tax Rules. In support, he has strongly placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Stitchwell Qualitex (RF) vs. ITO & Another as reported in 2015 (9) TMI 850 and National Thermal Power Corporation vs. CIT reported in (2013) 357 ITR 253 (Del), wherein the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court has held that the expression ‘used for the purpose of business’ in Section 32 of the Act is to be interpreted to include a case where the asset is kept ready for use even if actually it is not put in use. This factum of installation and commissioning was specifically contended by the Assessing…

M/S.MUTHOOTT MINI FINANCIERS P. LTD,KOZHENCHERRY vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2,, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 279/COCH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 14ASection 32

…s.277-279/Coch/2019 . (1) CIT vs. Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 314 (2) CIT (9)(1) Mumbai vs. Broskalis Dredging India (P) Ltd. (2012) (8) TM 11447-Mumbai ITAT. (3) National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT – Delhi High Court (2013) 357 ITR 253. (4) CIT vs. Geo Tech Construction Corporation (244 ITR 452 (Ker.) 10. In any case, in our view, the assessee has submitted the explanation that during the impugned year, all the floors were used for the purpose of the business of the assessee in one form or the other and therefore, the twin conditions for allowing depreciation, i..e, ownership…

M/S.MUTHOOTT MINI FINANCIERS P. LTD,KOZHENCHERRY vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2,, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 278/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 14ASection 32

…s.277-279/Coch/2019 . (1) CIT vs. Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 314 (2) CIT (9)(1) Mumbai vs. Broskalis Dredging India (P) Ltd. (2012) (8) TM 11447-Mumbai ITAT. (3) National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT – Delhi High Court (2013) 357 ITR 253. (4) CIT vs. Geo Tech Construction Corporation (244 ITR 452 (Ker.) 10. In any case, in our view, the assessee has submitted the explanation that during the impugned year, all the floors were used for the purpose of the business of the assessee in one form or the other and therefore, the twin conditions for allowing depreciation, i..e, ownership…

M/S.MUTHOOTT MINI FINANCIERS P. LTD,KOZHENCHERRY vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2,, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 277/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 14ASection 32

…s.277-279/Coch/2019 . (1) CIT vs. Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 314 (2) CIT (9)(1) Mumbai vs. Broskalis Dredging India (P) Ltd. (2012) (8) TM 11447-Mumbai ITAT. (3) National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT – Delhi High Court (2013) 357 ITR 253. (4) CIT vs. Geo Tech Construction Corporation (244 ITR 452 (Ker.) 10. In any case, in our view, the assessee has submitted the explanation that during the impugned year, all the floors were used for the purpose of the business of the assessee in one form or the other and therefore, the twin conditions for allowing depreciation, i..e, ownership…

MANSUKHBHAI DAYALBHAI PATEL,,SURAT vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-2,, SURAT

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

ITA 1780/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O. P. Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.1780/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Mansukhbhai Dayalbhai V. Assistant Commissioner Of Patel,(Sheta), Income Tax, Central 10 Shantiniketan Row House, Circle-2, Surat Anand Mahal Road Adajan, Surat. [Pan: Abcpp 1275 F] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca राज"व क" ओर से Revenue By Shri Sriniwas T. Bidari, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई क" तारीख Date Of Hearing 26.07.2019 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख Date Of 27.08.2019 Pronouncement

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153A

…ing reasons and against which M/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd. has again approached the High Court in its petition which ultimately dismissed by the Hon`ble High Court, Mansukhbhai D Patel v. ACIT-2, Surat /I.T.A. No.1780/AHD/2016/A.Y.2011-12 Page 5 of 21 reported at 252 ITR 482 (Delhi). Learned Counsel further submitted that requirement of filing of an affidavit under Rule 10 of the ITAT rules arise where the fact which cannot be borne out by or is contrary to the record as stated by the parties. In the present case, the issue is a legal, goes to the root of the matter and no further fact investigation is required for d…

STITCHWELL QUALITEX (RF) vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER & ANR

The appeal is allowed with no order as to

ITA/346/2002HC Delhi16 Sept 2015
Section 143Section 260Section 32

…. This Court has heard the submissions of Mr. S. Krishnan, learned counsel for the Appellant. None appears for the Revenue. 8. As noted by this Court in a recent decision in National Thermal Power Corporation Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2013) 357 ITR 253 (Del), two conditions are necessary to be fulfilled before an allowance by way of depreciation under Section 32 of the Act can be granted to the Assessee. The first is ownership of the asset and the second, the user of the assets for the purposes of the business. The Court on the facts of the said case rejected the stand of the Revenue that…