What is Nirma Industries Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

Interest received on delayed payments for sales is considered part of the sale proceeds and is eligible for deduction under Section 80-IA as business income.

How many judgments cite Nirma Industries Ltd. v. DCIT?

136 judgments on BharatTax cite Nirma Industries Ltd. v. DCIT (283 ITR 402), spanning 2009 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Nirma Industries Ltd. v. DCIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 154, Section 271(1)(c), Section 36(1)(iii), Section 43CA, Section 50C.

Nirma Industries Ltd. v. DCIT (283 ITR 402)

Gemstone Glass Pvt. Ltd., (Successor in Pino Bisaza Glass Pvt. Ltd.), Kadi vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 3631/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy1. It(Tp)A No.3533/Ahd/2015 - Ay 2010-11 2. It(Tp)A No.3631/Ahd/2015 - Ay 2011-12 3. It (Tp)A No.414/Ahd/2017 - Ay 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Suhail DuttFor Respondent: Ms. Vasundhara Upmanyu, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. IT(TP)A No.3533/Ahd/2015 - AY 2010-11 2. IT(TP)A No.3631/Ahd/2015 - AY 2011-12 3. IT (TP)A No.414/Ahd/2017 - AY 2012-13 Gemstone Glass Pvt.Ltd. Vs. The DCIT (successor in Pino Bisazza Circle-3(1)(1) Glass Pvt.Ltd.) Ahmedabad Plot No.12-E, GIDC Estate Gujarat Kadi [PAN No. AABCP 8041 Q) (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Suhail Dutt, Shri Pawan Agarwal & Shri Sanjay R. Shah, ARs Respondent by : Ms. Vasundhara Upmanyu, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 09/10/201…

Gemstone Glass Pvt. Ltd., (Successor in Pino Bisaza Glass Pvt. Ltd.), Kadi vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 3533/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy1. It(Tp)A No.3533/Ahd/2015 - Ay 2010-11 2. It(Tp)A No.3631/Ahd/2015 - Ay 2011-12 3. It (Tp)A No.414/Ahd/2017 - Ay 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Suhail DuttFor Respondent: Ms. Vasundhara Upmanyu, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. IT(TP)A No.3533/Ahd/2015 - AY 2010-11 2. IT(TP)A No.3631/Ahd/2015 - AY 2011-12 3. IT (TP)A No.414/Ahd/2017 - AY 2012-13 Gemstone Glass Pvt.Ltd. Vs. The DCIT (successor in Pino Bisazza Circle-3(1)(1) Glass Pvt.Ltd.) Ahmedabad Plot No.12-E, GIDC Estate Gujarat Kadi [PAN No. AABCP 8041 Q) (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Suhail Dutt, Shri Pawan Agarwal & Shri Sanjay R. Shah, ARs Respondent by : Ms. Vasundhara Upmanyu, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 09/10/201…

ACIT, Circle-2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Boulevard Servicess Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1577/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr.A.L.Saini, Am ] Assessment Years : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, DR & Shri Saurabh Kumar,Addl.CIT,Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 43B

…ord indicating such interest to be assessee’s business activity as per its object clauses. There is no evidence before us as to whether the transaction in question had made in trading head or not. We make it clear that the hon’ble Gujarat High Court in (2006) 283 ITR 402 Nirma Industries vs DCIT holds that interest on trading transaction forms very much part of revenue activity. No such facts however are forthcoming from the instant case file. Assessee’s reliance on hon’ble apex court’s decision hereinabove is also without any merit. The said appeal before their lordships arose from hon’ble Delhi high court’s dec…

ACIT, Cir-2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Boulevard Services Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata

ITA 2070/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr.A.L.Saini, Am ] Assessment Years : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, DR & Shri Saurabh Kumar,Addl.CIT,Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 43B

…ord indicating such interest to be assessee’s business activity as per its object clauses. There is no evidence before us as to whether the transaction in question had made in trading head or not. We make it clear that the hon’ble Gujarat High Court in (2006) 283 ITR 402 Nirma Industries vs DCIT holds that interest on trading transaction forms very much part of revenue activity. No such facts however are forthcoming from the instant case file. Assessee’s reliance on hon’ble apex court’s decision hereinabove is also without any merit. The said appeal before their lordships arose from hon’ble Delhi high court’s dec…

ACIT, Cir-2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Boulevard Services Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata

ITA 1753/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr.A.L.Saini, Am ] Assessment Years : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, DR & Shri Saurabh Kumar,Addl.CIT,Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 43B

…ord indicating such interest to be assessee’s business activity as per its object clauses. There is no evidence before us as to whether the transaction in question had made in trading head or not. We make it clear that the hon’ble Gujarat High Court in (2006) 283 ITR 402 Nirma Industries vs DCIT holds that interest on trading transaction forms very much part of revenue activity. No such facts however are forthcoming from the instant case file. Assessee’s reliance on hon’ble apex court’s decision hereinabove is also without any merit. The said appeal before their lordships arose from hon’ble Delhi high court’s dec…

ACIT, Cir-2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Boulevard Services Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata

ITA 1752/KOL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr.A.L.Saini, Am ] Assessment Years : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, DR & Shri Saurabh Kumar,Addl.CIT,Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 43B

…ord indicating such interest to be assessee’s business activity as per its object clauses. There is no evidence before us as to whether the transaction in question had made in trading head or not. We make it clear that the hon’ble Gujarat High Court in (2006) 283 ITR 402 Nirma Industries vs DCIT holds that interest on trading transaction forms very much part of revenue activity. No such facts however are forthcoming from the instant case file. Assessee’s reliance on hon’ble apex court’s decision hereinabove is also without any merit. The said appeal before their lordships arose from hon’ble Delhi high court’s dec…

Boulevard Servicess Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Kolkata

ITA 1743/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr.A.L.Saini, Am ] Assessment Years : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, DR & Shri Saurabh Kumar,Addl.CIT,Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 43B

…ord indicating such interest to be assessee’s business activity as per its object clauses. There is no evidence before us as to whether the transaction in question had made in trading head or not. We make it clear that the hon’ble Gujarat High Court in (2006) 283 ITR 402 Nirma Industries vs DCIT holds that interest on trading transaction forms very much part of revenue activity. No such facts however are forthcoming from the instant case file. Assessee’s reliance on hon’ble apex court’s decision hereinabove is also without any merit. The said appeal before their lordships arose from hon’ble Delhi high court’s dec…

Boulevard Servicess Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Kolkata

ITA 1742/KOL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr.A.L.Saini, Am ] Assessment Years : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, DR & Shri Saurabh Kumar,Addl.CIT,Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 43B

…ord indicating such interest to be assessee’s business activity as per its object clauses. There is no evidence before us as to whether the transaction in question had made in trading head or not. We make it clear that the hon’ble Gujarat High Court in (2006) 283 ITR 402 Nirma Industries vs DCIT holds that interest on trading transaction forms very much part of revenue activity. No such facts however are forthcoming from the instant case file. Assessee’s reliance on hon’ble apex court’s decision hereinabove is also without any merit. The said appeal before their lordships arose from hon’ble Delhi high court’s dec…

Boulevard Servicess Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Kolkata

ITA 1741/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Dr.A.L.Saini, Am ] Assessment Years : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, DR & Shri Saurabh Kumar,Addl.CIT,Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 43B

…ord indicating such interest to be assessee’s business activity as per its object clauses. There is no evidence before us as to whether the transaction in question had made in trading head or not. We make it clear that the hon’ble Gujarat High Court in (2006) 283 ITR 402 Nirma Industries vs DCIT holds that interest on trading transaction forms very much part of revenue activity. No such facts however are forthcoming from the instant case file. Assessee’s reliance on hon’ble apex court’s decision hereinabove is also without any merit. The said appeal before their lordships arose from hon’ble Delhi high court’s dec…

Bisazza India Limited, Mehsana vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 3543/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 May 2018AY 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 92C

…of operating profit but that does not make any material difference because the interest levy for late realization of debtors, being inextricably connected with the sales, is also part of operating income. In the case of Nirma Industries Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2006] 283 ITR 402/155 Taxman 330 (Guj.), Hon'ble High Court has dealing with the nature of interest on debtors, held it to be integral to business income. The same is the principle for the transfer pricing cases to that extent interest is to be taken as integral to sale proceeds, and, as such, includible in operating income. When such an interest is includible in…

Rajasthan State Industrial Development & Investment Corp. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

In the result, both set of cross appeals for the respective assessment years are disposed off with above directions

ITA 380/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Mar 2018AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri P C ParwalFor Respondent: Shri Varindar Mehta (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 115JSection 14ASection 80I

…t was further submitted that the various High courts have held that interest received from the debtors is nothing but only a part of the sale consideration eligible for deduction u/s 80IA. Some of these decisions are as under: - Nirma Industries Ltd. vs. DCIT 283 ITR 402 (Guj) - Phatela Cotgin Industries (P) ltd. vs. CIT 303 ITR 411 (P&H) - CIT v. Indo Matsushita Carbon Co. Ltd. 286 ITR 201 (Mad) - CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd. 354 ITR 630 (Guj.) - Tata Sponge Iron Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax 292 ITR 175 (Ori) 4.7 The AO has not allowed the claim of deduction u/s 80IA on other income. The other income is mai…