Nirma Industries Ltd. v. DCIT

Shalin P. Selarka, Mumbai vs. ITO 22(2)(3), Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Ashwani Taneja, Am Mr. Shalin P Selarka Income Tax Officer 22(2)(3), Tower No.6,4 Th Floor, 105, Himgiri Neelkanth Vihar Complex, Shahid Bhagat Kanwar Vashi Rly Station Complex, Vs. Farm, Vidyavihar(E), Vashi, New Mumbai-400703 Mumbai-400077 Pan No.Aacps2986H Appellant .. Respondent .. Assessee By Shri Harshal Agarwal, Ar Revenue By .. Shri T.A. Khan, Dr .. Date Of Hearing 28-11-2016 Date Of Pronouncement .. 28-11-2016 O R D E R

…1,901/-. The assessee claimed that this delayed payment is nothing but compensation paid to the suppliers. For this learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Nirma Industries Ltd. Vs Dy. CIT(A) (2006) 283 ITR 402 (Guj), wherein it is held that the term interest used in Section 194 A of the Act relates in connection of debt or loan or a deposit. It was held that if the payment is compensatory in nature and do not relate to any deposit/bad debt/ loan, then such payment is out of the ambit of the provisions of Section 194A of the Act. We find from the above…

A.W Faber Castell India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 9(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Gargit(Tp)A No.1018/M/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. A.W. Faber Castell (India) Dcit 9(1)(1), Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai – 400 005 801, Kamla Executive Park, Vs. Off. M.V. Road, J.B. Nagar, Andheri (East), Mumbai – 400 059 Pan: Aacca3117H (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri M.P. Lohia, A.R. & Shri Pranay Gandhi, A.R. Revenue By : Shri N.K. Chand, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 19.05.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2016

…of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition, albeit, on a different ground.” 9. Further, the Ld. A.R. has also brought our attention to the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of “Nirma Industries Ltd. vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax” (2006) 283 ITR 402 wherein the Hon’ble 12 IT(TP)A No.1018/M/2016 M/s. A.W. Faber Castell (India) Pvt. Ltd. Gujarat High Court has held that whenever an order of a subordinate forum is carried in appeal, operative part thereof merges into the judgment, order or decision of the superior court after the confirmation, reversal or modification, as the case may be, and…

ACIT 10(1), Mumbai vs. Shivshahi Punarvasan Prakalp Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals for A

…siness by the assessee. Even the interest on the delayed payment of rent - itself a business receipt, would therefore be liable to be assessed as business income, and toward which we rely on the decision in the case of Nirma Industries Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT [2006] 283 ITR 402 (Guj). We decide accordingly, and the assessee succeeds on this Ground. Revenue’s Appeal - ITA No.7684/Mum/2011 (A.Y. 2008-09) 7. Gd. 2 reads as under: ‘On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the amount had already been offered by the assessee in A.Y. 2007-08.’ As apparent, the said ground is…