What is Orissa State Warehousing Corpn v. CIT authority for?

A fiscal statute must be interpreted strictly based on its plain language, without substituting judicial impressions for legislative intent. Exemptions and exclusions within such statutes must also be construed strictly and cannot be extended through interpretation.

How many judgments cite Orissa State Warehousing Corpn v. CIT?

114 judgments on BharatTax cite Orissa State Warehousing Corpn v. CIT (237 ITR 589), spanning 2011 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Orissa State Warehousing Corpn v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 115JB, Section 37(1), Section 43B, Section 2(24)(xviii), Section 36(1)(va).

Orissa State Warehousing Corpn v. CIT (237 ITR 589)

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION- THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 915/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR

Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

…dez v. State of Kerala (1957) 8 STC 561 (SC), the Supreme Court held that taxing statutes must be construed strictly and where the language is clear, there is no scope for any inference or equity. Further, in Orissa State Warehousing Corporation v. CIT (1999) 237 ITR 589 (SC), it was held that exemptions and exclusions must be strictly construed and cannot be extended by interpretation. The principle was reiterated in Novopan India Ltd. v. CCE 1994 Supp (3) SCC 606 that exemption provisions must be construed strictly and the burden is on the assessee to show that they fall within the exemption clause; otherwise t…

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DEHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION- THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 914/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi, ARFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR

Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

…v. State of Kerala (1957) 8 STC 561 (SC), the\nSupreme Court held that taxing statutes must be construed strictly and where\nthe language is clear, there is no scope for any inference or equity. Further,\nin Orissa State Warehousing Corporation v. CIT (1999) 237 ITR 589\n(SC), it was held that exemptions and exclusions must be strictly construed\nand cannot be extended by interpretation. The principle was reiterated\nin Novopan India Ltd. v. CCE 1994 Supp (3) SCC 606 that exemption\nprovisions must be construed strictly and the burden is on the assessee to\nshow that they fall within the exemption clause; otherw…

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION - THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 913/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR

Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

…dez v. State of Kerala (1957) 8 STC 561 (SC), the Supreme Court held that taxing statutes must be construed strictly and where the language is clear, there is no scope for any inference or equity. Further, in Orissa State Warehousing Corporation v. CIT (1999) 237 ITR 589 (SC), it was held that exemptions and exclusions must be strictly construed and cannot be extended by interpretation. The principle was reiterated in Novopan India Ltd. v. CCE 1994 Supp (3) SCC 606 that exemption provisions must be construed strictly and the burden is on the assessee to show that they fall within the exemption clause; otherwise t…

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DEHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION- THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 912/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR

Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

…dez v. State of Kerala (1957) 8 STC 561 (SC), the Supreme Court held that taxing statutes must be construed strictly and where the language is clear, there is no scope for any inference or equity. Further, in Orissa State Warehousing Corporation v. CIT (1999) 237 ITR 589 (SC), it was held that exemptions and exclusions must be strictly construed and cannot be extended by interpretation. The principle was reiterated in Novopan India Ltd. v. CCE 1994 Supp (3) SCC 606 that exemption provisions must be construed strictly and the burden is on the assessee to show that they fall within the exemption clause; otherwise t…

DCIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, BODAKDEV AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 850/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR

Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

…dez v. State of Kerala (1957) 8 STC 561 (SC), the Supreme Court held that taxing statutes must be construed strictly and where the language is clear, there is no scope for any inference or equity. Further, in Orissa State Warehousing Corporation v. CIT (1999) 237 ITR 589 (SC), it was held that exemptions and exclusions must be strictly construed and cannot be extended by interpretation. The principle was reiterated in Novopan India Ltd. v. CCE 1994 Supp (3) SCC 606 that exemption provisions must be construed strictly and the burden is on the assessee to show that they fall within the exemption clause; otherwise t…

DCIE CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHEMDABAD, VEJALPUR vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, BODAKDEV AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 849/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR

Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

…dez v. State of Kerala (1957) 8 STC 561 (SC), the Supreme Court held that taxing statutes must be construed strictly and where the language is clear, there is no scope for any inference or equity. Further, in Orissa State Warehousing Corporation v. CIT (1999) 237 ITR 589 (SC), it was held that exemptions and exclusions must be strictly construed and cannot be extended by interpretation. The principle was reiterated in Novopan India Ltd. v. CCE 1994 Supp (3) SCC 606 that exemption provisions must be construed strictly and the burden is on the assessee to show that they fall within the exemption clause; otherwise t…

DCIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT , BODAKDEV AHMEDABAD

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 848/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

For Appellant: \nShri Vartik Choksi, ARFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR

Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

…v. State of Kerala (1957) 8 STC 561 (SC), the\nSupreme Court held that taxing statutes must be construed strictly and where\nthe language is clear, there is no scope for any inference or equity. Further,\nin Orissa State Warehousing Corporation v. CIT (1999) 237 ITR 589\n(SC), it was held that exemptions and exclusions must be strictly construed\nand cannot be extended by interpretation. The principle was reiterated\nin Novopan India Ltd. v. CCE 1994 Supp (3) SCC 606 that exemption\nprovisions must be construed strictly and the burden is on the assessee to\nshow that they fall within the exemption clause; otherw…

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCE LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 847/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR

Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

…dez v. State of Kerala (1957) 8 STC 561 (SC), the Supreme Court held that taxing statutes must be construed strictly and where the language is clear, there is no scope for any inference or equity. Further, in Orissa State Warehousing Corporation v. CIT (1999) 237 ITR 589 (SC), it was held that exemptions and exclusions must be strictly construed and cannot be extended by interpretation. The principle was reiterated in Novopan India Ltd. v. CCE 1994 Supp (3) SCC 606 that exemption provisions must be construed strictly and the burden is on the assessee to show that they fall within the exemption clause; otherwise t…

NUTAN NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1023/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

For Appellant: \nShri Bandish Soparkar, ARFor Respondent: \nShri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR

Section 10(15)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 263Section 28Section 36(1)(viia)

…om what is expressed. The\nHon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Tara Agencies (292 ITR 444) has held\nthat where the words of a statute are clear, they must be given effect to\nregardless of consequences. Similarly, in Orissa State Warehousing\nCorporation v. CIT (237 ITR 589), the Court held that the language\nemployed by the Legislature must be given its plain meaning and that\ncourts cannot read something into the provision which is not there. The\nsame principle was reiterated in Ajmera Housing Corporation v. CIT\n(326 ITR 642), in which the Supreme Court held that in tax statutes\nparticularly, there is no room f…

ACIT (CIR.) - 6(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. BHANDAR POWER LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1908/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14 Assistant Commissioner Of Bhandar Power Ltd. Income Tax, 14Th Floor, Essar House, Circle 6(1)(2), 11, K. K. Marg, Mahalaxmi, Vs. Mumbai Mumbai - 400034 (Pan: Aaacb6693B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Vijay Mehta, Fca & Shri Tarang Mehta, Advocate Revenue : Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.10.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Delhi, Vide Order Dated 25.01.2018 Passed Against The Assessment Order By Ito 6(1)(4), Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 20.12.2016, For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Grounds Taken By The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Cit(A) Is Not Justified In Deleting The Disallowance Of Deduction U/S 80Ia Of The Income Tax Act Of Rs. 203,13,43,740/-Without Considering The Fact That The Provisions Of Section 801A(10) Is Clearly Attracted In This Case Hence The Assessee Is Not Eligible For Claiming Deduction U/S 801A Of The Income Tax Act.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, FCA and Shri Tarang Mehta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 801ASection 801A(10)Section 80I

…ustrial undertaking. Co- ordinate Bench while dealing with the issue, which is similar to the case before us, delve into the judicial precedents in the case of CIT vs. Sterling Foods [1999] 237 ITR 579 (SC), Orissa State Warehousing Corporation vs. CIT [1999] 237 ITR 589 (SC) and allowed the claim of the assessee. 9.8. Considering the above judicial precedents, we note in the present case that assessee has set up industrial undertaking for generation and sale of power and it is an undisputed fact that it is not engaged in any other business activity other than the business of generation and sale of power, for wh…

ARAVALI BUILDHOMES LLP,JAIPUR vs. AO CPC, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1154/JPR/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Ashok Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 80Section 80ASection 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1154/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2021-22 cuke Aravali Buildhomes LLP AO CPC, Vs. F. No. 205 Block A, Anukamapa Jaipur Residency, Durgapura, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABFFA 5163 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Ashok Kumar Gupta, Adv. jktLo dh vksj ls@…

SARAVANAN ARUMUGAM,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 2966/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 50C(2)Section 55ASection 56(2)(vii)

…valuation process through a fast-track mode. The Ld. AO cannot therefore avoid the blame of depriving the taxpayer of a statutory right available to him. 8.0 We have noted that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Orissa State Warehousing Corporation vs. CIT, 237 ITR 589 have held that a fiscal statute has to be interpreted on the basis of the language used therein and not de hors the same. Further, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of IPCA Laboratory Ltd. vs. DCIT, 266 ITR 521 have held that where there is no ambiguity in the provisions of statute, provisions cannot be interpreted to confer benefit on the assess…

PUSHPA VIDYA NIKETAN SAMITI,,KOTA vs. ACITDCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

ITA 315/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Mr. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT- Ld. DR

Section 11Section 131Section 133ASection 234BSection 250

…y Hon'ble Karnataka High Court that while interpreting a provision in a tax law wherein a legal fiction is created, such provision will have to be strictly interpreted. In the case of Orissa State Warehousing Corporation v. CIT [1999] 153 CTR (SC) 177: [1999] 237 ITR 589 (SC), it has been held that a fiscal statute shall have to be interpreted on the basis of the language used therein and not de hors the same. No words ought to be added and only the language used ought to be considered so as to ascertain the proper meaning and intent of the legislation. In the case of S.C. Cambatta & Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1952] 21 ITR…

PUSHPA VIDYA NIKETAN SAMITI,,KOTA vs. ACITDCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE,, KOTA

ITA 314/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Mr. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT- Ld. DR

Section 11Section 131Section 133ASection 234BSection 250

…y Hon'ble Karnataka High Court that while interpreting a provision in a tax law wherein a legal fiction is created, such provision will have to be strictly interpreted. In the case of Orissa State Warehousing Corporation v. CIT [1999] 153 CTR (SC) 177: [1999] 237 ITR 589 (SC), it has been held that a fiscal statute shall have to be interpreted on the basis of the language used therein and not de hors the same. No words ought to be added and only the language used ought to be considered so as to ascertain the proper meaning and intent of the legislation. In the case of S.C. Cambatta & Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1952] 21 ITR…

PUSHPA VIDYA NIKETAN SAMITI,KOTA vs. ACIT DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE, , KOTA

ITA 313/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Mr. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT- Ld. DR

Section 11Section 131Section 133ASection 234BSection 250

…y Hon'ble Karnataka High Court that while interpreting a provision in a tax law wherein a legal fiction is created, such provision will have to be strictly interpreted. In the case of Orissa State Warehousing Corporation v. CIT [1999] 153 CTR (SC) 177: [1999] 237 ITR 589 (SC), it has been held that a fiscal statute shall have to be interpreted on the basis of the language used therein and not de hors the same. No words ought to be added and only the language used ought to be considered so as to ascertain the proper meaning and intent of the legislation. In the case of S.C. Cambatta & Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1952] 21 ITR…

KULDEEP SINGH SHEKHAWAT,KOTA vs. ITO W-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 701/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Gagan Goyalkuldeep Singh Shekhawat, 11, Samridhi Traders, Police Line, Gopal Vihar, Baran Road-324001 Pan No. Araps0973M ...... Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Kota …... Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv., Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar, JCIT, Ld. DR

Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 54Section 54BSection 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH “A”, JAIPUR BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Kuldeep Singh Shekhawat, 11, Samridhi Traders, Police Line, Gopal Vihar, Baran Road-324001 PAN No. ARAPS0973M ...... Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Kota …... Respondent Appellant by : Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv., Ld. AR (Through V.C.) &Mr. Devang Gargieya, Adv., Ld. AR Respondent by : Mr. Manoj Kumar, JCIT, Ld. DR Date of hearing : 04/02/2025 Date of pronouncement : 06/03/2025 O R D E R PER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M: This appeal by the assessee is directed ag…

EXCELRA KNOWLEDGE SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 202/HYD/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.202/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Excelra Knowledge Vs. Dy. Cit Solutions (P) Ltd, Circle 8(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aafcg5715Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri H. Srinivasulu, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Kumar Pranav, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 25/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 23/01/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated10/02/2023 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2020-21. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri H. Srinivasulu, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT(DR)

Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 438Section 43B

…made the fixed deposits for a long duration, as evident from the balance sheet of the assessee and running from year to year. He has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Orissa State Warehousing Corporation vs. CIT reported in 237 ITR 589 and submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down the rule of interpretation of fiscal statute shall have to be interpreted on the basis of the language used therein and not de hors the same and the Court ought not, under any circumstances, to substitute its own impression and ideas in place of the legislative intent as is available from…

TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed

ITA 373/KOL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2014-15 & Assessment Years: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sriram Sashdari, ARFor Respondent: Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, DR

Section 250Section 43(6)Section 50CSection 50C(2)Section 928

…eferred to the provisions of section 50C and also of sub- section (2) thereof and was of the view that the reference to the DVO was discretionary. Relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v Orissa State Warehousing Corporation 237 ITR 589 (SC) and the use of the word ‘may’ in place of ‘shall’, he was of the view that such reference was not mandatory. Applying the provisions of section 50C, he re-computed the capital gains at Rs. 206.30 Cr. In the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee could not succeed. The Ld. CIT(A) has observed as under in the order while confirming the Ld.…

TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed

ITA 372/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2014-15 & Assessment Years: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sriram Sashdari, ARFor Respondent: Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, DR

Section 250Section 43(6)Section 50CSection 50C(2)Section 928

…eferred to the provisions of section 50C and also of sub- section (2) thereof and was of the view that the reference to the DVO was discretionary. Relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v Orissa State Warehousing Corporation 237 ITR 589 (SC) and the use of the word ‘may’ in place of ‘shall’, he was of the view that such reference was not mandatory. Applying the provisions of section 50C, he re-computed the capital gains at Rs. 206.30 Cr. In the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee could not succeed. The Ld. CIT(A) has observed as under in the order while confirming the Ld.…

THE N.D.D. P AND T E.C.C SOCIETY LTD.,,NELLORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NELLORE, NELLORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 611/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.611/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18) The Nddp & Tec Society Vs. Income Tax Officer Ltd, Ward-1 Nellore. Nellore. Pan:Aactt5322J (Appellant) (Respondent) /Assessee By: Shri M. Chandra Mouleswara निर्धारितीती द्वारा Rao, C.A /Revenue By: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Sr.Ar राजस्‍व द्वारा ई की तारीखरीख/Date Of Hearing: 14/03/2024 सुनवाई की तारीखरीख/Pronouncement: 19/03/2024 घोषणा

For Appellant: Shri M. Chandra MouleswaraFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Sr.AR

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69ASection 80P

…ITA 611 of 2023 NDDP and TEC Society Ltd आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Vice-President AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.611/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18) The NDDP and TEC Society Vs. Income Tax Officer Ltd, Ward-1 Nellore. Nellore. PAN:AACTT5322J (Appellant) (Respondent) /Assessee by: Shri M. Chandra Mouleswara निर्धारितीती द्वारा Rao, C.A /Revenue by: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Sr.AR राजस्‍व द्वारा ई की तारीखरीख/Date of hearing: 14/03/2024 सुनवाई की तारीखरीख/Pronouncement: 19…

Orissa State Warehousing Corpn v. CIT

What is Orissa State Warehousing Corpn v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Orissa State Warehousing Corpn v. CIT

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION- THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)), AHMEDABAD

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DEHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION- THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION - THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)), AHMEDABAD

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DEHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION- THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)), AHMEDABAD

DCIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, BODAKDEV AHMEDABAD

DCIE CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHEMDABAD, VEJALPUR vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, BODAKDEV AHMEDABAD

DCIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT , BODAKDEV AHMEDABAD

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCE LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, AHMEDABAD

NUTAN NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

ACIT (CIR.) - 6(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. BHANDAR POWER LTD., MUMBAI

ARAVALI BUILDHOMES LLP,JAIPUR vs. AO CPC, JAIPUR

SARAVANAN ARUMUGAM,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

PUSHPA VIDYA NIKETAN SAMITI,,KOTA vs. ACITDCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

PUSHPA VIDYA NIKETAN SAMITI,,KOTA vs. ACITDCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE,, KOTA

PUSHPA VIDYA NIKETAN SAMITI,KOTA vs. ACIT DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE, , KOTA

KULDEEP SINGH SHEKHAWAT,KOTA vs. ITO W-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

EXCELRA KNOWLEDGE SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA

TATA CONSUMER PRODUCTS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA

THE N.D.D. P AND T E.C.C SOCIETY LTD.,,NELLORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NELLORE, NELLORE