Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. v. DCIT

D, C, I.T, Cir-I, Kolkata vs. M/S Stewarts & Lloyds of India Ltd., Kolkata

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 1515/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Dcit, Circle – 1, Kolkata...................................………………………….................................Appellant P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069. M/S. Stewarts & Lloyds Of India Ltd.....................……………………………….............Respondent 41, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 071. [Pan: Aaecs 0445 G] Appearances By: Shri C.J. Singh, Sr. Dr (Jcit) Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. None Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 18, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 22, 2019 Order Per P.M. Jagtapthis Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) – 20, Kolkata Dated 21.02.2013. 2. At The Time Of Hearing Fixed On 18.03.2019, None Has Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee In Spite Of The Fact That The Notice Of The Said Hearing Was Sent To The Assessee By Rpad. There Was A Similar Non- Compliance On The Part Of The Assessee Even On The Earlier Occasions When The Appeal Was Fixed Or Hearing On 12.12.2017, 03.042018, 08.11.2018, 10.01.2019 & 04.02.2019. This Appeal Of The Revenue Is, Therefore, Being Disposed Of Ex-Parte Qua The Respondent Assessee After Hearing The Arguments Of The Learned Dr & Perusing The Relevant Material Available On Record.

…ofit’ u/s 115J is intended to be confined to business profit & profits from realisation of any asset should not be included in computing book profit. Similar view was also held by the Delhi Bench of the ITAT in the case of Oswal Agro Mills Ltd vs. DCIT (1994) 51 ITD 447 (Del). In the case it was held that the STCG arising from the sale of Government securities are not to be treated as part of book profit computed u/s 115J. I have carefully considered the fact of the case and decisions cited by the appellant (supra) and thereby, I find merit in the argument of the appellant, therefore, the appeal on this ground is…

DCIT, Cir-3(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Tata Metaliks Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…on'ble Tribunal in ACIT v. Northern India Theatres Ltd. (1996) 133 CTR 326 (Del) and Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. Asst. CIT (1993) 45 ITD 22 (Cal) (SB). Further, the appellant’s AR has also placed reliance upon judgement in Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. v DCIT (1994) 51 ITD 447 (Del), it was held that short term capital gains made on sale of government securities is not required to be treated as part of book profit because only business income is required to be computed in book profit. The facts of the appellant’s case are different as the issue is profit from sale of assets and the decision is prior to the judgment of t…

Tata Metaliks Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-3(2), Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…on'ble Tribunal in ACIT v. Northern India Theatres Ltd. (1996) 133 CTR 326 (Del) and Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. Asst. CIT (1993) 45 ITD 22 (Cal) (SB). Further, the appellant’s AR has also placed reliance upon judgement in Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. v DCIT (1994) 51 ITD 447 (Del), it was held that short term capital gains made on sale of government securities is not required to be treated as part of book profit because only business income is required to be computed in book profit. The facts of the appellant’s case are different as the issue is profit from sale of assets and the decision is prior to the judgment of t…

DCIT, Circle - 1, Kolkata vs. M/S. Gloster Jute Mills Limited, Kolkata

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No.95/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2007-08

…was held that 'book profit' under section 115J was intended to be confined to business profit & profits from realisation of any asset should not be included in computing book profit. A similar view has also been expressed in the case of Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. 51 ITD 447 (Del) and Northern India Theatres (P) Ltd. 133 CTR 326 (Del). I have considered the submission made by the Appellant. I find that the facts in the case of the Appellant are comparable with the facts in the case of Frigsales (India) Ltd and Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd as relied upon by the Appellant. Following the decision of the Jurisdictional Specia…