Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT

262 ITR 278Supreme Court of India2003#217 most cited

What is Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Income eligible for deduction under Section 80IA or 80IC must have a direct nexus with the eligible business activity of the industrial undertaking. Income merely incidental to the business, even if part of the assessee's overall business, is not considered "derived from" the eligible undertaking.

353

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT · 262 ITR 278 · Section 80IA deduction · Section 80IC deduction · income derived from · direct nexus · incidental income · eligible business activity · profits derived from industrial undertaking · statutory interpretation

Also reported as

129 Taxmann 539

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 143(3)Section 250Section 148Section 115JBSection 147Section 14ASection 263

Issues it is cited on

section 274(2)casus omissussection 80hinitial assessment yearsection 80hheligible businesssection 144badeduction under section 80iasection 80hhcsection 144asection 158bcsection 80ib

Judgments citing Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT

M/S. Vodafone Essar East Ltd., Kolkata vs. Addl. CIT, Range - 7, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 357/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “A” KOLKATA Before Shri Aby.T Varkey, Judicial Member and Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member ITA No.356 & 343/Kol/2009 Assessment Year :2004-05 M/s Vodafone Essar East V/s. JCIT, Range-7, Ltd., 11, Dr. U.N. Kolkata Brahmchari Road, Kolkakta-17 [PAN No. AAACU 3796 J] ACIT Circle-7, P-7, V/s. Hutchison Telecom East Chowringhe Square, Ltd., 11, Dr. U.. 5thFloor, Kolkata-69 Brahmachari Street,Kolkata-17 [PAN No. AAACU 3796 J] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ITA No.357 & 377/Kol/2009 Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/s Vo…

M/S. Vodafone Essar East Ltd., Kolkata vs. JCIT, Range - 7, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 356/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “A” KOLKATA Before Shri Aby.T Varkey, Judicial Member and Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member ITA No.356 & 343/Kol/2009 Assessment Year :2004-05 M/s Vodafone Essar East V/s. JCIT, Range-7, Ltd., 11, Dr. U.N. Kolkata Brahmchari Road, Kolkakta-17 [PAN No. AAACU 3796 J] ACIT Circle-7, P-7, V/s. Hutchison Telecom East Chowringhe Square, Ltd., 11, Dr. U.. 5thFloor, Kolkata-69 Brahmachari Street,Kolkata-17 [PAN No. AAACU 3796 J] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ITA No.357 & 377/Kol/2009 Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/s Vo…

ACIT, Circle - 7, Kolkata vs. Hutchison Telecom East Limited, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 343/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “A” KOLKATA Before Shri Aby.T Varkey, Judicial Member and Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member ITA No.356 & 343/Kol/2009 Assessment Year :2004-05 M/s Vodafone Essar East V/s. JCIT, Range-7, Ltd., 11, Dr. U.N. Kolkata Brahmchari Road, Kolkakta-17 [PAN No. AAACU 3796 J] ACIT Circle-7, P-7, V/s. Hutchison Telecom East Chowringhe Square, Ltd., 11, Dr. U.. 5thFloor, Kolkata-69 Brahmachari Street,Kolkata-17 [PAN No. AAACU 3796 J] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ITA No.357 & 377/Kol/2009 Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/s Vo…

M/S. Kamakhaya Oil Company, New Delhi vs. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3030/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Kamakhaya Oil Company, Vs. Cit, Delhi-X, New Delhi C/O- M/S. Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi. Pan : Aahfk3040R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. R.S. Singhvi, Ca Respondent By Sh. Vijay Verma, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 07.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 21.11.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.:

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80I

…of goods, the earning of the income must be directly connected with manufacture or processing goods. It is also necessary that material part of the said income should have been earned by that activity. " (ii) In the case of Pandian Chemicals Ltd. Vs CIT (SC) 262 ITR 278 it has been held that the "Interest on deposits with Electricity Board made out of statutory compulsion are not profit "derived from" industrial undertaking." (iii) In the case of CIT Vs N.S.C. Shoes (Mad) 258 ITR 749 it has been held that the; "Interest on amount deposited with bank as guarantee fund for opening the letters of credit for the pur…

Adarsh Kumar, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 5096/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, & Nippun Mital, CAsFor Respondent: Sh. Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153C

…nifest the intention of legislature. [Keshavji Ravji & Co. v/s. CIT - [(1990) 183 ITR 1 (SC)l. Similarly rule of interpretation would come into play only if there is doubt with regard to the express language used. [Pandian Chemicals Ltd. vis. CIT- [(2003) 262 ITR 278 (SC)l. Literal rule: Language of Statute should be read as it is : The first and the most elementary rule of construction is that it is to be assumed that the words and phrases of legislation are used in their technical meaning if they have acquired one, or otherwise in their ordinary meaning, and the second is that the phrases and sentences ar…

Adarsh Kumar, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 5095/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, & Nippun Mital, CAsFor Respondent: Sh. Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153C

…nifest the intention of legislature. [Keshavji Ravji & Co. v/s. CIT - [(1990) 183 ITR 1 (SC)l. Similarly rule of interpretation would come into play only if there is doubt with regard to the express language used. [Pandian Chemicals Ltd. vis. CIT- [(2003) 262 ITR 278 (SC)l. Literal rule: Language of Statute should be read as it is : The first and the most elementary rule of construction is that it is to be assumed that the words and phrases of legislation are used in their technical meaning if they have acquired one, or otherwise in their ordinary meaning, and the second is that the phrases and sentences ar…

Quadron Business Park Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 36, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 4857/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4857/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. Quadron Business Part Ltd. Dy. Cit, C.C.36, Plot No.28, Midc, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, बनाम/ Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Hinjewadi, Phase-Ii, Pune, "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaeca 9058 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Sharma/ Shri Dhruv Mehta ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Abhijit Patankar

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Sharma/For Respondent: Shri Abhijit Patankar
Section 80Section 80I

…his conclusion, the A.O. referred to the following judicial precedents wherein the expression "derived been interpreted, explained and distinguished from the expression attributable to: • Liberty India v. CIT 317 ITR 218 (SC) • Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT 262 ITR 278 (SC) • Cambay Electric Supply Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT 113 ITR 84 (SC) • CIT v. Sterling Foods 237 ITR 579 (SC) • Dy. CIT v. Parekh PIast India (P) Ltd. 137 ITD 208 (Mum) • JJC. Trust v. CIT 23 ITR 143 (Bom) 11. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer held that the amount receipt in this account is not derived from business and, accordingly, the cl…

DCIT 3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Jindal Drugs Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the ground raised by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 744/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Blem/S. Jindal Drugs Pvt. Ltd. V. Asst. Cit, Cc 8, Bhaktawar, 6Th Floor, Old Cgo Blgd, 8Th Floor, Near Church Gate, 229, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri Ashok MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia
Section 80HSection 80I

…f the appellant was business profit, the second question arises whether such business profit is eligible for deduction U/s. 80IB or not. Ld. Assessing Officer has followed the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Pandian Chemicals Ltd. vs. CIT - 262 ITR 278 (supra) and CIT Vs. Sterling Foods 237 - ITR 579 and has held that the Industrial undertaking itself had to be source of the profit for claiming deduction. 3.3.12 It is observed that there is a material difference between the language used in Section 80HH, section 801 and section 80IB. Whereas section 80HH, requires that the profit and gains shou…

Jindal Drugs Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT CC 8, Mumbai

In the result the ground raised by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 552/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Blem/S. Jindal Drugs Pvt. Ltd. V. Asst. Cit, Cc 8, Bhaktawar, 6Th Floor, Old Cgo Blgd, 8Th Floor, Near Church Gate, 229, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri Ashok MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia
Section 80HSection 80I

…f the appellant was business profit, the second question arises whether such business profit is eligible for deduction U/s. 80IB or not. Ld. Assessing Officer has followed the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Pandian Chemicals Ltd. vs. CIT - 262 ITR 278 (supra) and CIT Vs. Sterling Foods 237 - ITR 579 and has held that the Industrial undertaking itself had to be source of the profit for claiming deduction. 3.3.12 It is observed that there is a material difference between the language used in Section 80HH, section 801 and section 80IB. Whereas section 80HH, requires that the profit and gains shou…

Jet Airways (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 5(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 933/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Jehangir D.Mistry-ARFor Respondent: Shri Alok Johari and Ms.Arju Goradia-DR
Section 115JSection 254(1)

…ptic, that the physical business carried on by the assessee had to be considered for deciding various receipts. He further stated that while deciding the appeals for the A.Y. 1997 to 2002 the Tribunal had not considered the judgments of Pandian Chemicals Ltd.(262 ITR 278)and Liberty India (317 ITR 218) that the principal business carried out by the assessee and the Companies Act and the Act should decide the receipt under various heads. 7.2.1.The AR contended that the typographical mistake about the quantum of interest could not affect the issue, that the dispute before the Tribunal was to decide the head under w…

Oliver Valves India Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1056/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1055 & 1056/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Asish Tripathy, JCIT
Section 10BSection 10B(4)Section 143(3)Section 147

…management fee was not derived from the business of export. Therefore, according to the Ld. D.R., the Assessing Officer, by placing reliance on the judgments of Apex Court in CIT v. Sterling Foods (1999) 237 ITR 579 and in Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT (2003) 262 ITR 278, found that the management fee was not derived from the export of business, therefore, he rejected the claim of the assessee and the CIT(Appeals) has rightly confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. 5. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The only issue arises for con…

Oliver Valves India Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1055/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1055 & 1056/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Asish Tripathy, JCIT
Section 10BSection 10B(4)Section 143(3)Section 147

…management fee was not derived from the business of export. Therefore, according to the Ld. D.R., the Assessing Officer, by placing reliance on the judgments of Apex Court in CIT v. Sterling Foods (1999) 237 ITR 579 and in Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT (2003) 262 ITR 278, found that the management fee was not derived from the export of business, therefore, he rejected the claim of the assessee and the CIT(Appeals) has rightly confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. 5. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The only issue arises for con…

M/S. Odisha Power Generation Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee i

ITA 83/CTK/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Aug 2017AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Dillip Kumar MohantyFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan,CITDR
Section 801Section 80I

…. The assessee has not been able to show any nexus between impugned interest received by it with interest payments. Thus, we find that the disputed issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case Pandian Chemicals Ltd. Vs. CIT [262 ITR 278 (SC)], which was followed by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Tata Sponge (I) Ltd. (supra). We hold that interest of Rs. 9,00,00,000/- was earned by the assessee from- investment of fund in GRIDCO Bond. Thus, the same cannot be considered as interest received by the appellant for late payment of electricity by the GRIDCO. In t…

DCIT, Bhubaneswar vs. Orissa Power Generation Corporation Ltd, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee i

ITA 72/CTK/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Aug 2017AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Dillip Kumar MohantyFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan,CITDR
Section 801Section 80I

…. The assessee has not been able to show any nexus between impugned interest received by it with interest payments. Thus, we find that the disputed issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case Pandian Chemicals Ltd. Vs. CIT [262 ITR 278 (SC)], which was followed by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Tata Sponge (I) Ltd. (supra). We hold that interest of Rs. 9,00,00,000/- was earned by the assessee from- investment of fund in GRIDCO Bond. Thus, the same cannot be considered as interest received by the appellant for late payment of electricity by the GRIDCO. In t…

Siemens Technology and Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 7, Mumbai

In the result assessee’s appeals for the Assessment Years 2003-04 and 2005-06 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4165/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri C.N. Prasadsiemens Information Systems V. Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Limited Tax, 130, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, 7(2), Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Raod Worli, Mumbai 400 020 Mumbai 400 018 Pan : Aaacs 9788 E (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Mrs. Vasanti PatelFor Respondent: Shri E.Sankaran
Section 10ASection 250

…ion u/s 10A/10B of the Act. 11. We pursued the orders of the Coordinate Bench for the Assessment Year 2002–03 and find that this issue has been decided against the assessee following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pandyan Chemicals (262 ITR 278) and also following the Tribunal order in assessee’s own case for the Assessment Year 1997–98 and 1998–99, as there is no change in facts we are not inclined to deviate from the view already taken in assessee’s own case in earlier Assessment Year. Thus respectfully following said order we hold that the interest on Fixed Deposits as well as the in…

Siemens Information Systems Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 7(2), Mumbai

In the result assessee’s appeals for the Assessment Years 2003-04 and 2005-06 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6299/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri C.N. Prasadsiemens Information Systems V. Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Limited Tax, 130, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, 7(2), Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Raod Worli, Mumbai 400 020 Mumbai 400 018 Pan : Aaacs 9788 E (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Mrs. Vasanti PatelFor Respondent: Shri E.Sankaran
Section 10ASection 250

…ion u/s 10A/10B of the Act. 11. We pursued the orders of the Coordinate Bench for the Assessment Year 2002–03 and find that this issue has been decided against the assessee following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pandyan Chemicals (262 ITR 278) and also following the Tribunal order in assessee’s own case for the Assessment Year 1997–98 and 1998–99, as there is no change in facts we are not inclined to deviate from the view already taken in assessee’s own case in earlier Assessment Year. Thus respectfully following said order we hold that the interest on Fixed Deposits as well as the in…

M/S. Perfetti Van Melle India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

In the result, this appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 789/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Smt Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 43(1)Section 80Section 80ISection 92C

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘I-1’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .No. 789/DEL/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2011-12) Perfetti Van Melle India Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT 47th Milestone, Delhi-Jaipur Circle-3 Highway, Gurgaon Manesar, Gurgaon AAACP2626A (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) Appellant by Sh. Nageshwar Rao, Adv, Respondent by Sh. Amrender Kumar, CIT DR, Sh. Neeraj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 28.02.2017 Date of Pronouncement 28.04.2017 ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the Assessment O…

Anchor Electricals Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T. Cen.Cir.41, Mumbai

In the result of appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 6930/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…1 Anchor Electricals IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNNAL MUMBAI BENCH ‘’K’’, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A.No.6930/Mum/2012 - AY 2008-09 I.T.A.No.326 /Mum/2012 - AY 2011-12 Anchor Electricals Pvt Ltd V/s Dy.CIT, Cent.Cir. 7(2), Mumbai 3rd Floor, I-Think Techno Campus, Pokharan Road No.2 Thane (W) 400 067 PAN : AAECA2190C Appellant Respondent Appellant by Shri Nitesh Joshi Respondent by Shri Mahesh Kumar CIT Date of hearing 22.03.2017 Date of order 26.04.2017 O R D E R Per Ashwani Taneja, AM:- These appeals pertain to same assessee for tw…

M/S. Shubham Feed Mills, Uttrakhand vs. ITO- I, Uttrakhand

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 378/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Smt. Beena A. Pillaishubham Feed Mills Ito A Beria Road, Bazpur Kashipur Uttrakhand. Vs. Uttrakhand Gir/Pan: Abgfs8750G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Subhash Chandra Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Bedobani Choudhary, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 234Section 80I

…0IC on Rs.3,09,149/-. Aggrieved by addition made assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A), who upheld addition by relying upon decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sterling Foods reported in 237 ITR 53 and Pandian Chemicals Ltd., reported in 262 ITR 278. Aggrieved by order of Ld. CIT(A) assessee is in appeal before us now. Ground No. 1 and 2 4. Ld. AR submitted that assessee is engaged in the manufacturing activity of cattle foods. He submitted that raw materials for manufacture of cattle food comes in packed condition, which is unpacked and bags/bardana is separated from raw materials. The raw…

West Bengal Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-10, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1467/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Apr 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1467/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2010-2011) West Bengal Industrial Vs. Dcit, Circle-10, Kolkata, Infrastructure Development Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Corporation, Chowringhee Square, 5, Council House Street (3Rd Kolkata-700069 Floor), Kolkata-700001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacw 3073 C .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, Fca Revenue By : None सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 02/03/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 05/04/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2010-2011, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xii, Kolkata, In Appeal No.140/Xii/Cir-10/13-14, Dated 14.02.2014, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 21.03.2013. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2010-2011 On 13.10.2010 Disclosing Total Income Of Rs.6,59,11,015/-. Subsequently The Assessee Filed Revised Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2010-2011 On 31.3.2012 Disclosing Total Income Of Rs.6,49,27,168/-. Assessee’S Case Was Processed U/S.143(1) On 24.05.2011 Accepting The Return Of Income. West Bengal Industrial Infrastructure Dev.Corp Later On Assessee’S Case Was Selected For Scrutiny U/S.143(3) Of The Act

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, FCAFor Respondent: None
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80HSection 80l

…hiring the plants is not business of assessee so receipt due to these activity no way qualify the eligibility for 80-lA deduction. In this regard, he has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon' ble Apex Court in the case of- Pandian Chemicals Ltd. Vs CIT (262 ITR 278) wherein it has held that interest income earned on deposit with Electricity Board, not being income derived from industrial undertaking, could not be considered for deduction u/s 80HH. Reliance has also been placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of ClT vs Tribalogy India Ltd. (335 ITR 12), wherein it is held that th…