How many judgments cite Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT?

353 judgments on BharatTax cite Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT (262 ITR 278), spanning 2007 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 1961, Section 143(3), Section 250, Section 148, Section 115JB, Section 147.

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 366,470 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 1961 Section 143(3)Section 250 Section 148 Section 115JB Section 147 Section 14A Section 263

Issues it is cited on

section 274(2)casus omissus section 80h initial assessment year section 80hh eligible business section 144ba deduction under section 80ia section 80hhc section 144a section 158bc section 80ib

Judgments citing Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT

Jsw Energy Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 11(5), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 462/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 462/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Jsw Energy Limited Acit, Central Circle-46, बिाम/ Jsw Centre, Bandra Kurla Complex, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. Bandra (E), Mumabi-400 051 Mumbai स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacj 8109 N (Assessee) : (Revenue) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 981/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Acit, Central Circle-46, Jsw Energy Limited बिाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Jsw Centre, Bandra Kurla Mumbai Complex, Vs. Bandra (E), Mumabi-400 051 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacj 8109 N (Revenue) : (Assessee) Assessee By : Shri Rakesh Joshi Revenue By : Shri K. Ravi Kiran सुनवाई की तायीख / : 12.7.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तायीख / : 07.10.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per R. C. Sharma, A. M.: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Against The Order By The Ld. Cit(A) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2007-08. 2

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri K. Ravi Kiran

Section 115JSection 14ASection 80Section 80HSection 80I

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “जे” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R. C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 462/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) JSW Energy Limited ACIT, Central Circle-46, बिाम/ JSW Centre, Bandra Kurla Complex, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. Bandra (E), Mumabi-400 051 Mumbai स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. AAACJ 8109 N (Assessee) : (Revenue) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 981/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) ACIT, Central Circle-46, JSW Energy Limited बिाम/…

M/S. Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd., Tuticorin vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 718/CHNY/2011[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Sept 2016AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Dr. Anita Sumanth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. M. Swaminathan, Sr. Standing Counsel

Section 80

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.718/Mds/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2000-01 M/s Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. The Assistant Commissioner of No.1, Sai Flats, v. Income Tax, No.55, Pillaiyar Koil Street, Company Circle VI(4), Kanagam, Tharamani, Chennai - 600 034. Chennai - 600 113. PAN : AABCS 4955 Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1008…

ACIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Sterlite Industries Ltd., Tuticorin

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1008/CHNY/2011[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Sept 2016AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Dr. Anita Sumanth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. M. Swaminathan, Sr. Standing Counsel

Section 80

M/S. A.T. Kearney India Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result the ground No

ITA 511/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishiat Kearney India Private Ito, Limited, Ward-1(1), Vs. 6Th Floor, Tower-D, Global New Delhi Business Park, Gurgaon Pan:Aadca1436G (Appellant) (Respondent) At Kearney India Private Ito, Limited, Ward-1(1), Vs. 6Th Floor, Tower-D, Global New Delhi Business Park, Gurgaon Pan:Aadca1436G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Ray, Sr. DR

Section 10ASection 10A(7)Section 115JSection 147Section 148Section 80I

…s the ld DR submitted that interest income is earned from the fixed deposits and the issue is squarely covered against the assessee in view of this decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Liberty India Vs CIT 317 ITR 218 and Pandian Chemicals Ltd Vs. CIT 262 ITR 278 (SC). 17. We have carefully considered the rival contentions. Assessee has earned interest on short term deposit with the bank and appellant treated it as business income whereas the ld Assessing Officer was of the view that interest income is chargeable to tax as income from other sources and as it is not business income deduction on this sum is…

M/S. A.T. Kearney India Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result the ground No

ITA 510/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2016AY 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Ray, Sr. DR

Section 10ASection 10A(7)Section 115JSection 147Section 148Section 80I

M.M.Metacraft Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 144/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2016AY 2012-13

Section 115JSection 32Section 32(1)(iia)

…n the year of acquisition and installation of the plant and machinery since it was put to use for less than 180 days. Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pandian Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (2003) 262 ITR 278 (SC). 8. I have considered the submissions of both the parties and carefully gone through the material available on record. It is noticed that an identical issue having similar facts was a 7 AY: 2012-13 subject matter of the departmental appeal before the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax and Another Vs. Ritta…

DCIT, Cir-11, Kolkata vs. M/S Graphite India Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 559/KOL/2008[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 154Section 80Section 80HSection 80I

…(SC) CIT vs.Sterling Foods (1999) 237 ITR 579 (SC) Cambay Electric Supply Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1978) 113 ITR 84 (SC) ITA No.304-05 & 559/Kol/2008 A.Y 03-04 Graphit e India Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT, Rng-11, Kol. Page 14 Pandian Chemicals Ltd. vs. CIT (2003) 262 ITR 278 (SC) Further, Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Balarampur Chini Mills Ltd. vs. DCIT (2011) 140 TTJ 73 (Kol)(UO) has categorically held that expenditure which does not have first degree relation with the eligible unit cannot be considered for allocation to the eligible unit. Similar view is also expressed recently by the Co-ordinate Bench in the c…

Graphite India Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, R-11, Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 305/KOL/2008[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 154Section 80Section 80HSection 80I

Graphite India Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, R-11, Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 304/KOL/2008[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 154Section 80Section 80HSection 80I

Lupin Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Ltu, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 825/MUM/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosain: (A.Y : 2003-04) M/S. Lupin Limited Vs. Acit Ltu, 159, C.S.T Road, Kalina, Mumbai. Santa Cruz (East), Mumbai 400 098. Pan : Aaacl1069K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora &For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar

Section 115JSection 127Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 35Section 80Section 80I

…ed, is not acceptable and hence rejected. 6.2 coming to the issue of facts of the case, as has been held in the case laws of Cambay Electric Supply Industrial Co Ltd v. CIT 113 ITR 84 (SC), CIT v. Sterling Foods 237 ITR 579 (SC), CIT v. Pandian Chemicals Ltd 262 ITR 278 19 M/s. Lupin Limited (SC), CIT v. Ritesh Industries Ltd 274 ITR 324 (Del), CIT v. Sundaram Clayton Ltd 281 ITR 425 (Mad), Liberty India v. CIT 293 ITR 520 (P&H) and Mentha & Allied Products Pvt Ltd 302 1TR 144 (All) that the income that is 'derived‟ from an industrial undertaking is only deductible u/s 80IB is clearly applicable in this case.…

M/S Indo Swadishh Instriment, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result the appeal filed by the assesee stands

ITA 6408/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.K.Bansal

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Gaur, CAFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg, Sr. DR

Section 80I

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC-I”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI P.K.BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.:- 6408/Del /2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Indo Swedish Instrument Ld. Commissioner of 41, Friends Colony (East) Income Tax (A)-X Vs. New Delhi – 110 065 New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.K. Gaur, CA Shri Arjun Mehta, CA Department by : Shri Deepak Garg, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 12/07/2016 Date of pronouncement 12/07/2016 O R D E R This appeal is filed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 15.9.2015. The only issue involved in this appeal filed by the assessee relate…

M/S.. Upkar International (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 6710/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kanta.Y. : 2003-04 Upkar International (P) Ltd., Dcit, Circle 18(1), C/O J.S. Kochar & Associates, Vs. Cr Building, 209, Sewak Bhawan, I.P. Estate, New Delhi 16/2, Wea Karol Bagh, New Delhi – 110 005

For Appellant: Sh. J.S. Kochar & Sh. Udai BirFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Jain, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80Section 801BSection 80I

…business connection in every case. For instance in the case of Sterling Food Ltd the enquiry ended at the scheme of the Govt. for Duty Draw Back and did not continue to reach the fact that DDBK arose out of the. exports made 10 A.Y. 2003-04 Vs. CIT (2003) 262 ITR 278 (SC) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that interest on deposit with electricity board is not derived from industrial undertaking as it was a step removed from the business of industrial undertaking. Thus in order to qualify for deduction u/s 80-lB the income should qualify the above test of being born out of immediate source of manufacture. Th…

J.P Morgan Services India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as partly allowed

ITA 477/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09 J.P. Morgan Services India P. Dcit 8(2) Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, बनाम/ Prism Tower, Level No.9 To M.K. Rd Vs. 11, Link Rd, Mindspace, Mumbai-400020 Malad (W) Mumbai-400064 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aabcd0503B

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 92C

…same cannot be termed as ‘derived from’ export oriented undertaking. The connotation ‘derived from’ is much narrower than that of the phrase ‘attributable to’. He placed reliance on following judgments: i. Liberty India 317 ITR 218 (SC) ii. Pandian Chemicals 262 ITR 278(SC) iii. Sterling Foods 237 ITR 579(SC) iv. Shah Originals 327 ITR 19(SC) and v. Swani Spice 332 ITR 288 (SC). 7.4. The Ld. CIT-DR made an alternative argument also that in case impugned interest income is considered as business income then quantification of the amount of deduction allowable should be done strictly in accordance with the mechan…

D.C.I.T.-Central Circle-XII, Kolkata vs. M/S Century Aluminium Mfg. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2408/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Md.Ghayasuddin Ansari, JCIT, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri N.P.Jain, Advocate

Section 801BSection 80ISection 80l

…nected to the industrial operation. 2. In doing so, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the ratio of the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Sterling Foods reported in 237 ITR 579 and Pandian Chemicals Ltd. Vs CIT reported in 262 ITR 278.” 3. The Assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing of aluminium and zinc based alloys and die-cast components. It is not in dispute that the assessee was entitled for deduction u/s 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) in respect of profits derived from the business of manufacturing and sale of aluminium and zinc based allo…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Malana Power Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 5478/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal Hon’Ble & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

Section 14Section 143Section 14ASection 37Section 80

…uty drawback receipts and DEPB benefits do not form part of the net profits of eligible undertaking for the purposes of deduction under section 80-IA, 80-IB, 80-IC of the act. Similarly Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Panday and chemicals Ltd reported in 262 ITR 278 has held that interest derived by the industrial undertaking of the assessee on deposits could not be said to flow directly from the industrial undertaking itself and was not profits or gains derived by such undertaking for the purposes of deduction under section80HHC. Respectfully following the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court we are inclined…

M/S. Veejay Impex, Kolkata vs. ACIT, C.C.-Xiii, Kol, Kolkata

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

ITA 1093/KOL/2006[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 May 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] Assessment Year : 2002-03 M/S. Veejay Impex -Versus- A.C.I.T., Central Circle-Xiii, Kolkata Kolkata (Pan:Aacfv5247L) (Appellant ) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S.M.S.Tauheed, JCIT, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 80H

…ity deposits with CESC Ltd, no specific arguments were advanced by the Learned AR with regard to the eligibility of claim of deduction u/ s 80HHC of the Act. We find that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pandian Chemicals Ltd vs CIT reported in (2003) 262 ITR 278 (SC) had held that the interest income from deposits with electricity boards would be taxable as income from other sources. Hence respectfully following the said decision, we hold that the assessee is not entitled for deduction u/s 80HHC of the Act in respect of interest income. Accordingly, the ground no. 6 raised by the assessee is dismissed. 6…

Ascendas It Sez (Chennai) Private Limited, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1193/CHNY/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Apr 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1193/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2009-2010. M/S. Ascendas It Sez (Chennai) Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Private Ltd, Company Ward I(1) No,9, Ist Floor, International Techpark, Chennai 600 034. Taramani Road, Taramani, Chennai 600 113. [Pan Aafca 5329L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Raghunathan Sampath, AdvFor Respondent: Shri. A.V.Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT

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

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार",लेखा सद"य एवं "ीजी. पवन कुमार,"या"यकसद"यकेसम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1193/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2009-2010. M/s. Ascendas IT SEZ (Chennai) Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Private Ltd, Company Ward I(1) No,9, Ist floor, International Techpark, Chennai 600 034. Taramani Road, Taramani, Chennai 600 113. [PAN AAFCA 5329L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri. Raghuna…

DCIT 5(2), Mumbai vs. Lahoti Overseas Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee company in ITA

ITA 3812/MUM/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3812/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04) Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Lahoti Overseas Ltd., बनाम/ Tax , 5(2),Room No. 571, 307, Arun Chambers, V. 5 Th Floor, Tardeo Road, Tardeo, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai - 400034. M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacl2578 H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Bare (Sr.DR)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)

…lements, which it can sell. The sale consideration therefrom cannot, in our view, be held to constitute a profit and gain derived from the assessees' industrial undertaking.” (Para 13) 15. Similarly, in Pandian Chemicals Limited v Commissioner of Income Tax, 262 ITR 278, this Court dealt with the claim for a deduction under Section 80HH of the Act. The question before the Court was as to whether interest earned on a deposit made with the Electricity Board for the supply of electricity to the appellant’s industrial undertaking should be treated as income derived from the industrial undertaking under Section 80HH.…

Jindal Drugs Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8, Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the CO filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 5394/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shjogindersingh & Rajendraआयकर अपील सं./Ita/5394/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2010-11 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. Jindal Drugs Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle-8 6 B&C, Bhaktawar , Nariman Point Old, Cgo Complex 8Th Floor Vs. Mumbai-400 021. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. Pan:Aaacj 1000 A. आयकर अपील सं./Ita/5495/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2010-11 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dy. Cit, Central Circle-8 Vs. M/S. Jindal Drugs Ltd. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 021. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ""या"ेप संसंसंसं./ C.O. No.242/Mum/2014 ""या"ेप ""या"ेप ""या"ेप आयकर अपील सं./Arising Out Of Ita/5495/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2010-11 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Vs. Dy. Cit, Central Circle-8 M/S. Jindal Drugs Ltd. Mumbai-400 021. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. Revenue By: Shri Ashish Heliwal Assessee By: Shri Ashok Mehta सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21.03.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 21.03.2016 आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra A.M.- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order,Dated 10.6.2013,Of Cit(A)-37 Mumbai The Assessing Officer (Ao)And The Assessee Have Filed Cross-Appeals For The Year Under Consideration.The Assessee Has Also Filed Cross Objections.During The Course Of Hearing Before Us,The Ar Stated That The Assessee Was Not Interested In Pursuing The C.O. Filed By It.Hence,Same Stands Dismissed As Not Pressed.

For Appellant: Shri Ashok MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Heliwal

Section 254(1)Section 80I

…Spices ( 165 ITR 755) wherein it has been held that that a forward contract of sale can be treated as a hedge transaction if such a contract is supported by a pre existing contract. 9.6 The AO has placed reliance on the decisions of Pandian Chemicals Vs. CIT (262 ITR 278)(SC) and CIT Vs. Sterling Foods (237 ITR 579) (SC) and holding that the hedging profit cannot be said to be forming a part of the profits of business of the industrial undertaking. In this regard, the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Eltek SGS (P) Ltd (300 ITR 6), in case of CIT V. Dharam Pal Prem Chand (2008-TIOL-664-HC-Del-IT…

Sara Services & Engineers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and those of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes in the manner as indicated above

ITA 408/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri O.P. Sapra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sujit Kumar, Sr-DR

Section 80I

…sal of section 80IC of the Act, it is apparent that unlike sections 80HH/80IA/80IB of the Act dealt by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgments of Cambay Electrical Supply Industrial Co. Vs. CIT [1978] [113 ITR 84][SC], Pandian Chemicals Ltd VS. CIT [2003] [262 ITR 278][SC] and CIT Vs. Sterling Foods [1999] [237 ITA Nos. 408 to 410 & 545 to 547 M/s Sara Services & Engineers P. Ltd ITR 579], incomes on account on commission, service charges, etc. are not in the nature of income which can be said to be derived from the industrial undertaking. But section 80IC of the Act provides deduction from gross total inco…