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

Roha Dyechem P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 43, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and revenue except ITA No

ITA 2863/MUM/2009[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2004-05 Acit Cen Ci-43 Rohadyechem Pvt Ltd., 6Th Floor, R.No. 659, Aayakar Survoday Mill Compund, Bhavan, M.K.Rd. Vs. M.P. Mills, Tardeo, Mumbai 400 020 Mumbai-400 034 Pan No. Aaacr 4974P Appellant Respondent

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80HSection 80ISection 92C

…ther similar receipt are not derived from the business of industrial undertaking,and hence not eligible for deduction under section 80IB of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Pandiyan chemicals Ltd (262 ITR 278) and disallowed the claim of the assessee for deduction under section 80IB of the Act in respect of net interest income of ₹ 40, 89, 209/-. We find that Tribunal (supra) also following the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Pandiyan chemical (supra) decided the issue against the assessee observing as under: “5. Ground No.2 : After heari…

Roha Dyechem Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT-Central Circle 43, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and revenue except ITA No

ITA 2862/MUM/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2004-05 Acit Cen Ci-43 Rohadyechem Pvt Ltd., 6Th Floor, R.No. 659, Aayakar Survoday Mill Compund, Bhavan, M.K.Rd. Vs. M.P. Mills, Tardeo, Mumbai 400 020 Mumbai-400 034 Pan No. Aaacr 4974P Appellant Respondent

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80HSection 80ISection 92C

…ther similar receipt are not derived from the business of industrial undertaking,and hence not eligible for deduction under section 80IB of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Pandiyan chemicals Ltd (262 ITR 278) and disallowed the claim of the assessee for deduction under section 80IB of the Act in respect of net interest income of ₹ 40, 89, 209/-. We find that Tribunal (supra) also following the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Pandiyan chemical (supra) decided the issue against the assessee observing as under: “5. Ground No.2 : After heari…

Roha Dyechem Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT-Central Circle 43, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and revenue except ITA No

ITA 2860/MUM/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2004-05 Acit Cen Ci-43 Rohadyechem Pvt Ltd., 6Th Floor, R.No. 659, Aayakar Survoday Mill Compund, Bhavan, M.K.Rd. Vs. M.P. Mills, Tardeo, Mumbai 400 020 Mumbai-400 034 Pan No. Aaacr 4974P Appellant Respondent

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80HSection 80ISection 92C

…ther similar receipt are not derived from the business of industrial undertaking,and hence not eligible for deduction under section 80IB of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Pandiyan chemicals Ltd (262 ITR 278) and disallowed the claim of the assessee for deduction under section 80IB of the Act in respect of net interest income of ₹ 40, 89, 209/-. We find that Tribunal (supra) also following the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Pandiyan chemical (supra) decided the issue against the assessee observing as under: “5. Ground No.2 : After heari…

Roha Dyechem P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 43, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and revenue except ITA No

ITA 2859/MUM/2009[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2004-05 Acit Cen Ci-43 Rohadyechem Pvt Ltd., 6Th Floor, R.No. 659, Aayakar Survoday Mill Compund, Bhavan, M.K.Rd. Vs. M.P. Mills, Tardeo, Mumbai 400 020 Mumbai-400 034 Pan No. Aaacr 4974P Appellant Respondent

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80HSection 80ISection 92C

…ther similar receipt are not derived from the business of industrial undertaking,and hence not eligible for deduction under section 80IB of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Pandiyan chemicals Ltd (262 ITR 278) and disallowed the claim of the assessee for deduction under section 80IB of the Act in respect of net interest income of ₹ 40, 89, 209/-. We find that Tribunal (supra) also following the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Pandiyan chemical (supra) decided the issue against the assessee observing as under: “5. Ground No.2 : After heari…

ACIT Cen Ci-43 vs. Roha Dyechem P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and revenue except ITA No

ITA 10/MUM/2009[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2004-05 Acit Cen Ci-43 Rohadyechem Pvt Ltd., 6Th Floor, R.No. 659, Aayakar Survoday Mill Compund, Bhavan, M.K.Rd. Vs. M.P. Mills, Tardeo, Mumbai 400 020 Mumbai-400 034 Pan No. Aaacr 4974P Appellant Respondent

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80HSection 80ISection 92C

…ther similar receipt are not derived from the business of industrial undertaking,and hence not eligible for deduction under section 80IB of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Pandiyan chemicals Ltd (262 ITR 278) and disallowed the claim of the assessee for deduction under section 80IB of the Act in respect of net interest income of ₹ 40, 89, 209/-. We find that Tribunal (supra) also following the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Pandiyan chemical (supra) decided the issue against the assessee observing as under: “5. Ground No.2 : After heari…

JCIT (OSD) (TDS)-2(3). Mumbai, Mumbai vs. M/S Wockhardt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2012–

ITA 894/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Pranay GandhiFor Respondent: Shri A.B. Koli
Section 133ASection 194ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

…rtaking. It was observed that such an interest is distinct from interest income which is being received from Fixed Deposit. Case laws referred were CIT v. Paras Oil Extraction Ltd. [1998] 230 ITR 266/96 Taxman 234 (MP) and Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT [2003] 262 ITR 278/ 129 Taxman 539 (SC). 11. An another interesting feature involved to resolve this controversy is that the revenue otherwise cannot allow the claim of payment under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act because as per this section, the deduction is provided in respect of the amount of interest paid in respect of capital borrowed for the purpose of busines…

JCIT (OSD) (TDS)-2(3), Mumbai. vs. M/S Wockhardt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2012–

ITA 893/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Pranay GandhiFor Respondent: Shri A.B. Koli
Section 133ASection 194ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

…rtaking. It was observed that such an interest is distinct from interest income which is being received from Fixed Deposit. Case laws referred were CIT v. Paras Oil Extraction Ltd. [1998] 230 ITR 266/96 Taxman 234 (MP) and Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT [2003] 262 ITR 278/ 129 Taxman 539 (SC). 11. An another interesting feature involved to resolve this controversy is that the revenue otherwise cannot allow the claim of payment under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act because as per this section, the deduction is provided in respect of the amount of interest paid in respect of capital borrowed for the purpose of busines…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Visakhaptnam vs. Dredging Corporation of India Limited, Visakhaptnam

In the result, appeal and cross objections of the assessee as well as the appeal of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 54/VIZ/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.211/Viz/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16) M/S Dredging Corporation Of India Ltd. Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Dredge House, Hb Colony, Main Road Income Tax Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam Circle-3(1) [Pan : Aaacd6021B] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.54/Viz/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16) Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Dredging Corporation Of Income Tax India Ltd. Circle-3(1) Dredge House, Hb Colony, Visakhapatnam Main Road, Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaacd6021B] Cross Objection No.48/Viz/2021 (Arising Out Of I.T.A No.54/Viz/2021) M/S Dredging Corporation Of India Ltd. Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Dredge House, Hb Colony, Main Road Income Tax Seethammadhara Circle-3(1) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaacd6021B] निर्धारितऩ की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar िधजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, Cit(Dr) सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing 18.07.2022 : घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.09.2022

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, CIT(DR)
Section 115VSection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…tivity. The Ld.CIT(A) followed the order of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2006-07 to 2008- 09 supra. The Ld.CIT(A) also applied the ratio of the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Pandian Chemicals Ltd. Vs. CIT(2003) (262 ITR 278). 26. Against the order of theLd.CIT(A), the revenue has filed appeal before this Tribunal. 27. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. The issue is squarely covered against the revenue in the assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2009-10 to 2011-12 in I.T.A. Nos.555/Viz/2013, 602/Viz/2013, 78-80/Viz/2014 a…

Dredging Corporation of India, Visakhapatnam vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal and cross objections of the assessee as well as the appeal of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 211/VIZ/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.211/Viz/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16) M/S Dredging Corporation Of India Ltd. Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Dredge House, Hb Colony, Main Road Income Tax Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam Circle-3(1) [Pan : Aaacd6021B] Visakhapatnam आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.54/Viz/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16) Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Dredging Corporation Of Income Tax India Ltd. Circle-3(1) Dredge House, Hb Colony, Visakhapatnam Main Road, Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaacd6021B] Cross Objection No.48/Viz/2021 (Arising Out Of I.T.A No.54/Viz/2021) M/S Dredging Corporation Of India Ltd. Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Dredge House, Hb Colony, Main Road Income Tax Seethammadhara Circle-3(1) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaacd6021B] निर्धारितऩ की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar िधजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, Cit(Dr) सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing 18.07.2022 : घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.09.2022

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, CIT(DR)
Section 115VSection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…tivity. The Ld.CIT(A) followed the order of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2006-07 to 2008- 09 supra. The Ld.CIT(A) also applied the ratio of the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Pandian Chemicals Ltd. Vs. CIT(2003) (262 ITR 278). 26. Against the order of theLd.CIT(A), the revenue has filed appeal before this Tribunal. 27. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. The issue is squarely covered against the revenue in the assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2009-10 to 2011-12 in I.T.A. Nos.555/Viz/2013, 602/Viz/2013, 78-80/Viz/2014 a…

Hikal Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 5388/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2022AY 2009-10
Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘H‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & M/s. Hikal Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner of 717/718, Maker Chambers V Income Tax, Circle-3(1) Nariman Point, Aaykar Bhawan Mumbai – 21 M.K.Road Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AAACH0383A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) ACIT Circle-3(1) Vs. M/s. Hikal Ltd., Room No.607, 6th Floor 717/718, Maker Chambers V Aaykar Bhawan Nariman Point, M.K.Road Mumbai – 21 Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AAACH0383A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Sanjay Parikh Revenue by Shri Vivek Anand Ojh…

Hikal Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 5387/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2022AY 2008-09
Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘H‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & M/s. Hikal Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner of 717/718, Maker Chambers V Income Tax, Circle-3(1) Nariman Point, Aaykar Bhawan Mumbai – 21 M.K.Road Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AAACH0383A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) ACIT Circle-3(1) Vs. M/s. Hikal Ltd., Room No.607, 6th Floor 717/718, Maker Chambers V Aaykar Bhawan Nariman Point, M.K.Road Mumbai – 21 Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AAACH0383A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Sanjay Parikh Revenue by Shri Vivek Anand Ojh…

DCIT (OSD) Cir 3(1), Mumbai vs. Hikal Ltd, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 5372/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2022AY 2009-10
Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘H‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & M/s. Hikal Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner of 717/718, Maker Chambers V Income Tax, Circle-3(1) Nariman Point, Aaykar Bhawan Mumbai – 21 M.K.Road Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AAACH0383A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) ACIT Circle-3(1) Vs. M/s. Hikal Ltd., Room No.607, 6th Floor 717/718, Maker Chambers V Aaykar Bhawan Nariman Point, M.K.Road Mumbai – 21 Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AAACH0383A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Sanjay Parikh Revenue by Shri Vivek Anand Ojh…

Sigma Electric Manufacturing Corporation Pvt.Ltd, (Formerly Known As Sigma Electric Manufacturing Pvt.Ltd), Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 10, Pune

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1740/PUN/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Aug 2022AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Sharad ShahFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 10ASection 10B

…attributable to the income of the undertaking. That by itself does not make the interest income of fixed deposits as derived from the industrial undertaking. In this context, the supreme Court has held in the case of Pandian Chemicals Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 262 ITR 278 (SC) that interest on deposits with electricity department cannot be held to have been derived by the Industrial undertaking even though it is statutory to treat a deposit with electricity authority for supply of electricity to the undertaking. The appellant had tried to distinguish this judgment by relying on the judgment of Bombay High Court in…

Sigma Electric Manufacturing Corporation Pvt.Ltd, (Formerly Known As Sigma Electric Manufacturing Pvt.Ltd), Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 10, Pune

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1741/PUN/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Aug 2022AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Sharad ShahFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 10ASection 10B

…attributable to the income of the undertaking. That by itself does not make the interest income of fixed deposits as derived from the industrial undertaking. In this context, the supreme Court has held in the case of Pandian Chemicals Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 262 ITR 278 (SC) that interest on deposits with electricity department cannot be held to have been derived by the Industrial undertaking even though it is statutory to treat a deposit with electricity authority for supply of electricity to the undertaking. The appellant had tried to distinguish this judgment by relying on the judgment of Bombay High Court in…

Tata Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2692/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jul 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi a/wFor Respondent: Smt. Somogyan Pal, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 80Section 80HSection 80M

…tled to import entitlements, 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 Ltd. v. CIT [2003] 262 ITR 278/129 Taxman 539 (SC) , 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 undertakin…

DCIT 2(2), Mumbai vs. Tata Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2553/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jul 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi a/wFor Respondent: Smt. Somogyan Pal, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 80Section 80HSection 80M

…tled to import entitlements, 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 Ltd. v. CIT [2003] 262 ITR 278/129 Taxman 539 (SC) , 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 undertakin…

DCIT 2(2), Mumbai vs. Tata Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2733/MUM/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jul 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi a/wFor Respondent: Smt. Somogyan Pal, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 80Section 80HSection 80M

…tled to import entitlements, 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 Ltd. v. CIT [2003] 262 ITR 278/129 Taxman 539 (SC) , 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 undertakin…

Tata Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2440/MUM/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jul 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi a/wFor Respondent: Smt. Somogyan Pal, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 80Section 80HSection 80M

…tled to import entitlements, 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 Ltd. v. CIT [2003] 262 ITR 278/129 Taxman 539 (SC) , 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 undertakin…

Narayan Industires, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 60(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 6153/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Aakash Deep Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. N. K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 253

…e is entitled to import entitlements, 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) 26. In Pandian Chemicals Ltd. vs. CIT [2003] 262 ITR 278/129 Taxman 539 (SC), the Hon’ble 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 unde…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad vs. Sai Regency Power Corporations Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1221/HYD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. Sai Regency Power Income Tax, Corporation Private Circle – 3(1), Limited, Kondapur, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaccr6134R. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri C.A. M.Chandramouleswar Rao Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy. Date Of Hearing: 14.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.06.2022 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Having Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Order Dt.18.06.2019 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Only Effective Ground Raised By The Revenue Reads As Under : “Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Disallowance U/S. 80Ia On Interest Income Of Rs.3,00,93,705/- Without Appreciating The Fact That The Assessee Company Is Not Eligible For Deduction U/S. 80Ia On Interest Income Of Rs.3,00,93,705/- As The Income Was Not Directly Generated From Business Operations & Ignoring The Fact That Assessee Itself Has Shown Separately Such Income In The Computation Of Income For A.Y. 2010-11 & Not Claimed Deduction U/S 80Ia Thereon.”

For Appellant: Shri C.A. M.ChandramouleswarFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

…sessment year 1997-98 in I. T. A. No. 3569/M/ 2001 through their order dated 5 September 13, 2004. After considering the facts and features of the case and also considering the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT [2003] 262 ITR 278, the Tribunal has held that the interest income earned by the assessee was in the nature of business income and should be considered as part of business profit for the purpose of granting deduction under section 80-IA. We find that this issue stands fully covered by the said order in favour of the assessee. Accordingly, we direct the assessing au…