PCIT v. Britannia Industries Ltd.

396 ITR 677High Court2017#1587 most cited

What is PCIT v. Britannia Industries Ltd. authority for?

An assessee is entitled to raise additional grounds of appeal before the appellate authorities, including the Tribunal or High Court, provided such grounds are purely legal in nature and arise from facts already available on record.

71

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Britannia Industries Ltd. · Britannia Industries · additional ground of appeal · raising new legal ground · appellate authorities · ITAT · High Court · facts on record · assessment procedure · Section 143(2) · Section 147 · Section 263

Also reported as

145 Taxmann.com 618

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 1961Section 144Section 68Section 263

Issues it is cited on

section 119(2)(a)section 147ofsection 10(26)revision u/s 263section 119(2)section 139(5)complete scrutinypreponderance of probabilitysection 119section 151asection 40a(3)limited scrutiny

Judgments citing PCIT v. Britannia Industries Ltd.

Blueprint Infrahomes LLP, Jaipur vs. ADIT CPC Bengaluru Or ITO Ward 6(1) Jaipur, Jaipur

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

ITA 68/JPR/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Aug 2023AY 2021-22

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

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 801BSection 80I

…e claim of deduction not claimed before the AO by filing the revised return and tribunal in exercising of its power u/s 254 justified in accepting this claim though no revised return u/s 139(5) was fled before the AO also refer CIT v/s Britania Industries Ltd 396 ITR 677(Cal.) 3.3 In the case of Suresh Kumar Agarwal vs. Joint Director Of Income Tax IN ITA Nos. 1073 & 1074/JP/2018 Mar 15, 2022 (2022) 64 CCH 0234 Jaipur Trib It has been held that Penalty— Penalty for failure to answer question, sign statement, furnish information, returns or statements, allow inspection etc.—Assessee is an individual and having bu…

ACIT 3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Hikal Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 3517/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharish & Pavan Kumar Gadaleacit – 3(1)(2), Vs. M/S Hikal Ltd Room No. 607, 6Th Floor 717/718, Maker Aayakar Bhavan, Chambers V, Mumbai – 400020. Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaach0383A Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Smt .Madhumalti Gosh.Cit Dr Respondent By : Sri.Sanjay Parikh.Ar Date Of Hearing 16.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 25.01.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai, Passed U/S 154 & 250 Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Smt .Madhumalti Gosh.CIT DRFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjay Parikh.AR
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 154

…l receipts and not income liable to tax, the Tribunal in exercise of its power under section 254 was justified in allowing this claim though no revised return under section 139(5) was filed before the Assessing Officer. CIT v. BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD. [2017] 396 ITR 677 (Cal) followed. GOETZE (INDIA) LTD. v. CIT [2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC) distinguished. Cases referred to: Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT [2002] 255 ITR 273 (SC) (paras 12,30) Hikal Ltd.Mumbai. CIT v. Britannia Industries Ltd. [2017] 396 ITR 677 (Cal) (paras 23, 33) CIT v. Chaphalkar Brothers [2018] 400 ITR 279 (SC) (para 15) CIT v. Gloster Jute Mills Ltd.…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4, Kolkata vs. M/S. Krishi Rasayan Exports Pvt. Ltd

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed with no order as

ITA/120/2018HC Calcutta14 Sept 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya Date : September 14, 2022. Appearance: Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. … For Appellant Mr. R.K. Murarka, Sr. Adv. Mr. S.D. Verma, Adv. …For Respondent The Court :- This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The `Act’) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 8Th March, 2017 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) In I.T.A. No. 883 & 1018/Kol/2014 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. The Appeal Was Admitted To Decide The Following Substantial Question Of Law:-

Section 115Section 115JSection 2(24)Section 260A

…power of the assessing authority and does not impinge on the power of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.” This judgment was followed by our court in the case of CIT v. Britannia Industries Ltd. reported in [2017] 396 ITR 677 (Cal) holding that the Tribunal has the power to entertain the claim of deduction not claimed before the Assessing Officer by filing a revised return. Respectfully following the aforesaid decision as well as the view already taken by us in this case that the aforesaid subsidies are capital receipt and not an “income” and not liable to tax, the Tr…

Principal Comm of Income Tax 4, Kolkata vs. M/S Krishi Rasayan Exports Pvt Ltd

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed with no order as

ITA/17/2021HC Calcutta14 Sept 2022

Bench: :

Section 115Section 115JSection 2(24)Section 260A

…of the assessing authority and does not impinge on the power of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.” This judgment was followed by our court in the case of CIT v. Britannia Industries Ltd. reported in [2017] 396 ITR 677 (Cal) holding that the Tribunal has the power to entertain the claim of deduction not claimed before the Assessing Officer by filing a revised return. Respectfully following the aforesaid decision as well as the view already taken by us in this case that the aforesaid subsidies are capital receipt and not an “income” and not liable to tax,…

Principal Comm of Income Tax 4, Kolkata vs. M/S Krishi Rasayan Exports Pvt Ltd

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed with no order as

ITA/18/2021HC Calcutta14 Sept 2022

Bench: :

Section 115Section 115JSection 2(24)Section 260A

…of the assessing authority and does not impinge on the power of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.” This judgment was followed by our court in the case of CIT v. Britannia Industries Ltd. reported in [2017] 396 ITR 677 (Cal) holding that the Tribunal has the power to entertain the claim of deduction not claimed before the Assessing Officer by filing a revised return. Respectfully following the aforesaid decision as well as the view already taken by us in this case that the aforesaid subsidies are capital receipt and not an “income” and not liable to tax,…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 2 Kolkata vs. M/S Orient Paper and Industries Ltd

ITAT/164/2022HC Calcutta12 Sept 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya Date : September 12, 2022. Appearance: Ms. Smita Das De, Adv. … For Appellant Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Adv. …For Respondent Ga/1/2022 The Court :- Heard Ms. Smita Das De, Learned Standing Counsel For The Appellant & Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Learned Advocate For The Respondent. There Is A Delay Of 202 Days In Filing The Appeal. We Have Perused The Affidavit Filed In Support Of The Petition & We Find That Sufficient Cause Has Been Shown For Not Being Able To Prefer The Appeal Within The Period Of Limitation. Accordingly, The Application Is Allowed & The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned.

Section 260

…, 2022 has taken a similar view and also the decisions of this Court in the case PCIT VS. EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD. in ITAT 96 of 2018 dated 4th January, 2022 and also the decision in COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD. reported in [2017] 396 ITR 677 (CAL). Thus the Tribunal has rightly taken note of the legal position and dismissed the appeal filed by the revenue. Thus we find that there is no ground to interfere with the order passed by the learned Tribunal. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the substantial questions of law are answered against the revenue.…

Mayank Jalan, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed and for AY 2014-15 is allowed

ITA 360/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…of the Act cannot exceed dividend income earned during the year at Rs.8,88,566/-. This Tribunal, thereafter, referring to various judgments including the judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Britannia Industries Ltd. reported in 396 ITR 677 and the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Milton Laminates Pvt. Ltd. reported in 218 Taxman 108 and in view of the CBDT Circular No. 14 dated 11.04.1955 instructing the officers of the Department not to take advantage of ignorance of the assessee as to his rights and also assist a taxpayer in every reasonable way, particul…

Mayank Jalan, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed and for AY 2014-15 is allowed

ITA 359/KOL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…of the Act cannot exceed dividend income earned during the year at Rs.8,88,566/-. This Tribunal, thereafter, referring to various judgments including the judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Britannia Industries Ltd. reported in 396 ITR 677 and the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Milton Laminates Pvt. Ltd. reported in 218 Taxman 108 and in view of the CBDT Circular No. 14 dated 11.04.1955 instructing the officers of the Department not to take advantage of ignorance of the assessee as to his rights and also assist a taxpayer in every reasonable way, particul…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 Kolkata vs. Bangiya Gramin Vikash Bank

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed with no order as

ITAT/17/2021HC Calcutta21 Feb 2022

Bench: :

Section 115Section 115JSection 2(24)Section 260A

…of the assessing authority and does not impinge on the power of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.” This judgment was followed by our court in the case of CIT v. Britannia Industries Ltd. reported in [2017] 396 ITR 677 (Cal) holding that the Tribunal has the power to entertain the claim of deduction not claimed before the Assessing Officer by filing a revised return. Respectfully following the aforesaid decision as well as the view already taken by us in this case that the aforesaid subsidies are capital receipt and not an “income” and not liable to tax,…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Kolkata vs. M/S. Bip Developers (P) Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITAT/165/2021HC Calcutta10 Feb 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam A N D The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : February 10, 2022. [Via Video Conference] Appearance : Mr. S.N. Dutta, Adv. … For The Appellant Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Adv. Mr. Indranil Banerjee, Adv. Mr. S. Rudra, Adv. … For The Respondent The Court : This Appeal By The Revenue Filed Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ For Brevity) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18Th December, 2019 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) In Ita No. 1366/Kol/2019 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration: A) Whether The Itat Has Jurisdiction Or Authority To Override The Statutory Provision Of Law As By The

Section 139(5)Section 260A

…the case of PCIT vs. Eastern Coalfeilds Ltd. in ITAT 96 of 2018 dated 4th January, 2022. In the said decision, we have also noted about the decision which was passed by this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Britannia Industries Ltd. reported in [2017] 396 ITR 677 (Cal). Thus, following the above decisions, we find the Tribunal was right in dismissing the appeal filed by the revenue. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Substantial questions of law are answered against the revenue. Consequently, the stay application also stands dismissed. (T. S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.) GH/RS…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 Kolkata vs. M/S Bidit Financial Management Pvt Ltd

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed with no order as

ITAT/18/2021HC Calcutta18 Feb 2021

Bench: :

Section 115Section 115JSection 2(24)Section 260A

…of the assessing authority and does not impinge on the power of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.” This judgment was followed by our court in the case of CIT v. Britannia Industries Ltd. reported in [2017] 396 ITR 677 (Cal) holding that the Tribunal has the power to entertain the claim of deduction not claimed before the Assessing Officer by filing a revised return. Respectfully following the aforesaid decision as well as the view already taken by us in this case that the aforesaid subsidies are capital receipt and not an “income” and not liable to tax,…