Poonawala Estate Stud & Agro Farm (P) Ltd. v. ACIT

136 TTJ 236Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2011#13412 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2022.

Judgments citing Poonawala Estate Stud & Agro Farm (P) Ltd. v. ACIT

KIRLOSKAR INDUSTRIES LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 14,, PUNE

ITA 267/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav
Section 10(34)Section 14A

…onclusions of the AO is considered favourably, it defeats the purpose of provisions of section 80IA(4) and 80IA(5) read with umpteen decisions on this subject including the Tribunal’s decision in the case of Poonawala Estate Stud & Agro Farm (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT 136 TTJ 236 (Pune). 8.2 We find that there is no dispute on the fact that the assessment year 2009-10 is the initial assessment year in the hands of Kirloskar Oil Ltd. The dispute is only with respect to the manner of computation of deduction qua the set off of carry forward of losses. Further, we find there is no clarity as to the outcome of appeal by the R…

KIRLOSKAR INDUSTRIES LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE

ITA 787/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav
Section 10(34)Section 14A

…onclusions of the AO is considered favourably, it defeats the purpose of provisions of section 80IA(4) and 80IA(5) read with umpteen decisions on this subject including the Tribunal’s decision in the case of Poonawala Estate Stud & Agro Farm (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT 136 TTJ 236 (Pune). 8.2 We find that there is no dispute on the fact that the assessment year 2009-10 is the initial assessment year in the hands of Kirloskar Oil Ltd. The dispute is only with respect to the manner of computation of deduction qua the set off of carry forward of losses. Further, we find there is no clarity as to the outcome of appeal by the R…

KIRLOSKAR INDUSTRIES LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 14 (5),, PUNE

ITA 268/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav
Section 10(34)Section 14A

…onclusions of the AO is considered favourably, it defeats the purpose of provisions of section 80IA(4) and 80IA(5) read with umpteen decisions on this subject including the Tribunal’s decision in the case of Poonawala Estate Stud & Agro Farm (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT 136 TTJ 236 (Pune). 8.2 We find that there is no dispute on the fact that the assessment year 2009-10 is the initial assessment year in the hands of Kirloskar Oil Ltd. The dispute is only with respect to the manner of computation of deduction qua the set off of carry forward of losses. Further, we find there is no clarity as to the outcome of appeal by the R…

KIRLOSKAR INDUSTRIES LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

ITA 1383/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav
Section 10(34)Section 14A

…onclusions of the AO is considered favourably, it defeats the purpose of provisions of section 80IA(4) and 80IA(5) read with umpteen decisions on this subject including the Tribunal’s decision in the case of Poonawala Estate Stud & Agro Farm (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT 136 TTJ 236 (Pune). 8.2 We find that there is no dispute on the fact that the assessment year 2009-10 is the initial assessment year in the hands of Kirloskar Oil Ltd. The dispute is only with respect to the manner of computation of deduction qua the set off of carry forward of losses. Further, we find there is no clarity as to the outcome of appeal by the R…

KIRLOSKAR OIL ENGINES LTD.,,PUNE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose in the terms aforesaid

ITA 1831/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das
Section 14Section 14A

…the income from other business. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) allowed the benefit of deduction u/s. 80IA(4)(iv) by following the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Poonawala Estate Stud & Agro Farm Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT reported as 136 TTJ 236. The Department has filed appeal before the Hon’ble High Court against the aforesaid decision of Tribunal. The ld. DR submitted that the Ahmedabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Goldmine Shares and Finance Pvt. Ltd. in ITA Nos. 4044 to 4049/Ahd/2003 has held that the profit from eligible business for the purpose of determination of quantum…

KIRLOSKAR INDUSTRIES LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

ITA 1722/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri O.A. Mao
Section 14ASection 80I

…nclusions of the AO is considered favourably, it defeats the purpose of provisions of section 80IA(4) and 80IA(5) read with umpteen decisions on this subject including the Tribunal’s decision in the case of Poonawala Estate Stud & Agro Farm (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT 136 TTJ 236 (Pune). 8.2 We find that there is no dispute on the fact that the assessment year 2009-10 is the initial assessment year in the hands of Kirloskar Oil Ltd. The dispute is only with respect to the manner of computation of deduction qua the set off of carry forward of losses. Further, we find there is no clarity as to the outcome of appeal by t…

THE DCIT, 5(1), BHOPAL vs. M/S. SANWARIA AGRO OILS LTD., BHOPAL

In the result Ground No.2 of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 288/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 43BSection 80I

…ty as well as the lower Appellate Authority. The substantial question of law is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.” 8.9 Similar view as expressed by various Benches of the ITAT, such as in – (i) Poonawalla Estate Stud Farm Ltd. (2011) 136 TTJ 236 (Pune ITAT) (ii) Chordia Food Products Ltd, Pune Tribunal Order dated 26.06.2012 (iii) ACIT Vs.Surbha Subhash Lodha ITA No. 1845/PN/2013 order dated 24.09.2014 (Pune ITAT). Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and legal position on the issue, I am of the view that the appellant was eligible for deduction u/s 80IA of the…

Poonawala Estate Stud & Agro Farm (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (136 TTJ 236) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax