Pr. CIT v. Miele India Private Ltd.

127 Taxmann.com 684High Court2021#19012 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 1961

Judgments citing Pr. CIT v. Miele India Private Ltd.

BUENO INSTA PIZZA PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 6(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4280/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Smt Renu Jauhriassessment Year: 2016-17 Bueno Insta Pizza Pvt. Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd. Income Tax Circle 78/9, 2Nd Floor, 6(1)(2) Krishna Vihar, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. R. A. Kidwal Road, Mumbai- 400020. Wadala, Mumbai- 400031. Pan: Aagcb3987J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Karna ThakerFor Respondent: Shri Anurag Tripathi, SR. A.R

Section 143(2)Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SMT RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 Bueno Insta Pizza Pvt. Deputy Commissioner of Ltd. Income Tax Circle 78/9, 2nd Floor, 6(1)(2) Krishna Vihar, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. R. A. Kidwal Road, Mumbai- 400020. Wadala, Mumbai- 400031. PAN: AAGCB3987J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Karna Thaker Revenue by : Shri Anurag Tripathi, SR. A.R. Date of Hearing : 24.10.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 17.12.2024 O R D E R Per Beena Pillai, JM: Present appeal filed by the assessee…

ORIENT GREEN POWER CO. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

The appeals stands allowed

ITA 1216/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajith Kumar (JCIT) –Ld. DR

Section 143(3)

…bmitted that assessee had duly set-up its business during the year and all the work to set up the plant was already done by the assessee. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT V/s Miele India Private Ltd. (127 Taxmann.com 684) wherein it was held that when the assessee was ready to carry on business in previous year it could safely be concluded that business had been set-up and therefore expenditure incurred prior to launch a physical trading outlet would be allowable expenditure. Reliance has also been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in th…

ORIENT GREEN POWER CO. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

The appeals stands allowed

ITA 1215/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajith Kumar (JCIT) –Ld. DR

Section 143(3)

ITO CORPORATE WARD 1(3), CHENNAI vs. C.S.HOUSING PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

Accordingly, the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is confirmed and the appeal of the Revenue in I.T.A No.2427/Chny/2018 is dismissed

ITA 2427/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Mr. R. Sivaraman, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 35D

…after the commencement of business. 8. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the Assessee has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-6 vs. Miele India (P) Limited reported in [2021] 127 Taxmann.com 684 (Delhi) and the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of Samsara Hospitality (P.) Limited vs. Income-tax Officer reported in [2017] 85 Taxmann.com 36 (Mumbai – Trib.) and argued that the business of the Assessee has already been commenced and therefore various revenue expenditure was incurred for the purpose of business…