Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. L.H. Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd.

392 ITR 568High Court2017#4560 most cited

What is Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. L.H. Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Income from the sale of carbon credits is capital in nature. This classification is supported by judicial precedent.

26

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. L.H. Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd. · 392 ITR 568 · Allahabad High Court · carbon credits · income from sale of carbon credits · capital in nature · Section 80-IA

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 158BBGSection 254

Issues it is cited on

section 40(1)section 41(1)(a)section 41(2)remission or cessation of liabilitysection 115psection 28(iv)section 32(1)(iia)trade creditorspurposive interpretationddtdeduction under section 80iadepreciation on goodwill

Judgments citing Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. L.H. Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd.

Srf Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 1, Ltu, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 4539/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jadhav, CIT DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 92BSection 92C

…he additional grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, we find that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. L.H. Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd. reported in 392 ITR 568 (All.) wherein the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court had held that income from sale of carbon credits/profits from sale of carbon credits is capital in nature. We also find that ITAT Bangalore Bench in the case of Subhash Kabini Power Corpn. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in (2015) 37 ITR (T)106 (Bang.Trib.) had held that once the Assessing Officer had allowed…

Srf Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 80/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jadhav, CIT DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 92BSection 92C

…he additional grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, we find that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. L.H. Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd. reported in 392 ITR 568 (All.) wherein the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court had held that income from sale of carbon credits/profits from sale of carbon credits is capital in nature. We also find that ITAT Bangalore Bench in the case of Subhash Kabini Power Corpn. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in (2015) 37 ITR (T)106 (Bang.Trib.) had held that once the Assessing Officer had allowed…

DCIT-2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Navin Fluorine International Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 4105/MUM/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Ms. Aarti Vissanji & Amod
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 158B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 4104/Mum/2013 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) I.T.A. No. 4105/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dy. CIT-(2(3)(1) Navin Fluorine International Ltd. 502, Aayakar Bhavan, Office No. 602, Natraj by Rustomjee, M.K. Road, Vs. Sir Mathuradas Vasanji Road, Mumbai - 400020. Andheri East, Mumbai-400069 PAN : AABCP0464B Appellant) : Respondent) Revenue/Respondent by : Ms. Aarti Vissanji & Amod Prabhudesai, CA : Shri S. Srinivasu, CIT-DR Appellant/Assessee by Date of Hearing : 06.05.2024 Date of Pronouncem…

DCIT-2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Navin Fluorine International Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 4104/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 158B

…Power Corporation Ltd, reported in (20161 385 ITR 592 (Karn) and followed by Allahabad High Court and Rajasthan High Court, (Allahabad High Court decision is in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v/s. LH Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd reported in (2017) 392 ITR 568 (All)). 5. In view of such consistent view of the different High Courts in the country, we see no reason to take a different stand. No question of law arises in these Appeals. Hence, not entertained. The Income Tax Appeals are dismissed.” After taking into consideration the detailed finding and judicial decision referred in the order of the ld. C…

Asst CIT (Ltu) 1, Mumbai vs. Grasim Industries Limited (As A Successor to Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1248/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Ms. A. Alankrutha, Sr. DR
Section 10BSection 115JSection 14ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 37Section 40Section 43BSection 80I

…f CIT vs. My Home Power Ltd. reported in 365 ITR 82; Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Subhash Kabini Power Corporation Ltd reported in 385 ITR 592; Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of PCIT vs L.H. Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd. reported in 392 ITR 568 had held that Carbon Credit receipts are to be construed as capital receipts. When this was put to the ld. DR, the ld. DR fairly conceded that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by various High Courts, but he however, prayed for verification of these figures by the ld. AO. The ld. AR also fairly agreed that verification of the figure…

Grasim Industries Limited (As A Successor to Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1065/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Ms. A. Alankrutha, Sr. DR
Section 10BSection 115JSection 14ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 37Section 40Section 43BSection 80I

…f CIT vs. My Home Power Ltd. reported in 365 ITR 82; Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Subhash Kabini Power Corporation Ltd reported in 385 ITR 592; Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of PCIT vs L.H. Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd. reported in 392 ITR 568 had held that Carbon Credit receipts are to be construed as capital receipts. When this was put to the ld. DR, the ld. DR fairly conceded that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by various High Courts, but he however, prayed for verification of these figures by the ld. AO. The ld. AR also fairly agreed that verification of the figure…

M/S. Zensar Technologies Ltd, Mumbai vs. The DCIT -2(3), Mumbai

In the result, ground No.5 and the additional ground of appeal are allowed

ITA 2907/MUM/2008[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2023AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shrigagan Goyalआअसं.2907/मुं/2008 ("न.व.2002-03) Zensar Technologies Ltd. Magnet House, 2Nd Floor, Narottam Morarjee Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400 038. Pan: Aaacf-0742-K ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 2(31), Mumbai Mumbai. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate : ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : S/Shri Jasdeep Singh, Cit-Dr & Pratap Narayan Sharma, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 02/06/2023 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 28/08/2023 आदेश/Order

For Respondent: S/Shri Jasdeep Singh, CIT-DR &
Section 10ASection 115JSection 234DSection 80HSection 94(7)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण मुंबई पीठ “जे”, मुंबई पीठ "ी "वकास अव"थी, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी गगन गोयल, लेखाकार सद"य के सम" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRIGAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसं.2907/मुं/2008 ("न.व.2002-03) Zensar Technologies Ltd. Magnet House, 2nd Floor, Narottam Morarjee Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400 038. PAN: AAACF-0742-K ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(31), Mumbai Mumbai. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant by Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate : ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent by :…

Dcm Shriram Industries Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-7(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 1000/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2017-18 With Assessment Year 2016-17 With Assessment Year 2015-16

Section 133(6)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘I’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 With Assessment year 2016-17 With Assessment year 2015-16 DCM Shriram Industries Vs. ACIT, Ltd., Circle -7(1), 6th Floor, Kanchenjunga Delhi Building, 18 Barakhamba Road, New Delhi PAN :AAACD0204C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, CA Sh. Ravi Kumar, CA Respondent by Sh. Mahesh Shah, CIT(DR) Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 17.02.2023 Date of pronouncement 15.03.2023 ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JM: Captioned appea…

Dcm Shriram Industries Ltd, New Delhi vs. Addi. CIT National E - Assesment Centre, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 539/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2017-18 With Assessment Year 2016-17 With Assessment Year 2015-16

Section 133(6)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘I’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 With Assessment year 2016-17 With Assessment year 2015-16 DCM Shriram Industries Vs. ACIT, Ltd., Circle -7(1), 6th Floor, Kanchenjunga Delhi Building, 18 Barakhamba Road, New Delhi PAN :AAACD0204C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, CA Sh. Ravi Kumar, CA Respondent by Sh. Mahesh Shah, CIT(DR) Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 17.02.2023 Date of pronouncement 15.03.2023 ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JM: Captioned appea…

Dcm Shriram Industries Ltd, New Delhi vs. Addi. CIT Special Range-3, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 1841/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2017-18 With Assessment Year 2016-17 With Assessment Year 2015-16

Section 133(6)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘I’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 With Assessment year 2016-17 With Assessment year 2015-16 DCM Shriram Industries Vs. ACIT, Ltd., Circle -7(1), 6th Floor, Kanchenjunga Delhi Building, 18 Barakhamba Road, New Delhi PAN :AAACD0204C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, CA Sh. Ravi Kumar, CA Respondent by Sh. Mahesh Shah, CIT(DR) Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 17.02.2023 Date of pronouncement 15.03.2023 ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JM: Captioned appea…

DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3178/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…(2016) 385 ITR 592 (Karn) and followed by lgc 2 of 3 (16) itxa-1820.16ors.doc Allahabad High Court and Rajasthan High Court, (Allahabad High Court decision is in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v/s. L Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd reported in (2017) 392 ITR 568 (All)). 5 In view of such consistent view of the different High Courts in the country, we see no reason to take a different stand. No question of law arises in these Appeals. Hence not entertained. The Income Tax Appeals are dismissed. 52. It is observed that identical issue has been decided in favour of assessee by Hon’ble Bombay High court ref…

Acc Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl CIT(Ltu), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3139/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…(2016) 385 ITR 592 (Karn) and followed by lgc 2 of 3 (16) itxa-1820.16ors.doc Allahabad High Court and Rajasthan High Court, (Allahabad High Court decision is in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v/s. L Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd reported in (2017) 392 ITR 568 (All)). 5 In view of such consistent view of the different High Courts in the country, we see no reason to take a different stand. No question of law arises in these Appeals. Hence not entertained. The Income Tax Appeals are dismissed. 52. It is observed that identical issue has been decided in favour of assessee by Hon’ble Bombay High court ref…

Srf Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addl CIT, New Delhi

In the result, this ground of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 774/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Ussrf Limited Vs. Acit Unitech Crest, Greenwood Range – 9, City Block – C, Sector – 45, Ltu, New Delhi Gurgaon – 122 003 Pan No. Aaacs 0206 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Pradeep Dinodia, Shri R. K. Kapoor C.A. Shri Ravi Kumar Revenue By Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit (Dr) Shri Rajesh Kumar, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 10/01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/02/2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Dated 27.09.2016 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-44, New Delhi [For Short, Cit(A)] Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [For Short, 'The Act'] For Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Culled Out From The Material On Record Are As Under:-

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER SRF Limited Vs. ACIT Unitech Crest, Greenwood Range – 9, City Block – C, Sector – 45, LTU, New Delhi Gurgaon – 122 003 PAN No. AAACS 0206 P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Shri Pradeep Dinodia, Shri R. K. Kapoor C.A. Shri Ravi Kumar Revenue by Shri Mahesh Shah, CIT (DR) Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT (DR) Date of hearing: 10/01/2023 Date of Pronouncement: 23/02/2023 ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM: The present appeal is filed by the assessee directed against the order…

Srf Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 1, Ltu, New Delhi

ITA 5892/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.5892/Del/2019, A.Y. 2008-09

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250

…the additional grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, we find that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of the Hon’ble Allahabad HighCourt in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. L.H. Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd. reported in 392 ITR 568 (All.) wherein the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court had held that income from sale of carbon credits/profits from sale of carbon credits is capital in nature. We also find that ITAT Bangalore Bench in the case of SubhashKabini Power Corpn. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in (2015) 37 ITR (T)106 (Bang .Trib.) had held that once the Assessing Officer had allowed…

Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd, Jalgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 2, Jalgaon

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 227/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr.Dipak P.Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.227/Pun/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Jain Plastic Park, N.H No.6, Vs Income Tax, Circle-2, Jalgaon – 425001. . Jalgaon. Pan: Aaacj 7163 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Percy Pardiwala; Shri Prashant Maheshwari & Ms.Monicamulchandani – Ar’S Revenue By Shri B Koteswara Rao – Dr Date Of Hearing 23/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22/12/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’Sappeal For Assessment Year 2013-14Is Directed Against Thedeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cricle-2, Jalgaon’S Assessment Order Dated 29.10.2017, Framed In Furtherance To The Dispute Resolution Panel-3, Mumbai (Drp)’S Direction Dated 25.09.2017 Passed In Objection No.78, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) R,.W.S 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

Section 143(3)Section 92D

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “सी” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “C” :: PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR.DIPAK P.RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No.227/PUN/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner of Jain Plastic Park, N.H No.6, Vs Income Tax, Circle-2, Jalgaon – 425001. . Jalgaon. PAN: AAACJ 7163 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee by Shri Percy Pardiwala; Shri Prashant Maheshwari and Ms.MonicaMulchandani – AR’s Revenue by Shri B Koteswara Rao – DR Date of hearing 23/09/2022 Date of pron…

DCIT Cir 10(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Navin Fluorine International Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is partly allowed while for the appeals of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7038/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ashok MehtaFor Respondent: S.N. Kabra
Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 41(1)

…Power Corporation Ltd, reported in (20161 385 ITR 592 (Karn) and followed by Allahabad High Court and Rajasthan High Court, (Allahabad High Court decision is in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v/s. LH Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd reported in (2017} 392 ITR 568 (All)). 5. In view of such consistent view of the different High Courts in the country, we see no reason to take a different stand. No question of law arises in these Appeals. Hence, not entertained. The Income Tax Appeals are dismissed.” After taking into consideration the detailed finding and judicial decision referred in the order of the ld.…

Navin Fluorine International Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is partly allowed while for the appeals of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6491/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ashok MehtaFor Respondent: S.N. Kabra
Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 41(1)

…Power Corporation Ltd, reported in (20161 385 ITR 592 (Karn) and followed by Allahabad High Court and Rajasthan High Court, (Allahabad High Court decision is in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v/s. LH Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd reported in (2017} 392 ITR 568 (All)). 5. In view of such consistent view of the different High Courts in the country, we see no reason to take a different stand. No question of law arises in these Appeals. Hence, not entertained. The Income Tax Appeals are dismissed.” After taking into consideration the detailed finding and judicial decision referred in the order of the ld.…

DCIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai vs. Navine Fluorine International Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is partly allowed while for the appeals of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5555/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ashok MehtaFor Respondent: S.N. Kabra
Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 41(1)

…Power Corporation Ltd, reported in (20161 385 ITR 592 (Karn) and followed by Allahabad High Court and Rajasthan High Court, (Allahabad High Court decision is in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v/s. LH Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd reported in (2017} 392 ITR 568 (All)). 5. In view of such consistent view of the different High Courts in the country, we see no reason to take a different stand. No question of law arises in these Appeals. Hence, not entertained. The Income Tax Appeals are dismissed.” After taking into consideration the detailed finding and judicial decision referred in the order of the ld.…

Navin Fluorine International Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is partly allowed while for the appeals of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5301/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ashok MehtaFor Respondent: S.N. Kabra
Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 41(1)

…Power Corporation Ltd, reported in (20161 385 ITR 592 (Karn) and followed by Allahabad High Court and Rajasthan High Court, (Allahabad High Court decision is in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v/s. LH Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd reported in (2017} 392 ITR 568 (All)). 5. In view of such consistent view of the different High Courts in the country, we see no reason to take a different stand. No question of law arises in these Appeals. Hence, not entertained. The Income Tax Appeals are dismissed.” After taking into consideration the detailed finding and judicial decision referred in the order of the ld.…

Srf Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 1, Ltu, New Delhi

Appeals are allowed

ITA 6693/DEL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: The Hearing Of The Appeal.

Section 28Section 37

…the additional grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, we find that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of the Hon’ble Allahabad HighCourt in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. L.H. Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd. reported in 392 ITR 568 (All.) wherein the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court had held that income from sale of carbon credits/profits from sale of carbon credits is capital in nature. We also find that ITAT Bangalore Bench in the case of SubhashKabini Power Corpn. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in (2015) 37 ITR (T)106 (Bang .Trib.) had held that once the Assessing Officer had allowed…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. L.H. Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd. (392 ITR 568) — Cited in 26 Judgments | BharatTax