Privy Council in CIT v. Gurupada Dutta

14 ITR 100Reported decision1946#4459 most cited

What is Privy Council in CIT v. Gurupada Dutta authority for?

A rate imposed upon a business owner or occupier, where the quantum is fixed after considering the owner's circumstances including business income, is not assessed on the basis of profits and is therefore allowable as a business expense.

26

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2022.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Gurupada Dutta · 14 ITR 100 · Privy Council · deductible expenditure · business expense · section 10(4) · section 40(a)(ii) · section 29 · profits and gains of business or profession

Issues it is cited on

section 10(4)section 90asection 40(a)(ii)section 91comparable companiessection 30profits and gains of business or professiontransfer pricing adjustmentsection 90section 29section 40(a)section 92c

Judgments citing Privy Council in CIT v. Gurupada Dutta

RAMJEE CONCRETES PVT.LTD.,MOHALI vs. ITO-WARD-6(3), CHANDIGARH

The appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms

ITA 205/CHANDI/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Jan 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 205/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Ramjee Concretes Private Limited, The Ito, बनाम #1238.Sector 91, Ward 6(3), Mohali, Punjab Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aafcr9457E अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Singla, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

…nga and Palkhivala's “The Law and Practice of Income Tax” (Tenth Edition), several decisions have been analyzed in the context of provisions of Section 40(a)(ii) of the IT Act, 1961. There is reference to the decision of Privy Council in CIT Vs Gurupada Dutta 14 ITR 100, where a union rate was imposed under a Village Self Government Act upon the assessee as the owner or occupier of business premises, and the quantum of the rate was fixed after consideration of the 'circumstances' of the assessee, including his business income. The Privy Council held that the rate was not 'assessed on the basis of profits' and was…

SHAHI EXPORTS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 843/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Delhi17 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Shah, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 37Section 40A(2)Section 80ISection 92BSection 92C

…Palllivala's "The Low and Practice of Income Tax '(Tenth Edition) several decisions have been analyzed in the context of provisions of Section a0(a)(fi) of the IT Act, 196l . There is reference to the decision of Privy Council in CIT v. Gurupada Dutta [1946] 14 ITR 100 (PC), where a union rate was imposed under a Village Self Government Act upon the assessee as the owner or occupier of business premises, and the quantum of the rate was fixed after consideration of the circumstances' of the assessee, including his business income. The Privy Council held that the rate was not 'assessed on the basis of profits' and…

CENDUIT (INDIA) SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 227/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Ketan K. Ved, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)

…nga and Palkhivala's "The Law and Practice of Income Tax" (Tenth Edition), several decisions have been analyzed in the context of provisions of Section 40(a)(ii) of the IT Act, 1961. There is reference to the decision of Privy Council in CIT v. Gurupada Dutta 14 ITR 100, where a union rate was imposed under a Village Self Government Act upon the assessee as the owner or occupier of business premises, and the quantum of the rate was fixed after consideration of the 'circumstances' of the assessee, including his business income. The Privy Council held that the rate was not 'assessed on the basis of profits' and was…

KALYANI STEELS LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 14,, PUNE

The appeal of the assesse is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1403/PUN/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao() & Shri Ravish Sood () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Kalyani Steels Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Mundhwa, Vs. Income-Tax Circle-14, Pune – 411 036 Aaykarsadan, Bodhi Tower, 548/2B, Salisbury Park, Gultekdi, Pune – 411 037. Pan No. Aaack7315D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Nikhil Pathak, A.RFor Respondent: Shri. M.G Jasnani, D.R
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…Kanga and Palkhivala's “The Law and Practice of Income Tax” (Tenth Edition), several decisions have been analyzed in the context of provisions of Section 40(a)(ii) of the IT Act, 1961. There is reference to the decision of Privy Council in CIT VsGurupadaDutta 14 ITR 100, where a union rate was imposed under a Village Self Government 15 TXA17&18-13 dt.28.02.2020 Act upon the assessee as the owner or occupier of business premises, and the quantum of the rate was fixed after consideration of the 'circumstances' of the assessee, including his business income. The Privy Council held that the rate was not 'assessed on…

M/S. S R BATLIBOI & COMPANY LLP,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 22, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2589/KOL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manish Borad, Am]

Section 10(4)Section 40

…1 M/s. S. R. Batliboi & Company LLP, AY 2016-17 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ –“B” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Hon’ble Shri Manish Borad, AM] I.T.A. No. 2589/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/s. S. R. Batliboi & Company Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income- LLP. tax, Circle-22, Kolkata. (PAN: ACHFS9180N) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing (Virtual) 16.09.2021 Date of Pronouncement 26.10.2021 For the Appellant Shri Debabrata Ghosh, AR For the Respondent Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT ORDER Per Shri A. T. Varkey, JM: This is an appeal…

BACHHRAJ & COMPANY PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIRCLE- 3 (1)(1), MUMBAI

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed on the same terms

ITA 7349/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita Nos.7348 & 7349/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16) Bachhraj & Company The Assistant Commissioner Private Limited, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Of Income-Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Bajaj Bhawan, Room No. 607, Aayakar 226, Nariman Point, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan No. Aaacb5589N (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee By : Shri Kirit Kamdar, A.R Revenue By : Shri Kprr Murty, D.R Date Of Hearing : 04/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 08/10/2021

For Appellant: Shri Kirit Kamdar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri KPRR Murty, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…nga and Palkhivala's ―The Law and Practice of Income Tax‖ (Tenth Edition), several decisions have been analyzed in the context of provisions of Section 40(a)(ii) of the IT Act, 1961. There is reference to the decision of Privy Council in CIT Vs Gurupada Dutta 14 ITR 100, where a union rate was imposed under a Village Self Government 15 TXA17&18-13 dt.28.02.2020 Act upon the assessee as the owner or occupier of business premises, and the quantum of the rate was fixed after consideration of the 'circumstances' of the assessee, including his business income. The Privy Council held that the rate was not 'assessed on…

BACHHRAJ & COMPANY PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIRCLE- 3 (1)(1), MUMBAI

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed on the same terms

ITA 7348/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita Nos.7348 & 7349/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16) Bachhraj & Company The Assistant Commissioner Private Limited, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Of Income-Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Bajaj Bhawan, Room No. 607, Aayakar 226, Nariman Point, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan No. Aaacb5589N (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee By : Shri Kirit Kamdar, A.R Revenue By : Shri Kprr Murty, D.R Date Of Hearing : 04/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 08/10/2021

For Appellant: Shri Kirit Kamdar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri KPRR Murty, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…nga and Palkhivala's ―The Law and Practice of Income Tax‖ (Tenth Edition), several decisions have been analyzed in the context of provisions of Section 40(a)(ii) of the IT Act, 1961. There is reference to the decision of Privy Council in CIT Vs Gurupada Dutta 14 ITR 100, where a union rate was imposed under a Village Self Government 15 TXA17&18-13 dt.28.02.2020 Act upon the assessee as the owner or occupier of business premises, and the quantum of the rate was fixed after consideration of the 'circumstances' of the assessee, including his business income. The Privy Council held that the rate was not 'assessed on…

PERFETTI VAN MELLE INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1), GURGAON

In the result, the additional ground raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 463/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench “I-2”, New Delhi

For Appellant: Mr. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Meera Shrivastava, CIT (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80Section 80ISection 92C

…Palkhivala's "The Law and Practice of Income Tax” (Tenth Edition), several decisions have been analyzed in the context of provisions of Section 40(a)(z7) of the IT Act, 1961. There is reference to the decision of Privy Council in CIT v. Gurupada Dutta [1946] 14 ITR 100 (PC), where a union rate was imposed under a Village Self Government Act upon the assessee as the owner or occupier of business premises, and the quantum of the rate was fixed after consideration of the 'circumstances' of the assessee, including his business income. The Privy Council held that the rate was not 'assessed on the basis of profits' an…

ASHOK KIRTANLAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ADD. CIT CC-22 (1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 5842/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M.Balalganesh () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ashok Kirtanlal Shah Addl. Cit-Range 19(1) (Presently, Addl, Circle 22(1) 401, 4Th Floor, Anand House, Vs. Piramal Chambers, Lal Baug, 13Th Road, Off. Linking Road, Mumbai 400 012 Khar West, Mumbai – 400 052

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…nga and Palkhivala's ―The Law and Practice of Income Tax‖ (Tenth Edition), several decisions have been analyzed in the context of provisions of Section 40(a)(ii) of the IT Act, 1961. There is reference to the decision of Privy Council in CIT Vs Gurupada Dutta 14 ITR 100, where a union rate was imposed under a Village Self Government 15 TXA17&18-13 dt.28.02.2020 Act upon the assessee as the owner or occupier of business premises, and the quantum of the rate was fixed after consideration of the 'circumstances' of the assessee, including his business income. The Privy Council held that the rate was not 'assessed on…

AVAYA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 466/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 466/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Avaya India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, 202, Platina, 2Nd Floor, Plot No. Circle-1(1), C-59, G-Block, Bandra Kurla New Delhi Complex, Bandra(E), Mumabi, Maharashtra-400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaeca3592N Assessee By : Sh. Kamal Sawhney, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Surender Pal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.07.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Kamal Sawhney, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Surender Pal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92C

…t levied upon determined as per section 28 of the Act, is claimed to be an allowable expense. 3.11.3.3.1 The Panel, however, does not find the argument acceptable. It may be noted that Jaipuria Samla was a decision, which followed CIT v Gurupada Dutta (1946] 14 ITR 100 in the context of 'cess' levied under the Bengal Cess Act,1880 and is no longer good law under the Income tax Act 1961 as held by the Supreme Court in Smith Kline & French (India) Ltd. V CIT [1996] 85 Taxman 683 (SC), where BP Jeevan Reddy, J explicated the law in the following terms: 24 Avaya India Pvt. Ltd. "6. The learned counsel for the appell…

M/S NOVOZYMES SOUTH ASIA PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 895/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.894/Bang/2018 Assessment Year:2012-13

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayan, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

…Palkhivala's "The Law and Practice of Income Tax" (Tenth Edition), several decisions have been analyzed in the context of provisions of Section 40(a)(ii) of the IT Act, 1961. There is reference to the decision of Privy Council in CIT v. Gurupada Dutta [1946] 14 ITR 100 (PC), where a union rate was imposed under a Village Self Government Act upon the assessee as the owner or occupier of business premises, and the quantum of the rate was fixed after consideration of the 'circumstances' of the assessee, including his business income. The Privy Council held that the rate was not 'assessed on the basis of profits' an…

M/S NOVOZYMES SOUTH ASIA PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 894/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.894/Bang/2018 Assessment Year:2012-13

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayan, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

…Palkhivala's "The Law and Practice of Income Tax" (Tenth Edition), several decisions have been analyzed in the context of provisions of Section 40(a)(ii) of the IT Act, 1961. There is reference to the decision of Privy Council in CIT v. Gurupada Dutta [1946] 14 ITR 100 (PC), where a union rate was imposed under a Village Self Government Act upon the assessee as the owner or occupier of business premises, and the quantum of the rate was fixed after consideration of the 'circumstances' of the assessee, including his business income. The Privy Council held that the rate was not 'assessed on the basis of profits' an…

THE SARSWAT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 1 (3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 6609/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Anil Sathe, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Neehar Pandey, CIT D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 3Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…ITA Nos. 6609 &6610/Mum/2019 A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15 1 The Saraswat Cooperative Bank Ltd. Vs. ITO-1(3)(1) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member and Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member ITA. No.6609 /Mum/2019 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) The Saraswat Co-operative Bank Ltd. Income tax Officer-1(3)(1) Sarawat Bank Bhavan, Plot No.953, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Appasaheb Marathe Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai – 400 020 Vs Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400 025 PAN – AABAT4497Q (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA. No.6610/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Saraswa…

AJANTA PHARMA LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT,CC-7(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 4785/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No.4784 & 4785/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) M/S Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of 98, Ajanta House, Vs. Income-Tax-Central Circle 6(2),19Th Floor, Air India Govt. Industrial Area, Hindustan Naka, Building, Nariman Point, Charkop,Kandivli (West), Mumbai – 400 021. Mumbai – 400 067. Pan No. Aaaca5579P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistri, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Harit, CIT D.R
Section 143(2)Section 37(1)

…M/s Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT, Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA No.4784 & 4785/MUM/2019 (Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) M/s Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Dy. Commissioner of 98, Ajanta House, Vs. Income-tax-Central Circle 6(2),19th Floor, Air India Govt. Industrial Area, Hindustan Naka, Building, Nariman Point, Charkop,Kandivli (west), Mumbai – 400 021. Mumbai – 400 067. PAN No. AAACA5579P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri J.D. Mistri, Senior Advocate Re…

AJANTA PHARMA LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT,CC-7(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 4784/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No.4784 & 4785/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) M/S Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of 98, Ajanta House, Vs. Income-Tax-Central Circle 6(2),19Th Floor, Air India Govt. Industrial Area, Hindustan Naka, Building, Nariman Point, Charkop,Kandivli (West), Mumbai – 400 021. Mumbai – 400 067. Pan No. Aaaca5579P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistri, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Harit, CIT D.R
Section 143(2)Section 37(1)

…M/s Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT, Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA No.4784 & 4785/MUM/2019 (Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) M/s Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Dy. Commissioner of 98, Ajanta House, Vs. Income-tax-Central Circle 6(2),19th Floor, Air India Govt. Industrial Area, Hindustan Naka, Building, Nariman Point, Charkop,Kandivli (west), Mumbai – 400 021. Mumbai – 400 067. PAN No. AAACA5579P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri J.D. Mistri, Senior Advocate Re…

BACHHRAJ FACTORIES PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-3(1)(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 3986/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2021AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Kirit KamdarFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 14A

…Palkhivala's "The Law and Practice of Income Tax" (Tenth Edition), several decisions have been analyzed in the context of provisions of Section 40(a)(ii) of the IT Act, 1961. There is reference to the decision of Privy Council in CIT v. Gurupada Dutta [1946] 14 ITR 100 (PC), where a union rate was imposed under a Village Self Government Act upon the assessee as the owner or occupier of business premises, and the quantum of the rate was fixed after consideration of the 'circumstances' of the assessee, including his business income. The Privy Council held that the rate was not 'assessed on the basis of profits' an…

SULZER PUMPS INDIA LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal for AY 2012-13 is partly allowed

ITA 1153/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridharan, Shri S. SriramFor Respondent: Shri A. Mohan, Shri Sushil Kr
Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 92CSection 95D

…Palkhivala's "The Law and Practice of Income Tax" (Tenth Edition), several decisions have been analyzed in the context of provisions of Section 40(a)(ii) of the IT Act, 1961. There is reference to the decision of Privy Council in CIT v. Gurupada Dutta [1946] 14 ITR 100 (PC), where a union rate was imposed under a Village Self Government Act upon the assessee as the owner or occupier of business premises, and the quantum of the rate was fixed after consideration of the 'circumstances' of the assessee, including his business income. The Privy Council held that the rate was not 'assessed on the basis of profits' an…

J.B. CHEMICALS AND PHARMACEUTICAL LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7389/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Vikas Awasthy & Shri N.K.Pradhanआअसं. 7389/मुं/2016 ("न.व. 2010-11) J.B.Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Ltd., B Wing, 4Th Floor, Hind Cycle Road, Worli, Mumbai 400 030 Pan: Aaacj1482G ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. The Dy. Cit, Central Circle -2(1), Cgo Building, 8Th Floor, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Percy J. Pardiwalla with Shri Niraj D. ShethFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra
Section 115Section 37(1)

…nga and Palkhivala's “The Law and Practice of Income Tax” (Tenth Edition), several decisions have been analyzed in the context of provisions of Section 40(a)(ii) of the IT Act, 1961. There is reference to the decision of Privy Council in CIT Vs Gurupada Dutta 14 ITR 100, where a union rate was imposed under a Village Self Government Act upon the assessee as the owner or occupier of business premises, and the quantum of the rate was fixed after consideration of the 'circumstances' of the assessee, including his business income. The Privy Council held that the rate was not 'assessed on the basis of profits' and was…

IL & FS TRANSPORTATION NETWORKS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - RANGE - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4177/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Soodil & Fs Transportation Networks Asstt. Commissioner Of Limited, The Il & Fs Financial Income-Tax, Range -14(2)(1), Center, Plot No.C-22, Room No. Aaykar Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Vs. 460, 4Th Floor, G Block, Bandra- Road, Marine Lines, Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 051 Pan – Aabcc5460A (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit -14(2)(1), M/S Il & Fs Transportation Network 432, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd., Il & Fs Financial Centre, 8Th Vs. Mumbai – 400 020 Floor, C-22, G Block, B.K.C. Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400051

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Bhalla, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA Nos. 4177/Mum/2018 And 3638/Mum/2018 A.Y: 2012-13 1 IL &FS Transportation Networks Limited VS. Asstt. CIT, Range 14(2)(1) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member and Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member IL & FS Transportation Networks Asstt. Commissioner of Limited, The IL & FS Financial Income-tax, Range -14(2)(1), Center, Plot No.C-22, Room No. Aaykar Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Vs. 460, 4th Floor, G Block, Bandra- Road, Marine Lines, Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 051 PAN – AABCC5460A (Appellant) (Respondent) DCIT -14(2)(…

M/S HONEYWELL TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS LAB PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1210/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojarim/S. Honeywell Technology Solutions Lab Pvt. Ltd., 151/1, Bannerghata Road, Doraisanpalya, Bangalore-560 076 ….Appellant Pan Aaach 4151J Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. ……Respondent. Assessee By: Smt. Shreya Loyalka, C.A. Revenue By: Shri B.K. Panda, Cit (D.R)

For Appellant: Smt. Shreya Loyalka, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Panda, CIT (D.R)
Section 80J

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “ B ” BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Honeywell Technology Solutions Lab Pvt. Ltd., 151/1, Bannerghata Road, Doraisanpalya, Bangalore-560 076 ….Appellant PAN AAACH 4151J Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. ……Respondent. Assessee By: Smt. Shreya Loyalka, C.A. Revenue By: Shri B.K. Panda, CIT (D.R) Date of Hearing : 17.12.2020. Date of Pronouncement : 07.01.2021. O R D E R PER SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, AM : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the…

Showing 1–20 of 26 · Page 1 of 2

Privy Council in CIT v. Gurupada Dutta (14 ITR 100) — Cited in 26 Judgments | BharatTax