Punjab Distilling Industries Ltd. v. 34 Special Bench

57 ITR 1Supreme Court of India1965#8690 most cited
13

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

Issues it is cited on

section 115wasection 57(i)section 115bbdsection 2(43)section 4(1)section 115osection 2(45)section 10(33)section 14a(1)section 191section 49treaty benefits

Judgments citing Punjab Distilling Industries Ltd. v. 34 Special Bench

SRI. HARIS KALANDAN MOHAMMED ,MANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, MANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 878/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Sri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 234

…r 2018-19 from MSFIPL to present assessee, the computation of deemed dividend fails, as such provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act cannot be applied. Even otherwise, as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Punjab Distilling Industries Ltd. Vs. CIT 57 ITR 1 (SC) (Larger Bench) that in dictionary meaning of expression “distribution is to give each a share, to give to several persons”. The expression distribution connotes something actually not notional. It can be physical; it can also be constructive. One may distribute amount between different shareholders either by crediting the amount due to each one…

ABDUL AZEEZ POOLAKKODAN,KOTTAKKAL vs. ITO WARD 1, TIRUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1006/COCH/2022[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cochin19 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Anil Kumar Dugarabdul Azeez Poolakkodan Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 Poolakkodan House Tharif Bazar, Opp. Town Hall Randathani P.O. Vs. Tirur 676101 Malappuram 676510 [Pan: Acppa2490P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anil D. Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 10(37)Section 14Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 154Section 28Section 34Section 56Section 56(2)(viii)

…res the Act (i.e., on a view that interest u/s. 28 of LAA is capital in nature), that would entitle the assessing authority to disregard the same. The Hon'ble Apex Court per it’s Constitutional Bench decision in Punjab Distilling Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1965] 57 ITR 1 (SC) explained that there is no conflict between a receipt being capital in nature and, by fiction of law, an income chargeable 3 | P a g e Abdul Azeez Poolakkodan v. ITO to tax under the Act. That is, the nature of the receipt as capital, which is the purport of the decision in Ghanshyam (HUF) (supra), would not per se preclude interest from bein…

THE NEHRU MEMORIAL EDUCATION SOCIETY,KANHANGAD vs. ITO EXEMPTIONS, KANNUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 159/COCH/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. S. Seethalakshmithe Nehru Memorial The Income Tax Officer Education Society (Exemptions), Kannur Lakshmi Nivas Vs. Kanhangad - 671315 Kasaragod [Pan:Aabtt0633M] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Veeramani, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2

…e would be if the contribution by way of corpus donation, a capital receipt, could be regarded as part of the assessee’s 5 | P a g e The Nehru Memorial Education Society v. ITO income. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Punjab Distilling Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1965] 57 ITR 1 (SC) held that there is no conflict between a receipt being capital in nature and, by fiction of law, being an income chargeable to tax under the Act. Income, defined inclusively u/s. 2(24) of the Act, includes voluntary contributions received by a trust or institution created or established wholly or partly for charitable purposes [cl.(iia)]. The s…

CARMEL CONVENT ,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD, TRIVANDRAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes, and it’s stay petition is dismissed

ITA 689/COCH/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Mar 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. Seethalakshmi

For Appellant: Shri Anil D. Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)

…donees for the same to be regarded as corpus donation. 3.2 There is, to begin with, no conflict between a receipt being capital in nature and, by fiction of law, being an income chargeable to tax under the Act: Punjab Distilling Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1965] 57 ITR 1 (SC). The assessee claiming exemption u/s. 11(1)(d), the burden to though prove that the receipt is on capital account – a matter of fact, is on it, as indeed that the ingredients of the exemption provision, implying satisfaction of the essential conditions of the section, are met. Exemptions provisions, as indeed tax statutes, are to be strictly co…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 1953/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: FixedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसुं.6997/म ुं/2019(धन.व. 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai ...... अपीलाथी/Appellant बनाम Vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria, Andheri ( East), Mumbai 400 059 ..... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaace-2175-M C.O. No.57/Mum/2019 Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai – 400 059 ...... Cross Objector बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ...... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai.

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT-DR
Section 115

…e, dividend income paid to a non-resident is deemed to accrue in India only on payment and not on declaration. The ld. DR further referred to the decision in the case of Punjab Distilling Industries Ltd. vs. 34 Special Bench - Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. CIT, 57 ITR 1 (SC) to strengthen his argument that declaration is a stage, both in law and in time, which precedes accrual of income. 39. The ld. DR submits that the Companies Amendment Act, 2000 defines dividend in section 214A of the Act to mean “dividends includes interim dividend”. Once the dividend is declared (including interim dividend) the amount of prof…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 1952/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: FixedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसुं.6997/म ुं/2019(धन.व. 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai ...... अपीलाथी/Appellant बनाम Vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria, Andheri ( East), Mumbai 400 059 ..... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaace-2175-M C.O. No.57/Mum/2019 Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai – 400 059 ...... Cross Objector बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ...... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai.

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT-DR
Section 115

…e, dividend income paid to a non-resident is deemed to accrue in India only on payment and not on declaration. The ld. DR further referred to the decision in the case of Punjab Distilling Industries Ltd. vs. 34 Special Bench - Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. CIT, 57 ITR 1 (SC) to strengthen his argument that declaration is a stage, both in law and in time, which precedes accrual of income. 39. The ld. DR submits that the Companies Amendment Act, 2000 defines dividend in section 214A of the Act to mean “dividends includes interim dividend”. Once the dividend is declared (including interim dividend) the amount of prof…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 521/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: FixedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसुं.6997/म ुं/2019(धन.व. 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai ...... अपीलाथी/Appellant बनाम Vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria, Andheri ( East), Mumbai 400 059 ..... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaace-2175-M C.O. No.57/Mum/2019 Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai – 400 059 ...... Cross Objector बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ...... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai.

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT-DR
Section 115

…e, dividend income paid to a non-resident is deemed to accrue in India only on payment and not on declaration. The ld. DR further referred to the decision in the case of Punjab Distilling Industries Ltd. vs. 34 Special Bench - Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. CIT, 57 ITR 1 (SC) to strengthen his argument that declaration is a stage, both in law and in time, which precedes accrual of income. 39. The ld. DR submits that the Companies Amendment Act, 2000 defines dividend in section 214A of the Act to mean “dividends includes interim dividend”. Once the dividend is declared (including interim dividend) the amount of prof…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, SPL. RANGE-6, NEW DELHI

ITA 8968/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसुं.6997/म ुं/2019(धन.व. 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai ...... अपीलाथी/Appellant बनाम Vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria, Andheri ( East), Mumbai 400 059 ..... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaace-2175-M C.O. No.57/Mum/2019 Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai – 400 059 ...... Cross Objector बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ...... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai.

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT-DR
Section 115

…e, dividend income paid to a non-resident is deemed to accrue in India only on payment and not on declaration. The ld. DR further referred to the decision in the case of Punjab Distilling Industries Ltd. vs. 34 Special Bench - Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. CIT, 57 ITR 1 (SC) to strengthen his argument that declaration is a stage, both in law and in time, which precedes accrual of income. 39. The ld. DR submits that the Companies Amendment Act, 2000 defines dividend in section 214A of the Act to mean “dividends includes interim dividend”. Once the dividend is declared (including interim dividend) the amount of prof…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 8009/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसुं.6997/म ुं/2019(धन.व. 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai ...... अपीलाथी/Appellant बनाम Vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria, Andheri ( East), Mumbai 400 059 ..... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaace-2175-M C.O. No.57/Mum/2019 Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai – 400 059 ...... Cross Objector बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ...... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai.

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT-DR
Section 115

…e, dividend income paid to a non-resident is deemed to accrue in India only on payment and not on declaration. The ld. DR further referred to the decision in the case of Punjab Distilling Industries Ltd. vs. 34 Special Bench - Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. CIT, 57 ITR 1 (SC) to strengthen his argument that declaration is a stage, both in law and in time, which precedes accrual of income. 39. The ld. DR submits that the Companies Amendment Act, 2000 defines dividend in section 214A of the Act to mean “dividends includes interim dividend”. Once the dividend is declared (including interim dividend) the amount of prof…

M/S G G OILS & FATS PVT.LTD ,BATHINDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BATHINDA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 508/ASR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar05 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. No. 508/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora &For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 2(18)Section 2(22)(e)Section 56

…imilar challenge having been repelled in K.M.S. Lakshmana Aiyer (supra). The appeal was accordingly dismissed with costs. This was followed by another decision by the constitutional bench of the Apex Court in Punjab Distilling Industries Limited v. CIT [1965] 57 ITR 1 (SC), wherein, relying on, among others, the decision in Navnit Lal C. Jhaveri (supra), it upheld the constitutionality of s. 2(6A)(d), under challenge before it. There was no inconsistency, it clarified, between the receipt being a capital one under the company law and by fiction being treated as the income chargeable to tax under the Income-tax Ac…

M/S H.B.LEASING & FINANCE CO. vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/612/2004HC Delhi12 Jan 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 16(2)Section 2Section 80Section 80M

…es (CBDT) dated 03.08.1990. The CIT(A) also relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Kishanchand Chellaram vs CIT (1962) 46 ITR 640 (SC). That judgment had in turn relied upon the judgment in the case of Punjab Distilling Industries Ltd. vs CIT (1965) 57 ITR 1 (SC). This Court in M/s Kap Co. General Ltd. vs Commissioner of Income Tax (ITA No. 561/2004), decided on 22.11.2016, had answered an identical question of law in favour of the Revenue in the following terms: “......The assessee had claimed benefit under Section 80M of the Act contending that dividends have been duly distributed to its shareholder…

COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, HYDERABAD vs. M/S. DETERGENTS INDIA LTD

C.A. No.-009049-009051 - 2003Supreme Court08 Apr 2015

Bench: Cegat Was Also Dismissed By The Impugned Judgment Dated 22.4.2003. 2

Section 4Section 4(1)(a)Section 4(4)(c)

…v. ITO [AIR 1962 SC 123 : (1962) 2 SCR 983 : (1961) 43 ITR 393] ; Navnitlal C. Javeri v. CIT [AIR 1965 SC 1375 : (1965) 1 SCR 909 : (1965) 56 ITR 198] and Punjab Distilling Industries Ltd. v. CIT. [AIR 1965 SC 1862 : (1965) 3 SCR 1 : (1965) 57 ITR 1 : 35 Com Cas 541] 45. It is contended for the assessees that the definition of the expression “related person” is so arbitrary that it includes within that expression a distributor of the assessee. It is urged that the provision falls outside the ambit of Entry 84 of List I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution in…

COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, HYDERABAD vs. M/S. DETERGENTS INDIA LTD

C.A. No.-009049-009051 - 2003Supreme Court08 Apr 2015

Bench: Cegat Was Also Dismissed By The Impugned Judgment Dated 22.4.2003. 2

Section 4Section 4(1)(a)Section 4(4)(c)

…v. ITO [AIR 1962 SC 123 : (1962) 2 SCR 983 : (1961) 43 ITR 393] ; Navnitlal C. Javeri v. CIT [AIR 1965 SC 1375 : (1965) 1 SCR 909 : (1965) 56 ITR 198] and Punjab Distilling Industries Ltd. v. CIT. [AIR 1965 SC 1862 : (1965) 3 SCR 1 : (1965) 57 ITR 1 : 35 Com Cas 541] 45. It is contended for the assessees that the definition of the expression “related person” is so arbitrary that it includes within that expression a distributor of the assessee. It is urged that the provision falls outside the ambit of Entry 84 of List I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution in…