Punjab State Industrial Development Carp Ltd. v. CIT

138 ITR 45High Court1982#14880 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2021.

Judgments citing Punjab State Industrial Development Carp Ltd. v. CIT

Satya Narayan Dhoot, Jodhpur vs. ACIT, Circle-3, Jodhpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 35/JODH/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur07 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. Mohit Soni (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Sanchita Kumar (CIT-DR)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…n of account of Sulzon Pvt.Ltd and bills & invoices. Further, reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT v/s Saurashtra Cement Ltd 325 ITR 422 and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Shri Digvijay Cement Company Ltd. 138 ITR 45. The Ld. AO after due examination and verification of facts from documentary evidence and in the light of the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court had accepted that the amount received as liquidated damages due to delay in supply of machinery was a capital receipts and accordingly had allowed the claim of depreciation.…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Delhi Transport Corporation, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6658/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

…the income of the assessee. 6. Ld. CIT(A) considered the case of the assessee in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Digvijay Cement Co. Ltd. vs CIT (1982) 138 ITR 45 (Guj) wherein it was held by the Hon’ble High Court that having regard to the nature of the business of the assessee in the light of the terms of contract in respect of the provision for compensation for a delay in delivery, the sum received through compensation was not made with the intention of reducing the cost of machinery but to compensate th…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(3), Surat vs. M/S. Jivraj Tea Company, Surat

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2343/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat01 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.2343/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner Vs. Jivraj Tea Company, Of Income Tax, 5/258-259, Jivraj Chambers, Circle – 2(3), Surat. Ruwala Tekra, Bhagal, Surat. [Pan: Aacfj 2236 R] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah – Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Prasoon Kabra – Cit-Dr

Section 40A(2)(b)Section 80I

…blish that the borrowed funds have been used for advancing amounts to the partners, which has not been discharged. The ld. CIT(A) has relied on the decisions of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Gujarat in the cases of Shri Digvijay Cement Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 138 ITR 45 (Guj.) and CIT vs. Arihant Avenue and Credit Ltd. 36 taxmann.com 14 (Guj.), wherein it was held that where the assessee had given interest free advances to its sister concern but it was not the case of the revenue that interest bearing borrowed funds were given as interest free advances to sister concern then no addition on account of notional int…

Prabhakar Mishra, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-44, Kolkata

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

ITA 2255/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A T Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 2255/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Prabhakar Mishra -Vs- Dcit, Circle-44, Kolkata [Pan: Aezpm 7452 B ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kochar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Lakra, Addl. CIT Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 144

…e case of Woolcombers of India Ltd vs CIT reported in 134 ITR 219 (Cal) ; Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs Hotel Savera reported in 239 ITR 795 (Mad) and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Shree Digvijay Cement Co. Ltd vs CIT reported in 138 ITR 45 (Guj), among others. Respectfully following the ratio laid down in the said judicial precedents, we direct the ld AO to delete the disallowance of interest u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act in the sum of Rs 26,51,363/- . Accordingly, the Ground No. 5 raised by the assessee is allowed. 4. The next issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld…

Kuloday Technopack P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3300/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 3300/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 ) आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 2423/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri. M. SubramanianFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav,DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 172Section 172(1)Section 194CSection 195Section 40

…i) Brook Bond India Ltd. v. CIT(1997) 91 Taxman 26(SC) ii) Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Ltd v. ITO (1983) 12 Taxman 178 (Bom) iii) Punjab State Industrial Development Carp Ltd v. CIT(1997) 93 Taxman 5 (SC) iv) Shree Digvijay Cement Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1982) 138 ITR 45 (Guj) v) Bharat Carban & Ribbon Mfg Co. Ltd v. CIT (1981) 127 ITR 239 (Delhi) vi) Vazir Sultan Tabacco Co. Ltd. v. CIT(1988) 41 Taxman 7 (AP) vii) Metro General Credits Ltd. v. CIT(1996) 221 ITR 99 (Mad) I.T.A. No. 3300/Mum/2013 & 2423/Mum/2014 22 . Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal with learned CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the asses…

D.C.I.T Cir - 12, Kolkata vs. M/S Jct Limited., Kolkata

In the result the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1106/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A Nos. 1106 To 1109/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2004-05, 2006-07,2007-08 & 2008-09 D.C.I.T., Circle-12, -Vs.- M/S. J.C.T. Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaacj 6733 E] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Angam Shaiza, Cit For The Respondent : Shri A.K.Gupta, Fca

For Appellant: Shri Angam Shaiza, CITFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Gupta, FCA

Section 145Section 145ASection 43B

…f borrowed fund. The Assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble A.P. High Court in the case of CIT Vs Gopikrishna Murlidhar 47 ITR 469 (AP) whihch was followed by Gujrat High Court in 9 A.Y.2004-05,2006-07 to 2008-09 Digvijay Cement Co Ltd Vs CIT 138 ITR 45. It was further pointed out that in actual business situations, the borrowed fund and own fund are kept in a common pool. Even in case of Cash Credit A/cs, Overdraft A/cs. own funds are deposited therein and where the interest free advances are made by cheques, the advances were debited to Cash Credit /Overdraft A/cs. As such, the amount advanced…