Renowed Auto Products Mfgs. P. Ltd. v. ITO

354 ITR 127Reported decision#10820 most cited
10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Judgments citing Renowed Auto Products Mfgs. P. Ltd. v. ITO

RADHE RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT PVT LTD,RAJKOT vs. THE PCIT, RAJKOT-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 110/RJT/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot08 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Jain, CIT. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, राजकोट "यायपीठ, राजकोट । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Name of Sr. ITA No. Name of Appellant Year Respondent No. M/s Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.2621/22, ACIT, Circle-5, 1. No.139/Rjt/2015 2011-12 Lodhika GIDC, Rajkot Metoda, Rajkot. PAN: AACCR7723E M/s Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.2621/22, No.156/Rjt/2015 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-1(1), Lodhika GIDC, 2. Rajkot Metoda, Rajkot. PAN: AACCR7723E M/s Radhe Renewable Energ…

THE DEPUTY COMMR. INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2),, RAJKOT vs. M/S RADHE RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/RJT/2017[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot08 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Jain, CIT. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, राजकोट "यायपीठ, राजकोट । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Name of Sr. ITA No. Name of Appellant Year Respondent No. M/s Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.2621/22, ACIT, Circle-5, 1. No.139/Rjt/2015 2011-12 Lodhika GIDC, Rajkot Metoda, Rajkot. PAN: AACCR7723E M/s Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.2621/22, No.156/Rjt/2015 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-1(1), Lodhika GIDC, 2. Rajkot Metoda, Rajkot. PAN: AACCR7723E M/s Radhe Renewable Energ…

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. RADHE RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPEMENT PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 156/RJT/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Jain, CIT. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, राजकोट "यायपीठ, राजकोट । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Name of Sr. ITA No. Name of Appellant Year Respondent No. M/s Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.2621/22, ACIT, Circle-5, 1. No.139/Rjt/2015 2011-12 Lodhika GIDC, Rajkot Metoda, Rajkot. PAN: AACCR7723E M/s Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.2621/22, No.156/Rjt/2015 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-1(1), Lodhika GIDC, 2. Rajkot Metoda, Rajkot. PAN: AACCR7723E M/s Radhe Renewable Energ…

M/S RADHE RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE ASSTT. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 139/RJT/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Jain, CIT. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, राजकोट "यायपीठ, राजकोट । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Name of Sr. ITA No. Name of Appellant Year Respondent No. M/s Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.2621/22, ACIT, Circle-5, 1. No.139/Rjt/2015 2011-12 Lodhika GIDC, Rajkot Metoda, Rajkot. PAN: AACCR7723E M/s Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.2621/22, No.156/Rjt/2015 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-1(1), Lodhika GIDC, 2. Rajkot Metoda, Rajkot. PAN: AACCR7723E M/s Radhe Renewable Energ…

M/S.TAMILNADU GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION CORPN. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is

ITA 2262/CHNY/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2022AY 2006-07

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

Section 36(1)(viia)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद"य के सम$ BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2262/Chny/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) M/s.Tamil Nadu Generation and Vs Assistant Commissioner of Distribution Corporation Ltd. Income Tax, 800, NPKRR Maligai, Corporate Circle-3(1) Electricity Avenue, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 034. Chennai-600 002. PAN: AACCT 1245M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Mr. R.Vijayaraghavan, अपील…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. POLYHOSE INDIA (RUBBER) PVT. LTD., KANCHEEPURAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 17/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3387, 3388 & 3389/Mds/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2008-2009, 2009-10 & 2011-12) M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, C/O. B. Sivaraman & Associates, Ca Corporate Circle-V(2), 10, E Block, Karthik Apartments, Chennai – 34. 46, Vijayaragava Road, Chennai – 600 017. Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.17/Mds/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-2010) Vs M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., F-37 To F-42, Corporate Circle-5(2), Sipcot Industrial Park, Chennai – 34. Irungattukottai, Kanchipuram - 602105 Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Smt. S. Vijayaprabha, Jcit "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : 26.09.2017 सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.11.2017 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: 26.09.2017
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 32

…. This aspect is also made clear in the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case Forbes Campbell Finance Ltd reported in 352 ITR 602. Further the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case Renowned Auto Products Mfrs. Ltd reported in 354 ITR 127 has also made it clear that provision for warranty will be allowable as deduction only if it is computed on scientific method. Further in the case CIT vs. Sony India Pvt. Ltd reported in 160 taxman 397, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held that deduction on account of provision for gratuity will be allowed if it is claimed based on the past expe…

POLYHOSE INDIA RUBBER PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3389/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3387, 3388 & 3389/Mds/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2008-2009, 2009-10 & 2011-12) M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, C/O. B. Sivaraman & Associates, Ca Corporate Circle-V(2), 10, E Block, Karthik Apartments, Chennai – 34. 46, Vijayaragava Road, Chennai – 600 017. Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.17/Mds/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-2010) Vs M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., F-37 To F-42, Corporate Circle-5(2), Sipcot Industrial Park, Chennai – 34. Irungattukottai, Kanchipuram - 602105 Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Smt. S. Vijayaprabha, Jcit "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : 26.09.2017 सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.11.2017 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: 26.09.2017
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 32

…. This aspect is also made clear in the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case Forbes Campbell Finance Ltd reported in 352 ITR 602. Further the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case Renowned Auto Products Mfrs. Ltd reported in 354 ITR 127 has also made it clear that provision for warranty will be allowable as deduction only if it is computed on scientific method. Further in the case CIT vs. Sony India Pvt. Ltd reported in 160 taxman 397, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held that deduction on account of provision for gratuity will be allowed if it is claimed based on the past expe…

POLYHOSE INDIA RUBBER PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3388/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3387, 3388 & 3389/Mds/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2008-2009, 2009-10 & 2011-12) M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, C/O. B. Sivaraman & Associates, Ca Corporate Circle-V(2), 10, E Block, Karthik Apartments, Chennai – 34. 46, Vijayaragava Road, Chennai – 600 017. Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.17/Mds/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-2010) Vs M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., F-37 To F-42, Corporate Circle-5(2), Sipcot Industrial Park, Chennai – 34. Irungattukottai, Kanchipuram - 602105 Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Smt. S. Vijayaprabha, Jcit "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : 26.09.2017 सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.11.2017 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: 26.09.2017
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 32

…. This aspect is also made clear in the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case Forbes Campbell Finance Ltd reported in 352 ITR 602. Further the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case Renowned Auto Products Mfrs. Ltd reported in 354 ITR 127 has also made it clear that provision for warranty will be allowable as deduction only if it is computed on scientific method. Further in the case CIT vs. Sony India Pvt. Ltd reported in 160 taxman 397, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held that deduction on account of provision for gratuity will be allowed if it is claimed based on the past expe…

POLYHOSE INDIA RUBBER PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3387/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3387, 3388 & 3389/Mds/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2008-2009, 2009-10 & 2011-12) M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, C/O. B. Sivaraman & Associates, Ca Corporate Circle-V(2), 10, E Block, Karthik Apartments, Chennai – 34. 46, Vijayaragava Road, Chennai – 600 017. Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.17/Mds/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-2010) Vs M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., F-37 To F-42, Corporate Circle-5(2), Sipcot Industrial Park, Chennai – 34. Irungattukottai, Kanchipuram - 602105 Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Smt. S. Vijayaprabha, Jcit "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : 26.09.2017 सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.11.2017 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: 26.09.2017
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 32

…. This aspect is also made clear in the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case Forbes Campbell Finance Ltd reported in 352 ITR 602. Further the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case Renowned Auto Products Mfrs. Ltd reported in 354 ITR 127 has also made it clear that provision for warranty will be allowable as deduction only if it is computed on scientific method. Further in the case CIT vs. Sony India Pvt. Ltd reported in 160 taxman 397, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held that deduction on account of provision for gratuity will be allowed if it is claimed based on the past expe…

DCIT 8(3), MUMBAI vs. ZINSER TEXTILES SYSTEMS P.LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 4851/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2016AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Rushabh VoraFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Jain-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 254(1)

…ased on reliable estimates or not. The decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT (supra) has been considered by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the recent decision in case of Renowned Auto Products Mfrs. Ltd. Vs ITO, 354 ITR 127 in para 12 & 13 as under: “No doubt, the learned counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Apex court reported in Rotork Controls India P. Ltd. v. CIT [2009] 314 1TR 62 (SC) to substantiate his contention that the estimated provision for warranty cost is allowable. The very same decision was considered by the Division Bench of this c…