Rubber Industry Ltd. (1986) 157 ITR 77 (SC;, Mittal Belting and Machinery Stores v. CIT

266 ITR 178High Court2004#17526 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 54F

Judgments citing Rubber Industry Ltd. (1986) 157 ITR 77 (SC;, Mittal Belting and Machinery Stores v. CIT

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. NIRANJAN KOIRALA,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2253/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.2253/िद"ी/2010(िन.व. 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-31(1), R. No. 1405, 14Th Floor, E-2 Block, Pratyakshkar Bhawan, Civic Centre, Jln Marg, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi बनाम Vs. Niranjan Koirala, 27, Akbar Road, New Delhi ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaupk-0483-B Assessee By : Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate Department By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 23.05.2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 19.08.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxx, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 18.02.2010, For Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. This Appeal Was Decided By The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 20.07.2018. Thereafter, The Revenue Filed Miscellaneous Application Seeking Rectification In The Order Of Tribunal On The Ground That The Additional Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Vide Application Dated 13.08.2014 Remained To Be Decided. The Tribunal In Ma No. 732/Del/2018 Vide Order Dated 10.07.2023 Recalled The Order

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 54F

….(P) Ltd Vs. CIT(2001) 250 /TR 291 (Delhi;, Workmen of Association Rubber Industry Ltd. Vs. Associated Rubber Industry Ltd. (1986) 157 ITR 77 (SC;, Mittal Belting and Machinery Stores Vs. CIT (2002) 253 ITR 341 (P&H), Avasasala Automation Ltd. Vs. JCIT (2004) 266 ITR 178 (Kar.). 2.6 A show cause letter was issued to the assessee on 21.10.2008 asking him to explain as to why the claim of deduction u/s 54F may not be rejected. Assessee has filed his reply on 3.11.2008. The reply of the assessee has been examined in detail. The assessee has reiterated its earlier claim that the original asset owned by him was not th…

BARMINCO INDIAN UNDERGROUND MINING SERVICES LLP,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-28(1), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2253/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.2253/िद"ी/2010(िन.व. 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-31(1), R. No. 1405, 14Th Floor, E-2 Block, Pratyakshkar Bhawan, Civic Centre, Jln Marg, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi बनाम Vs. Niranjan Koirala, 27, Akbar Road, New Delhi ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaupk-0483-B Assessee By : Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate Department By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 23.05.2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 19.08.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxx, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 18.02.2010, For Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. This Appeal Was Decided By The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 20.07.2018. Thereafter, The Revenue Filed Miscellaneous Application Seeking Rectification In The Order Of Tribunal On The Ground That The Additional Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Vide Application Dated 13.08.2014 Remained To Be Decided. The Tribunal In Ma No. 732/Del/2018 Vide Order Dated 10.07.2023 Recalled The Order

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 54F

….(P) Ltd Vs. CIT(2001) 250 /TR 291 (Delhi;, Workmen of Association Rubber Industry Ltd. Vs. Associated Rubber Industry Ltd. (1986) 157 ITR 77 (SC;, Mittal Belting and Machinery Stores Vs. CIT (2002) 253 ITR 341 (P&H), Avasasala Automation Ltd. Vs. JCIT (2004) 266 ITR 178 (Kar.). 2.6 A show cause letter was issued to the assessee on 21.10.2008 asking him to explain as to why the claim of deduction u/s 54F may not be rejected. Assessee has filed his reply on 3.11.2008. The reply of the assessee has been examined in detail. The assessee has reiterated its earlier claim that the original asset owned by him was not th…

M/S. ICICI BANK LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG. - 3 (1), MUMBAI

ITA 4903/MUM/2005[1993-1994]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jan 2016AY 1993-1994
For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji (AR)For Respondent: Shri Manjunatha R. Swamy (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 32

…essee.He referred to the case of Popular Jewelers (238 ITR 676), Prakash S. Vyas(Tax Appeal No.660 of 2010 dt.15. 11.2011), Soft Touch Hygiene Products Pvt. Ltd.(Tax Appeal No.2146 of 2010 dt.20.12.2011) of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court, Avasarala Automation Ltd(266 ITR 178); Sundaram Finance Ltd. (353ITR375);TVS Finance & Services Ltd.(125 ITD 341); BPL Sanyo Finance(362 ITR 630); Times Guarantee Ltd. (1681/M/2007,AY-93-94)dt.10.10.2016; 4.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us.We find that vide its order dated 3.3.2004,(Income tax Appeal No.8 of 2004),the Hon’ble Bombay High Court h…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S MAA COMMUNICATION BOZELL LTD

The appeal is allowed

ITA/523/2006HC Karnataka04 Sept 2013

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 260Section 260ASection 32Section 80M

…olls i.e. Noble Road Lines, Mumbai, Balaji Road Lines and Madras Goods Movers, Chennai have clearly stated that they have transported only bulk scrap and coal to the BSAL and denied to have transported M.S.Rolls. He relied upon the judgments reported in 266 ITR 178 AVASARALA AUTOMATION LTD., V/S. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX and an unreported judgment made in ITA No.2611/2005 disposed of on 1-8-2008. He contended that the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal is contrary to law and sought for setting aside the same. 9. Sri.S.Parthasarathy, learned counsel appearing for the respondent argued…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. COSMO FILMS LTD

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/1404/2008HC Delhi18 Jul 2011

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

For Appellant: Ms Suruchi AggarwalFor Respondent: Mr Ajay Vohra with Ms Kavita Jha, Mr Sriram Krishna
Section 260

…e cases of sale and lease back transactions involving the State Electricity Boards. The Tribunal also took note of the fact that the decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Avasarala Automation Limited v. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax: 266 ITR 178 (Kar), which had been relied upon by the department, had been considered in the Bombay High Court decision as well as in the decision rendered by the Rajasthan High Court and had been distinguished by the said High Courts. 4. The present appeal was admitted on 06.07.2009, when the following question of law had been framed for adjudication…

Rubber Industry Ltd. (1986) 157 ITR 77 (SC;, Mittal Belting and Machinery Stores v. CIT (266 ITR 178) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax