Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. v. CIT

228 ITR 253Supreme Court of India1997#166 most cited

What is Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

A subsidy is treated as a revenue receipt if the assessee is free to use the money in its business as it likes and is not obligated to spend it for a specific capital purpose, such as acquiring assets or repaying loans.

429

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. v. CIT · subsidy revenue receipt · capital receipt · taxability of subsidies · Section 2(24)(xviii) · Section 37(1) · purpose of subsidy · obligation to spend · income tax treatment of subsidies

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 115JBSection 14ASection 2(24)(xviii)Section 37(1)Section 32Section 43(1)Section 147

Issues it is cited on

section 2(24)(xviii)section 43(1)section 40(a)(ii)book profitsdeduction under section 80iablock of assetssection 80hhcadditional depreciationwritten down valuesection 139(5)section 80hhsection 2(24)

Judgments citing Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. v. CIT

DCIT Cent. Cir 2(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Vinati Organics Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 1667/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 1667 To 1669/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years:2014-15 To 2016-17) Dy. Commissioner Of बिधम/ M/S. Vinati Organics Ltd. 11Th Income Tax Floor, 1102, Parinee Vs. Central Circle-2(2), Old Crescenzo, G Block, Plot Cgo Building, 8Th Floor, M. No.C38/39, Behind Mca, K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Bkc, Bandra East, Mumbai- 400051. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacv6538K (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. Ar) Assessee By: None सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 08/03/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/04/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Different Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -48, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys. 2014-15 To 2016-17. Ita. No.1667/Mum/2021 2. The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 26.07.2021 Passed By The Cit(A)-48, Mumbai Relevant To The A.Y. 2014- 15. 3. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. Whether The Cit (A) Was Justified Against The Ao’S Action Not Considering The Claim Of Export Incentive Of Rs. ,66,70,644/- By

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. AR)
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)

…etting up of the industry but after commencement of production for repayment of loan. In such situation, the amount should have been treated as revenue receipt, as per judgment of the Hon ‘ble Supreme Court in Sahne Steel & Press Works Ltd. & Ors. Ve CIT 997) 228 ITR 253. ITA No.95/Kol/2011 M/s. Gloster Jute Mills Ltd. A.Yr.2007-08. 3. We are unable to accept the submission. 6. The purpose of scheme under which the subsidy is given, has been discussed by the Tribunal. To sustain and prove the competitiveness and overall long term viability of the textile industry, the concerned Ministry of Textile adopted the TU…

Vivimed Labs Limited, Hyderabad vs. 500082 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle2-(3), Hyderabad

ITA 189/HYD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Apr 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai – CIT DR
Section 143(3)

…ction treating its subsidy amounts received; is the nature of industrial promotions assistance, under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme, 2000, as revenue items than capital receipts. The Revenue’s case in light of hon’ble apex court landmark decision in (1997) 228 ITR 253 (SC) Sahney Steel and Press Works Limited Vs. CIT is that the lower authorities have rightly treated the impugned sum as a revenue item assessable to tax. We find no merit in Revenue’s instant arguments as the tribunal’s latest decision DCIT Vs. M/s. Ankit Metal and Pvt. Ltd. (2021) 92 ITR 189 (Trib) (Kal) holds the very incentive scheme as givin…

Vivimed Labs Limited, Hyderabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad

ITA 188/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai – CIT DR
Section 143(3)

…ction treating its subsidy amounts received; is the nature of industrial promotions assistance, under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme, 2000, as revenue items than capital receipts. The Revenue’s case in light of hon’ble apex court landmark decision in (1997) 228 ITR 253 (SC) Sahney Steel and Press Works Limited Vs. CIT is that the lower authorities have rightly treated the impugned sum as a revenue item assessable to tax. We find no merit in Revenue’s instant arguments as the tribunal’s latest decision DCIT Vs. M/s. Ankit Metal and Pvt. Ltd. (2021) 92 ITR 189 (Trib) (Kal) holds the very incentive scheme as givin…

Vivimed Labs Limited, Hyderabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle2-(3), Hyderabad

ITA 187/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai – CIT DR
Section 143(3)

…ction treating its subsidy amounts received; is the nature of industrial promotions assistance, under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme, 2000, as revenue items than capital receipts. The Revenue’s case in light of hon’ble apex court landmark decision in (1997) 228 ITR 253 (SC) Sahney Steel and Press Works Limited Vs. CIT is that the lower authorities have rightly treated the impugned sum as a revenue item assessable to tax. We find no merit in Revenue’s instant arguments as the tribunal’s latest decision DCIT Vs. M/s. Ankit Metal and Pvt. Ltd. (2021) 92 ITR 189 (Trib) (Kal) holds the very incentive scheme as givin…

Vivimed Labs Limited, Hyderabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 2(3), Hyderabad

ITA 186/HYD/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai – CIT DR
Section 143(3)

…ction treating its subsidy amounts received; is the nature of industrial promotions assistance, under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme, 2000, as revenue items than capital receipts. The Revenue’s case in light of hon’ble apex court landmark decision in (1997) 228 ITR 253 (SC) Sahney Steel and Press Works Limited Vs. CIT is that the lower authorities have rightly treated the impugned sum as a revenue item assessable to tax. We find no merit in Revenue’s instant arguments as the tribunal’s latest decision DCIT Vs. M/s. Ankit Metal and Pvt. Ltd. (2021) 92 ITR 189 (Trib) (Kal) holds the very incentive scheme as givin…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4, Kolkata vs. Ambuja Cement Eastern Limited

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

ITAT/376/2017HC Calcutta11 Apr 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 260A

…e 5 incentive subsidy. The form or the mechanism through which the subsidy is given are irrelevant.” In the case on hand, the assessing officer placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sahney Steel And Press Works Ltd Vs. CIT ; (1997) 228 ITR 253 (SC). This decision was taken note of by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ponni Sugars and the same was distinguished by observing the basic test to be applied in judging the character of a subsidy is to examine as to for what purpose the subsidy was given. The Hon’ble Supreme Court lays down the clarity called “purpose test”. It was pointed out th…

Trishul Hi -Tech Industries, Guwahati vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Patna

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 52/PAT/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Feb 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Aby. T. Varkey & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 80I

…s revenue receipts to which the provisions section 80IB/80IC of the Act were not applicable and the appeal of the assessee was also dismissed by ld. CIT(A) by following the decision of Apex Court in the case of Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. As reported in 228 ITR 253 (SC). The appeal of the assessee for the instant year was also dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) by giving the same reasons that the subsidy amounting to Rs. 7,17,27,768/- does not qualify u/s 80IC of the Act. 3. At the outset the ld. AR submitted that the issue in respect of transport subsidy, central interest subsidy, power subsidy and central excis…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central- I, Kolkata vs. M/S. Budge Budge Refineries Limited

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and

ITAT/261/2017HC Calcutta08 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

For Appellant: Mr. P.K. Bhowmick, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. Ananda Sen, Adv
Section 260ASection 41(1)

…owards the subsidy by relying upon a decision of this Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT –vs- Rasoi Limited without considering the settled proposition of law as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sahney Steel and Press Works Limited Reported in 228 ITR 253 S.C. wherein it has been held that the sales tax incentive/subsidy eligible to be received as a revenue receipt and thereby the same to be treated as income under Section 41(1) of the said Act. We have heard Mr.P. K. Bhowmick, learned counsel for the appellant/revenue and Mr. Ananda Sen, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/assessee. The…

Hyundai Construction Equipment India Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 9, Pune

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1766/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1766/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Hyundai Construction Equipment India Vs. Acit, Private Limited, Circle-9, Plot No.A/2, Chakan, Midc, Pune Phase Ii, Khalumbre, Chakan-Talegaon Road, Chakan, Taluka Khed, Pune 410 501 Pan : Aabch8756Q Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH, ‘C’ PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1766/PUN/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Hyundai Construction Equipment India Vs. ACIT, Private Limited, Circle-9, Plot No.A/2, Chakan, MIDC, Pune Phase II, Khalumbre, Chakan-Talegaon Road, Chakan, Taluka Khed, Pune 410 501 PAN : AABCH8756Q Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri M.P. Lohia, Shri Rajendra Agiwal and Shri Heman Chandariya Revenue by Shri Rajiv Kumar Date of hearing 02-12-2021 Date of pronouncement 06-12-2021 आदेश / O…

Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Haryana

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 4185/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…e hands of the recipient is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy has been given. 18. The aforesaid principle has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case of Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. and Others v. CIT reported in 228 ITR 253 wherein the Court held that the character of a subsidy in 29 ITA. No. 167/Del/2009 & 7 ors. the hands of the recipient, whether revenue or capital, is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy is given. It was further held that if the purpose of the subsidy is to help the assessee to set up its business or complete a pro…

DCIT, Hisar vs. Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Hisar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 4067/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…e hands of the recipient is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy has been given. 18. The aforesaid principle has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case of Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. and Others v. CIT reported in 228 ITR 253 wherein the Court held that the character of a subsidy in 29 ITA. No. 167/Del/2009 & 7 ors. the hands of the recipient, whether revenue or capital, is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy is given. It was further held that if the purpose of the subsidy is to help the assessee to set up its business or complete a pro…

Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Hisar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 2280/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…e hands of the recipient is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy has been given. 18. The aforesaid principle has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case of Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. and Others v. CIT reported in 228 ITR 253 wherein the Court held that the character of a subsidy in 29 ITA. No. 167/Del/2009 & 7 ors. the hands of the recipient, whether revenue or capital, is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy is given. It was further held that if the purpose of the subsidy is to help the assessee to set up its business or complete a pro…

ACIT, Hisar vs. Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Hisar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 2230/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…e hands of the recipient is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy has been given. 18. The aforesaid principle has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case of Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. and Others v. CIT reported in 228 ITR 253 wherein the Court held that the character of a subsidy in 29 ITA. No. 167/Del/2009 & 7 ors. the hands of the recipient, whether revenue or capital, is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy is given. It was further held that if the purpose of the subsidy is to help the assessee to set up its business or complete a pro…

Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Haryana vs. DCIT, Hisar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 413/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…e hands of the recipient is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy has been given. 18. The aforesaid principle has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case of Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. and Others v. CIT reported in 228 ITR 253 wherein the Court held that the character of a subsidy in 29 ITA. No. 167/Del/2009 & 7 ors. the hands of the recipient, whether revenue or capital, is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy is given. It was further held that if the purpose of the subsidy is to help the assessee to set up its business or complete a pro…

DCIT, Hisar vs. Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Hisar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 341/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…e hands of the recipient is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy has been given. 18. The aforesaid principle has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case of Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. and Others v. CIT reported in 228 ITR 253 wherein the Court held that the character of a subsidy in 29 ITA. No. 167/Del/2009 & 7 ors. the hands of the recipient, whether revenue or capital, is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy is given. It was further held that if the purpose of the subsidy is to help the assessee to set up its business or complete a pro…

ACIT, Hisar vs. M/S Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Hisar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 220/DEL/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…e hands of the recipient is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy has been given. 18. The aforesaid principle has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case of Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. and Others v. CIT reported in 228 ITR 253 wherein the Court held that the character of a subsidy in 29 ITA. No. 167/Del/2009 & 7 ors. the hands of the recipient, whether revenue or capital, is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy is given. It was further held that if the purpose of the subsidy is to help the assessee to set up its business or complete a pro…

Jindal Steel & Power Limited vs. Addl. CIT

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2008-09 is dismissed

ITA 167/DEL/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 80H

…e hands of the recipient is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy has been given. 18. The aforesaid principle has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case of Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. and Others v. CIT reported in 228 ITR 253 wherein the Court held that the character of a subsidy in 29 ITA. No. 167/Del/2009 & 7 ors. the hands of the recipient, whether revenue or capital, is to be determined having regard to the purpose for which the subsidy is given. It was further held that if the purpose of the subsidy is to help the assessee to set up its business or complete a pro…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Uflex Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1855/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri M. P. RastogiFor Respondent: Shri S. Najmi [CIT] – D. R
Section 115JSection 14ASection 80I

…w industries to generate more employment opportunities. 22. Before us, the ld. DR submitted that it is clearly in the nature of revenue receipt and relied upon the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahaney Steel & Press Works Ltd. Vs. CIT 228 ITR 253 (SC). 23. We have heard the contentions as well as perused the relevant material as referred to above. The subsidy scheme has to be seen in the light of the object for which various State Governments have been provided to attract investment in the nature or for other specified areas in order to boost industrialization for the investment in the in…

Uflex Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1329/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri M. P. RastogiFor Respondent: Shri S. Najmi [CIT] – D. R
Section 115JSection 14ASection 80I

…w industries to generate more employment opportunities. 22. Before us, the ld. DR submitted that it is clearly in the nature of revenue receipt and relied upon the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahaney Steel & Press Works Ltd. Vs. CIT 228 ITR 253 (SC). 23. We have heard the contentions as well as perused the relevant material as referred to above. The subsidy scheme has to be seen in the light of the object for which various State Governments have been provided to attract investment in the nature or for other specified areas in order to boost industrialization for the investment in the in…

M/S Bhartiya Samruddhi Finance Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 6022/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Appellant: Shri KVSR. Krishna, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…bsidy received by the assessee company is on account of revenue being given for business purposes and, therefore, the same is taxable in view of the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s. Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd., vs., CIT 228 ITR 253 (SC). He further noted that assessee company has revised its return of income under section 148 for the impugned assessment year and has not submitted any documentary evidence in support of its revised return of income. Relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs., M/s. Sun Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd., reported in [1992…