Sasisri Extractions Ltd. v. ACIT (122 ITD 428)

DCIT CIR 6(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. BIOSTACH INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 3559/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 349/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2011-12) Biostadt India Limited V/S. Dcit 6(1), Mumbai Poonam Chambers, A बिधम Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Wing, 6Th Floor, Dr. A. B. 400020 Road, Worli, Mumbai- 400018 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaccb1830G Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी

For Appellant: Shri Kirit KamdarFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui

Section 115Section 115JSection 14ASection 154Section 250Section 263Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)Section 80

…td. [2019] 103 taxmann.com 436 (Bombay High Court) ii. Universal Cables Ltd. vs. DCIT [2015] 57 taxmann.com 95 (Kolkata Tribunal) iii. Alkoplus Producers Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITA No. 1129/Pune/2016) (Pune Tribunal) iv. Sasisri Extractions Ltd. vs. ACIT [2010] 122 ITD 428 (Vishakhapatnam Tribunal) v. Capital Foods Exports P. Ltd. vs. ACIT [2012] 139 ITD 584 (Mumbai Tribunal) vi. ACIT vs. Godrej Agrovet (ITA No. 1629/Mum/09) (Mumbai Tribunal) 9.3 Ld. DR, on the other hand, has relied on the order of Ld. AO, and pointed out that after insertion of Explanation 10 to Section 43(1), the capital investment subsidy oug…

BIOSTADT INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 6(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 349/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 349/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2011-12) Biostadt India Limited V/S. Dcit 6(1), Mumbai Poonam Chambers, A बिधम Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Wing, 6Th Floor, Dr. A. B. 400020 Road, Worli, Mumbai- 400018 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaccb1830G Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी

For Appellant: Shri Kirit KamdarFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui

Section 115Section 115JSection 14ASection 154Section 250Section 263Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)Section 80

…td. [2019] 103 taxmann.com 436 (Bombay High Court) ii. Universal Cables Ltd. vs. DCIT [2015] 57 taxmann.com 95 (Kolkata Tribunal) iii. Alkoplus Producers Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITA No. 1129/Pune/2016) (Pune Tribunal) iv. Sasisri Extractions Ltd. vs. ACIT [2010] 122 ITD 428 (Vishakhapatnam Tribunal) v. Capital Foods Exports P. Ltd. vs. ACIT [2012] 139 ITD 584 (Mumbai Tribunal) vi. ACIT vs. Godrej Agrovet (ITA No. 1629/Mum/09) (Mumbai Tribunal) 9.3 Ld. DR, on the other hand, has relied on the order of Ld. AO, and pointed out that after insertion of Explanation 10 to Section 43(1), the capital investment subsidy oug…

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (OSD), CIRCLE -1,, SOLAPUR vs. M/S. LOKMANGAL AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD,, SOLAPUR

ITA 986/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Krishna V. GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43(1)

…o accelerate the industrial development of the State, then the case is not caught within the mandate of the Explanation 10. Similar view has been taken by various benches of the tribunal in several decisions, including Sasisri Extractions Ltd. VS. ACIT (2010) 122 ITD 428 (Visakhapatnam). The Mumbai bench of the Tribunal in Godrej Agrovet Ltd. VS. ACIT in ITA No. 1629/Mum/09 has also taken a similar view vide its order dated 17.9.2010. Though the Department preferred an appeal against this Tribunal order, but did not challenge the finding returned by the Tribunal on this aspect. Copy of the Tribunal order and the…

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (OSD), CIRCLE -1,, SOLAPUR vs. M/S. LOKMANGAL AGRO INDUSTRIAL LTD,, SOLAPUR

ITA 984/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Krishna V. GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43(1)

…o accelerate the industrial development of the State, then the case is not caught within the mandate of the Explanation 10. Similar view has been taken by various benches of the tribunal in several decisions, including Sasisri Extractions Ltd. VS. ACIT (2010) 122 ITD 428 (Visakhapatnam). The Mumbai bench of the Tribunal in Godrej Agrovet Ltd. VS. ACIT in ITA No. 1629/Mum/09 has also taken a similar view vide its order dated 17.9.2010. Though the Department preferred an appeal against this Tribunal order, but did not challenge the finding returned by the Tribunal on this aspect. Copy of the Tribunal order and the…

JOINT CIT (OSD) CENT CIR. 1(4), MUMBAI vs. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2155/MUM/2016[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 1996-97

Section 143(3)

…f the Block 436) (Bom HC) (PB 4 pg. 1012-1017) of Assets to be  Nestle India Ltd v. DCIT (1954/Del/2014) (PB reduced by 4 pg. 1089-1115)  amount of subsidy CIT v. Rasoi Ltd. (46 taxmann.com 214) (Kol T) treated as capital  Sasisri Extractions Ltd. v. ACIT (122 ITD 428) receipt in view of (Vizac T) (PB 1 Pg. No. 364-367) Explanation 10 to section 43(1) of the I.T. Act.” This ground will arise in case the subsidy is held to be capital receipt. The ground is self- explanatory. Particularly from M/s. Grasim Industries Ltd., the assessment year 1999-2000 when the Explanation 10 was inserted in section 43(1), the la…

DCIT 4(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. ORBIT EXPORTS LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 6360/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Dcit-4(3)(1) Vs. M/S. Orbit Exports Ltd., Room No.649, 6Th Floor E-27-29, Mangalore Street Aayakar Bhavan (Adi Marizaben Street) Mumbai – 400 020 Ballard Estate, S. Bhagat Sing Marg, Mumbai – 400 038 Pan/Gir No. Aaaco1268K (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 43(1)

…aracter of a payment intended either directly or indirectly to meet the "actual cost". 3.2. We find that the ld. CIT(A) had placed reliance on the Co-ordinate Bench decision of Visakhapatnam Tribunal in the case of Sasisri Extrusions Ltd. vs. ACIT reported in 122 ITD 428; Co-ordinate Bench decision of Patna Tribunal in the case of Dayal Steel Ltd., vs. Addl. CIT reported in 83 taxmann.com 221 and Co-ordinate Bench decision of this tribunal in the case of Spectrum Coal & Power Ltd., vs. ACIT in ITA No.1295/Mum/2012 & Others. The ld. CIT(A) while granting relief to the assessee observed as under:- “I understand fr…

DCIT CEN CIR 3(3) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. WELSPUN CORP LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assesee and appeal filed by the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5722/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Dec 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negim/S Welspun Corp Ltd. Vs. Dcit,Central Circle-22 Room No.465, 4Th Floor Welspun House 7Th Floor, B-Wing Aaykar Bhawan Kamla Mills Compound M.K.Road Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai-400 020 Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No.Aaacw0744L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & Dcit,Central Circle-3(3) Vs. M/S Welspun Corp Ltd. Room No.401, 4Th Floor Welspun House 7Th Floor, B-Wing Aaykar Bhawan M.K.Road Kamla Mills Compound Mumbai-400 020 Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No.Aaacw0744L (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 32Section 32(1)(iia)Section 37Section 40aSection 43(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s Welspun Corp Ltd. Vs. DCIT,Central Circle-22 Room No.465, 4th Floor Welspun House 7th Floor, B-Wing Aaykar Bhawan Kamla Mills Compound M.K.Road Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai-400 020 Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013 PAN/GIR No.AAACW0744L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & DCIT,Central Circle-3(3) Vs. M/s Welspun Corp Ltd. Room No.401, 4th Floor Welspun House 7th Floor, B-Wing Aaykar Bhawan M.K.Road Kamla Mills Compound Mumbai-400 020 Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013 PAN/GI…

WELSPUN CORP LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assesee and appeal filed by the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5370/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Dec 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negim/S Welspun Corp Ltd. Vs. Dcit,Central Circle-22 Room No.465, 4Th Floor Welspun House 7Th Floor, B-Wing Aaykar Bhawan Kamla Mills Compound M.K.Road Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai-400 020 Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No.Aaacw0744L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & Dcit,Central Circle-3(3) Vs. M/S Welspun Corp Ltd. Room No.401, 4Th Floor Welspun House 7Th Floor, B-Wing Aaykar Bhawan M.K.Road Kamla Mills Compound Mumbai-400 020 Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No.Aaacw0744L (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 32Section 32(1)(iia)Section 37Section 40aSection 43(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s Welspun Corp Ltd. Vs. DCIT,Central Circle-22 Room No.465, 4th Floor Welspun House 7th Floor, B-Wing Aaykar Bhawan Kamla Mills Compound M.K.Road Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai-400 020 Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013 PAN/GIR No.AAACW0744L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & DCIT,Central Circle-3(3) Vs. M/s Welspun Corp Ltd. Room No.401, 4th Floor Welspun House 7th Floor, B-Wing Aaykar Bhawan M.K.Road Kamla Mills Compound Mumbai-400 020 Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013 PAN/GI…

M/S KISHANGARH HI TECH TEXTILE PARK LTD.,KISHANGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TECH), AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 328/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Nagar (C.A)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 43(1)

…ion without reducing the grant received from Ministry of Textiles by holding that Explanation 10 to Section 43(1) is not applicable. Further M/s Kishangarh Hi Tech Textile Park Ltd. reliance was placed on the decisions in case of Sasisri Extractions vs. ACIT 122 ITD 428 (Vizag), Inventaa Chemical Ltd vs CIT 42 SOT 249 (Hyd) and Sohan Electroplast Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO 1578/PN/2008 (Pune). 5. It was further submitted that the appellant had claimed depreciation @ 80% on the entire investment of Rs 45.72 Crs made in the Wind Power Project and since the assets were used for less than 180 days, depreciation has been cla…

M/S KISHANGARH HI TECH TEXTILE PARK LTD.,KISHANGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TECH), AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 327/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Nagar (C.A)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 43(1)

…ion without reducing the grant received from Ministry of Textiles by holding that Explanation 10 to Section 43(1) is not applicable. Further M/s Kishangarh Hi Tech Textile Park Ltd. reliance was placed on the decisions in case of Sasisri Extractions vs. ACIT 122 ITD 428 (Vizag), Inventaa Chemical Ltd vs CIT 42 SOT 249 (Hyd) and Sohan Electroplast Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO 1578/PN/2008 (Pune). 5. It was further submitted that the appellant had claimed depreciation @ 80% on the entire investment of Rs 45.72 Crs made in the Wind Power Project and since the assets were used for less than 180 days, depreciation has been cla…

M/S KISHANGARH HI TECH TEXTILE PARK LTD.,KISHANGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TECH), AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 326/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Nagar (C.A)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 43(1)

…ion without reducing the grant received from Ministry of Textiles by holding that Explanation 10 to Section 43(1) is not applicable. Further M/s Kishangarh Hi Tech Textile Park Ltd. reliance was placed on the decisions in case of Sasisri Extractions vs. ACIT 122 ITD 428 (Vizag), Inventaa Chemical Ltd vs CIT 42 SOT 249 (Hyd) and Sohan Electroplast Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO 1578/PN/2008 (Pune). 5. It was further submitted that the appellant had claimed depreciation @ 80% on the entire investment of Rs 45.72 Crs made in the Wind Power Project and since the assets were used for less than 180 days, depreciation has been cla…

M/S KISHANGARH HI TECH TEXTILE PARK LTD.,KISHANGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TECH), AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 325/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Nagar (C.A)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 43(1)

…ion without reducing the grant received from Ministry of Textiles by holding that Explanation 10 to Section 43(1) is not applicable. Further M/s Kishangarh Hi Tech Textile Park Ltd. reliance was placed on the decisions in case of Sasisri Extractions vs. ACIT 122 ITD 428 (Vizag), Inventaa Chemical Ltd vs CIT 42 SOT 249 (Hyd) and Sohan Electroplast Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO 1578/PN/2008 (Pune). 5. It was further submitted that the appellant had claimed depreciation @ 80% on the entire investment of Rs 45.72 Crs made in the Wind Power Project and since the assets were used for less than 180 days, depreciation has been cla…

AUTOLINE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 970/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos. 970 & 2983/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 Autoline Industries Limited. S. No.313-314 & 320-323, Nanewarwadi, Chakan, Pune-410501. Pan : Aabca4534D .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sharad Shah &For Respondent: Shri T. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, CIT

Section 115JSection 14Section 14A

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “सी” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, VP AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM आयकर अपीऱ सं. / ITA Nos. 970 & 2983/PUN/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 Autoline Industries Limited. S. No.313-314 & 320-323, Nanewarwadi, Chakan, Pune-410501. PAN : AABCA4534D .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/s. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Pune ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Sharad Shah & Shri Rohit Japadiya Revenue by : Shri T. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing…

AUTOLINE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2983/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos. 970 & 2983/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 Autoline Industries Limited. S. No.313-314 & 320-323, Nanewarwadi, Chakan, Pune-410501. Pan : Aabca4534D .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sharad Shah &For Respondent: Shri T. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, CIT

Section 115JSection 14Section 14A

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “सी” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, VP AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM आयकर अपीऱ सं. / ITA Nos. 970 & 2983/PUN/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 Autoline Industries Limited. S. No.313-314 & 320-323, Nanewarwadi, Chakan, Pune-410501. PAN : AABCA4534D .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/s. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Pune ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Sharad Shah & Shri Rohit Japadiya Revenue by : Shri T. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. ALKOPLUS PRODUCER PVT. LTD,, LATUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that

ITA 23/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

…is not caught within the mandate of the Explanation 10. Similar view has been taken by various benches of the tribunal in several decisions, including 10 M/s. Alkoplus Producers Pvt. Ltd., A.Yrs. 2011-12 and 2012-13 Sasisri Extractions Ltd. VS. ACIT (2010) 122 ITD 428 (Visakhapatnam). The Mumbai bench of the Tribunal in Godrej Agrovet Ltd. VS. ACIT in ITA No. 1629/Mum/09 has also taken a similar view vide its order dated 17.9.2010. Though the Department preferred an appeal against this Tribunal order, but did not challenge the finding returned by the Tribunal on this aspect. Copy of the Tribunal order and…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. ALKOPLUS PRODUCERS PRIVATE LTD.,, LATUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that

ITA 1222/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

…is not caught within the mandate of the Explanation 10. Similar view has been taken by various benches of the tribunal in several decisions, including 10 M/s. Alkoplus Producers Pvt. Ltd., A.Yrs. 2011-12 and 2012-13 Sasisri Extractions Ltd. VS. ACIT (2010) 122 ITD 428 (Visakhapatnam). The Mumbai bench of the Tribunal in Godrej Agrovet Ltd. VS. ACIT in ITA No. 1629/Mum/09 has also taken a similar view vide its order dated 17.9.2010. Though the Department preferred an appeal against this Tribunal order, but did not challenge the finding returned by the Tribunal on this aspect. Copy of the Tribunal order and…

M/S. ALKOPLUS PRODUCERS PVT. LTD.,,LATUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, LATUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that

ITA 1129/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

…is not caught within the mandate of the Explanation 10. Similar view has been taken by various benches of the tribunal in several decisions, including 10 M/s. Alkoplus Producers Pvt. Ltd., A.Yrs. 2011-12 and 2012-13 Sasisri Extractions Ltd. VS. ACIT (2010) 122 ITD 428 (Visakhapatnam). The Mumbai bench of the Tribunal in Godrej Agrovet Ltd. VS. ACIT in ITA No. 1629/Mum/09 has also taken a similar view vide its order dated 17.9.2010. Though the Department preferred an appeal against this Tribunal order, but did not challenge the finding returned by the Tribunal on this aspect. Copy of the Tribunal order and…

SAF YEAST COMPANY P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 40, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee for AY 2009-10 is partly allowed

ITA 1875/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 80I

…ase. The Ld A.R placed reliance on the following case law in this regard:- (a) CIT Vs. P J Chemicals (210 ITR 830)(SC) (b) CIT Vs. Rasoi Ltd (2011)(335 ITR 438)(Cal) (c) ACIT Vs. Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd (ITA No.772/Mum/2012) (d) M/s Sasisri Extractions Ltd (122 ITD 428)(Visakha) and other decisions. 36. The Ld D.R submitted that the scheme itself has been framed to provide financial assistance for setting up of projects for recovery of energy from industrial wastes and incentives. Further it is specifically provided that it is a capital subsidy given for installation of bio-gas generation project. In this rega…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. RAI BAHADUR NARAIN SINGH SUGAR MILLS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 2980/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 28Section 33A

…f the existing sugar industry in the state of UP and thus, the said subsidy is given for setting up of an industry or expansion of existing industry. We further find it appropriate to note that SASISRI EXTRACTIONS LTD. vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 122 ITD 428, Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal has held that where subsidy is AY: 2010-11 granted as percentage of fixed capital cost taken as the basis for determining the subsidy that would only be a measure adopted under the scheme to quantify the financial aid. The contention is that it is not a payment, directly or indirectly, to meet any portion of the…

M/S. RAI BAHADUR NARAIN SINGH SUGAR MILLS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1904/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 28Section 33A

…f the existing sugar industry in the state of UP and thus, the said subsidy is given for setting up of an industry or expansion of existing industry. We further find it appropriate to note that SASISRI EXTRACTIONS LTD. vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 122 ITD 428, Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal has held that where subsidy is AY: 2010-11 granted as percentage of fixed capital cost taken as the basis for determining the subsidy that would only be a measure adopted under the scheme to quantify the financial aid. The contention is that it is not a payment, directly or indirectly, to meet any portion of the…

Sasisri Extractions Ltd. v. ACIT

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Sasisri Extractions Ltd. v. ACIT

DCIT CIR 6(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. BIOSTACH INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

BIOSTADT INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 6(1), MUMBAI

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (OSD), CIRCLE -1,, SOLAPUR vs. M/S. LOKMANGAL AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD,, SOLAPUR

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (OSD), CIRCLE -1,, SOLAPUR vs. M/S. LOKMANGAL AGRO INDUSTRIAL LTD,, SOLAPUR

JOINT CIT (OSD) CENT CIR. 1(4), MUMBAI vs. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

DCIT 4(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. ORBIT EXPORTS LTD., MUMBAI

DCIT CEN CIR 3(3) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. WELSPUN CORP LTD, MUMBAI

WELSPUN CORP LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

M/S KISHANGARH HI TECH TEXTILE PARK LTD.,KISHANGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TECH), AJMER

M/S KISHANGARH HI TECH TEXTILE PARK LTD.,KISHANGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TECH), AJMER

M/S KISHANGARH HI TECH TEXTILE PARK LTD.,KISHANGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TECH), AJMER

M/S KISHANGARH HI TECH TEXTILE PARK LTD.,KISHANGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TECH), AJMER

AUTOLINE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

AUTOLINE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. ALKOPLUS PRODUCER PVT. LTD,, LATUR

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. ALKOPLUS PRODUCERS PRIVATE LTD.,, LATUR

M/S. ALKOPLUS PRODUCERS PVT. LTD.,,LATUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, LATUR

SAF YEAST COMPANY P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 40, MUMBAI

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. RAI BAHADUR NARAIN SINGH SUGAR MILLS LTD., NEW DELHI

M/S. RAI BAHADUR NARAIN SINGH SUGAR MILLS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI