Saurashtra 2012:DHC:5739-DB ITA-95 & 100/2011 Page 7 Cement Chemicals Indst. Ltd. v. CIT

196 ITR 237High Court1992#23363 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 271E

Judgments citing Saurashtra 2012:DHC:5739-DB ITA-95 & 100/2011 Page 7 Cement Chemicals Indst. Ltd. v. CIT

DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur, Ncrb vs. Barmer Lignite Mining Company Limited, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 71/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal CAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…2011. Thus expenses incurred prior to October, 2011 required to be capitalized. This expenditure was in the nature of capital not revenue as decided by the Hon'ble Gujarat High court in case of Saurasthra Cement and Chemical Industries Limited VS. CIT (1992) (196 ITR 237) and also held in case JK Chemicals Limited (1994) (207 ITR 985). Accordingly expenditure of Rs. 44,81,910/- was disallowed by the AO and penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was initiated on this issue for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Further, the assessee debited Rs. 52,58,106 as upfront fee expense. The…

ACIT, Circle - 5, Kolkata vs. M/S. Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 56/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri. Snehotpal Datta, JCIT, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri D.S.Damle, FCA

Section 37(1)

…xpenditure incurred in connection with supporting a new project which had to be abandoned is of capital in nature. The AO also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Industries Ltd. Vs CIT 196 ITR 237 and CIT vs Ambica Mills Ltd. 236 ITR 921. In both the decision it was held that the expenditure incurred for feasibility report for putting up a new project which did not materialize is a capital expenditure. This conclusion of the 10 M/s. Essel Mining & Industries Ltd. A.Yr.2006-07 CIT(A) in our view was not correct for the reason that the asse…

CIT vs. Hindustan Times Ltd

Appeal is partly allowed, to the extent it covers the first two questions;

ITA - 95 / 2011HC Delhi14 Sept 2012

…ITA-95 & 100/2011 Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON: 23.07.2012 PRONOUNCED ON: 14.09.2012 + ITA Nos.95 & 100/2011 CIT ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus HINDUSTAN TIMES ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra with Ms. Kavita Jha and Mr. Somnath Shukla, Advocates. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT % The present common judgment arises out of a…