SC) 227 ITR 172 (ii) CIT Vs Coromandal Cements Ltd. (SC) 234 ITR 412 (iii) CIT v. Autokast Ltd. (SC)

280 ITR 617High Court2006#15590 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2023.

Judgments citing SC) 227 ITR 172 (ii) CIT Vs Coromandal Cements Ltd. (SC) 234 ITR 412 (iii) CIT v. Autokast Ltd. (SC)

M/S RAJENDRA PRASAD SRIVASTAVA,AZAMGARH vs. ACIT, RANGE - AZAMGARH, AZAMGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 164/VNS/2019[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi07 Feb 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Rajendra Prasad Srivastava, Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Sarfuddinpur, Near Railway Tax, Range-Azamgarh Station, Azamgarh-276001 Pan-Aakfr2986A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh.Hari N. Singh Bisen, C.A. Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.02.2023

For Appellant: Sh.Hari N. Singh Bisen, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

…TR 612 are binding precedents. He has also relied upon the various decisions as under:- “1. [1997] 227 ITR 172 (SC), Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. 2. [2000] 243 ITR 192 (Kerela), NanjiTopanbhai& Co. 3 M/s Rajendra Prasad Srivastava 3. [2006] 280 ITR 617 (All.) KisanSahkariChini Mills. Ltd. 4. [2007] 105 ITD 1 (Delhi) (Special Bench), Allied Construction 5. [2010] 325 ITR 201 (Kerela), T.O. Abraham & Co. 6. [2017] 163 ITD 46 (Visakhapatnam-Trib.), G. Raja GopalaRao 7. [2001] 248 ITR 449 (SC), Dr. V.P. Gopinathan” 5. Thus, the learned DR has submitted that interest earned from bank deposit / has…

ACIT- 14 (1) (2), MUMBAI vs. URJANKUR SHREE TATYASAHEB KORE WARNA POWER CO, LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, ground nos

ITA 1420/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Sh. S.N. Kabra, Sr. DRFor Respondent: None

Section 14Section 56(1)

…dhya Pradesh Stale Industries Corpn. Ltd. Vs. CIT (MP) 69 ITR 824 (MP) (viii) CIT vs. Assam Plantation Crops Dev. Corpn Ltd. (Gau) 221 ITR 392 (ix) South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. Vs. DY.CIT-240 ITR 24 (Mad) (x) CIT vs. Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd. – 280 ITR 617 (AH.) (xi) Shree Krishna Polyesters Ltd. vs. DY. CIT-274 ITR 21 (Bom.) 8. We have pursued the order of ld. AO, ld. CIT (A) and the submissions made by the assessee. The assessee has taken loan for the development, construction and operation of a power generation project and had entered into an agreement with a contortion of financial institutions…

HAZARIBAG RANCHI EXPRESSWAY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 14(2)(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 6696/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negihazaribagh Ranchi Vs. Ito-14(2)(1) 4Th Floor, Expressway Ltd. The Il&Fs Financial Center Aaykar Bhawan Plot No.C-22, G Block M.K.Road Bkc, Bandra(E) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 051 Pan/Gir No.Aacch2490J Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 234BSection 56(1)

…eanred is to be assessed under –“ Other sources” • The identical ruling has been given in the following cases. 7 Hazaribagh Ranchi Expressway Ltd. i. South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. Vs. CIT-240 ITR 24 (Mad.) ii. CIT vs. Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd. -280 ITR 617 (All.) iii. Shree Krishna Ploysters Ltd. Vs. Dy.CIT -274 ITR 21(Bom.) 5.16 In the back drop of the discussion in foregoing paras, the only and only natural and judicial inference that crops up is that the interest earned by the assesee of Rs. 75,96,711/- is taxable under the head ‘Income from Other Source’ and assessee is not entitled for any ded…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S TRIUMPH REALTY PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 6597/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri A.N. Mishraassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)

…he Courts including the following: - (i) Tuticorin Alkali Chemical and Fertilizers Limited Vs. CIT(SC) 227 ITR 172 (ii) CIT Vs Coromandal Cements Ltd. (SC) 234 ITR 412 (iii) CIT Vs Autokast Ltd. (SC) 248 ITR 110 (iv) CIT Vs Kishan Sahakari Chini Mills (All) 280 ITR 617 (v) CIT Vs Manipur Spinning Mills Corpn. Ltd. (Gau) 226 ITR 551.” 3. The facts, in brief, qua the issue involved, are that the assessee company was in process of construction of a hotel and has filed its return of income declaring income of Rs.1,20,744/- on 29.09.2012. The assessee company acquired an existing hotel at Calwaddo Salcette, Goa und…

REWAS PORTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT RG 7(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 758/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Dr.P.Danial

Section 10(35)Section 143(3)Section 56(1)Section 57

…, C.I.T versus Petroff is co- operative (Guj) 241 ITR 139, CIT versus Cochin Shipyard Ltd (Ker) 158 CTR 208, C.I.T V/s Rassii cement Ltd (AP) 232 ITR 554, South India shipping Corporation versus ACIT (Mad) 240 ITR 24, C.LT V/s Kisan Sahakari Genie bills (All) 280 ITR 617, Chanderpaul sugar: company Ltd versus C.LT (All) 280 ITR 612, Bokaro steel Ltd versus CIT (patna) 170 ITR 545, CIT versus Coromandel Siemens Ltd (SC) 234 ITR 412, C.LT versus auto cast Ltd (SC) 248 ITR 110, Consolidated fibers and chemicals Ltd versus CIT (Cal) 273 ITR 353, Skayef Ltd versus DCIT (ITAT, Bangalore) 71 ITD 419, Godavari fertiliser…

COASTAL GUJARAT POWER LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 6(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2298/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./ I.T.A. No 2298/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11) Coastal Gujarat Power Limited, The Income Tax Officer 34, Sant Tukaram Road, 6(2)(1), फनाभ/ Carnac Bunder, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400009 M K Road, Mumbai-400020 अऩीराथी की ओय से / Applicant By : Shri Farrokh V Irani प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri M C Omi Ningshen सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 14.12.2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of : 15.3.2017 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, A. M: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee & Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A), Mumbai, Dated25.2.2015 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The First Ground Raised By The Assessee Is Against Upholding The Order Of Assessing Officer As Regards Interest Income From Securities Deposited With Paschim Gujarat Vij Co.Ltd (Hereinafter Referred To As Pgvcl) For Availing Electricity For The Purposes Of Construction Of Power

For Respondent: Shri M C Omi Ningshen

Section 143(3)

…no provision under Act under which income received on short-term deposits is liable for deduction or adjustment against interest payable on borrowing, no deduction under section 57 could be allowed - Held, yes 5. CIT V/s Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd [2006] 280 ITR 617 (ALL.) “Section 56, read with section 4, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income from other sources - Chargeable as - Assessment year 1984-85 – Assessee, a co-operative society, commenced erection of building and installation of machinery for sugar mills and obtained a loan from Industrial Finance Corporation of India (IFCI) under an agreement which…