Shree Balaji Alloys v. CIT

333 ITR 335Reported decision2011#345 most cited
249

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Shree Balaji Alloys v. CIT · 333 ITR 335 · subsidy classification · capital vs revenue subsidy · industrial policy objectives · terms and conditions of scheme · section 2(24)(xviii) · section 80IB(4) · section 115JB · section 43(1) · initial assessment year · book profits

Also reported as

198 Taxmann 1229 Taxmann.com 255

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 115JBSection 14ASection 139(5)Section 147Section 148Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 11bsection 80ib(4)section 2(24)(xviii)initial assessment yearminimum alternate taxsection 115jasection 80hhcsection 42section 32(1)(iia)section 43(1)section 80hhbook profits

Judgments citing Shree Balaji Alloys v. CIT

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 467/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 467/Del/2014 (A.Y 2009-10)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

…DELHI BENCH: ‘I-1’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .No. 467/DEL/2014 (A.Y 2009-10) Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. Vs Addl. CIT Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, Range-6 Vasank Kunj New Delhi New Delhi AAACM0829Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv., Ms. Tejasvi Adv Respondent by Shr. G. C. Srivastava, Adv, Sh. Sanjay Kr. Dass, DR. Date of Hearing 27.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement 17.10.2018 ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeal is filed by the assessee for Assessment Year 2009-10 against the ord…

M/S Braza Tyres (P) Ltd., Paonta Sahib vs. DCIT, Circle, Shimla

Appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1417/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Aug 2018AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Sh. Harry Rikhy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Surinder Meena, JCIT
Section 14ASection 36Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEYFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Ms. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/s Braza Tyres (P) Ltd., Vs. The DCIT, Circle, Rampur Ghat, Paonta Sahib, Shimla District Sirmour (HP) PAN No. AACCB7366F & Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/s Cinq Micron Chem (P) Ltd., Vs. The DCIT, Circle, Rampur Ghat, Paonta Sahib, Shimla District Sirmour (HP) PAN No. AAACC5741R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Harry Rikhy, Advocate Respondent by : Sh. Surinder Meena, JCIT Date of Hearing : 24.05.2018 Date of Pronoun…

M/S Chinq Micron Chem (P) Ltd., Paonta Sahib vs. DCIT, Circle, Shimla

Appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1416/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Aug 2018AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Sh. Harry Rikhy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Surinder Meena, JCIT
Section 14ASection 36Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEYFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Ms. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/s Braza Tyres (P) Ltd., Vs. The DCIT, Circle, Rampur Ghat, Paonta Sahib, Shimla District Sirmour (HP) PAN No. AACCB7366F & Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/s Cinq Micron Chem (P) Ltd., Vs. The DCIT, Circle, Rampur Ghat, Paonta Sahib, Shimla District Sirmour (HP) PAN No. AAACC5741R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Harry Rikhy, Advocate Respondent by : Sh. Surinder Meena, JCIT Date of Hearing : 24.05.2018 Date of Pronoun…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana vs. M/S Vardhman Acrylics Limited, Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed and that of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 743/CHANDI/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Vineet Jain (on 13.12.2017)For Respondent: Sh. Ashish Abrol, CIT DR (on 13.12.2017)
Section 14ASection 25

…of ‘Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd. Hyderabad Vs. CIT, A.P.-1, Hyderabad’ : 1997 (7) SCC 765, ‘CIT, Madras Vs. Pooni Sugars and Chemicals Limited’ 2009 (9) SCC 337 and further of the Hon'ble J&K High Court in the case of ‘Shri Balaji Alloys Vs. CIT’ (2011) 333 ITR 335, has held that to hold whether any of such receipts are capital or Revenue in nature, ‘purpose test’ is to be applied. If the purpose is for the setting up of new industry, then the receipts are to be considered as capital in nature. However, if the receipts are in the nature of facilitation / helping hand to the trade, the same are to be cons…

DCIT, Ludhiana vs. M/S Vardhman Acrylics Limited, Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed and that of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 517/CHANDI/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Vineet Jain (on 13.12.2017)For Respondent: Sh. Ashish Abrol, CIT DR (on 13.12.2017)
Section 14ASection 25

…of ‘Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd. Hyderabad Vs. CIT, A.P.-1, Hyderabad’ : 1997 (7) SCC 765, ‘CIT, Madras Vs. Pooni Sugars and Chemicals Limited’ 2009 (9) SCC 337 and further of the Hon'ble J&K High Court in the case of ‘Shri Balaji Alloys Vs. CIT’ (2011) 333 ITR 335, has held that to hold whether any of such receipts are capital or Revenue in nature, ‘purpose test’ is to be applied. If the purpose is for the setting up of new industry, then the receipts are to be considered as capital in nature. However, if the receipts are in the nature of facilitation / helping hand to the trade, the same are to be cons…

Vardhman Acrylics Ltd., Ludhiana vs. DCIT, Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed and that of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 482/CHANDI/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Vineet Jain (on 13.12.2017)For Respondent: Sh. Ashish Abrol, CIT DR (on 13.12.2017)
Section 14ASection 25

…of ‘Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd. Hyderabad Vs. CIT, A.P.-1, Hyderabad’ : 1997 (7) SCC 765, ‘CIT, Madras Vs. Pooni Sugars and Chemicals Limited’ 2009 (9) SCC 337 and further of the Hon'ble J&K High Court in the case of ‘Shri Balaji Alloys Vs. CIT’ (2011) 333 ITR 335, has held that to hold whether any of such receipts are capital or Revenue in nature, ‘purpose test’ is to be applied. If the purpose is for the setting up of new industry, then the receipts are to be considered as capital in nature. However, if the receipts are in the nature of facilitation / helping hand to the trade, the same are to be cons…

Vardhman Acrylics Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT, Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed and that of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 481/CHANDI/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Vineet Jain (on 13.12.2017)For Respondent: Sh. Ashish Abrol, CIT DR (on 13.12.2017)
Section 14ASection 25

…of ‘Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd. Hyderabad Vs. CIT, A.P.-1, Hyderabad’ : 1997 (7) SCC 765, ‘CIT, Madras Vs. Pooni Sugars and Chemicals Limited’ 2009 (9) SCC 337 and further of the Hon'ble J&K High Court in the case of ‘Shri Balaji Alloys Vs. CIT’ (2011) 333 ITR 335, has held that to hold whether any of such receipts are capital or Revenue in nature, ‘purpose test’ is to be applied. If the purpose is for the setting up of new industry, then the receipts are to be considered as capital in nature. However, if the receipts are in the nature of facilitation / helping hand to the trade, the same are to be cons…

Asst CIT Cir 4(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Svg Fashions Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 704/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

For Appellant: Shri V. JustinFor Respondent: None
Section 2(24)(x)

…. DCIT vs. Gloster Jute Mills Ltd. 40 CCH 433 (2014). ii. CIT vs. Sham Lal Bansal 200 Taxman 14 [2011](P&H). iii. Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd. (228 ITR 253) iv. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd. (306 ITR 392) v. M/s. Shree Balaji Alloys & Ors. Vs. CIT (2011) 333 ITR 335 (J&K) vi. CIT vs. Chaphalkar Brothers [2013] 351 ITR 309 (Bombay High Court) vii. CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd [2011] 339 ITR 632 (Bombay High Court) After going through the entire facts and circumstances of the present case, I find that the ratio of issue in the present case is similar to that of Chaphalkar Brothers wherein the Hon'ble jurisd…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jammu vs. M/S Kashmir Steel Rolling Mills, Jammu

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for AY 2006-07 is allowed, while that of the Revenue for AY 2005-06, dismissed

ITA 571/ASR/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 Jul 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 544/(Asr)/2016 Assessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. R. K. Gupta (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Bhawani Shankar (D.R.)
Section 154Section 80Section 80I

…the decision in Liberty India v. CIT [2009] 317 ITR 218 (SC). The matter traveled to the Hon'ble High Court which, accepting the assessee’s alternate plea, held it to be a capital receipt, per its decision reported at Shree Balaji Alloys & Ors. v. CIT [2011] 333 ITR 335 (J&K). The assessee, accordingly, raised an additional ground toward the same in its appeal for AY 2006-07 pending before the ld. CIT(A). The same stands denied by him following Goteze (India) Ltd. v. CIT [2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC). For AY 2005- 06, the second year under appeal before us, the assessee moved the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s. 154, i.e.,…

Kashmir Steel Rolling Milss., Jammu vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax .Central Circle, Jammu

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for AY 2006-07 is allowed, while that of the Revenue for AY 2005-06, dismissed

ITA 544/ASR/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 544/(Asr)/2016 Assessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. R. K. Gupta (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Bhawani Shankar (D.R.)
Section 154Section 80Section 80I

…the decision in Liberty India v. CIT [2009] 317 ITR 218 (SC). The matter traveled to the Hon'ble High Court which, accepting the assessee’s alternate plea, held it to be a capital receipt, per its decision reported at Shree Balaji Alloys & Ors. v. CIT [2011] 333 ITR 335 (J&K). The assessee, accordingly, raised an additional ground toward the same in its appeal for AY 2006-07 pending before the ld. CIT(A). The same stands denied by him following Goteze (India) Ltd. v. CIT [2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC). For AY 2005- 06, the second year under appeal before us, the assessee moved the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s. 154, i.e.,…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sutlej Textiles and Industries Ltd., Rajasthan

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 336/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu, Jm & Sh. Prashant Maharishi, Am

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT (DR)
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. H.S. Sidhu, JM and Sh. Prashant Maharishi, AM ITA No. 336/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dy. Commissioner of Income Vs M/s Sutlej Textiles and Industries Tax, Circle-9(1), Ltd., Pachpahar Road, New Delhi Bhawanimandi, Rajasthan (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN/GIR No. AAJCS1850N Revenue by : Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT (DR) Assessee by : Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv. ORDER Per H.S. Sidhu, JM: This is an appeal by the department against the order dated 12.11.2014 of the ld. CIT(A)-XII, New Delhi. 2. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal: “1.…

DCIT Cir 4(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Svg Fashions Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 175/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhdcit Circle-4(3)(2) M/S Svg Fashions Ltd. R.No. 649, 6Th Floor, 235, Shree Venkateshwar Bhavan, 3Rd Floor, Kalabadevi Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400002 Pan: Aaacd1621K Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Ms. Arju Garodia (Dr) Respondent By : Shri Rahul Bagaria (Ar) Date Of Hearing : 20.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.06.2018 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh; 1. This Appeal By Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner

For Appellant: Ms. Arju Garodia (DR)For Respondent: Shri Rahul Bagaria (AR)
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…g capabilities to tide over the crises for promotion of industry in the state is to be treated as capital in nature. That similarly, the issue is covered in the case of Shree Balaji Alloys & 6 ITA No. 175 Mum 17 - Ms SVG Fashions Ltd. Ors. –vs.- CIT (2011) 333 ITR 335 (J&K) wherein it has been held that excise duty refund and interest subsidy received for the purpose of eradication of unemployment in the state by acceleration of industrial development and removing backwardness of the area that lagged behind in industrial development is to be treated as capital receipt. 8. Ld. A.R. also submitted that similar…

M/S. Kashmir Tubes, Jammu vs. The Dy.Commissioner of Income-Tax, Jammu

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 198/ASR/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 May 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. Nos. 198 & 199/(Asr)/2014 Assessment Years: 2003-04 & 2004-05

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Bansal (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Rajeev Gubgotra (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 28Section 80I

…the case of CIT v. Sterling Foods [1999] 237 ITR 579 (SC) and Cambay Electric Supply Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1978] 113 (AYs 2003-04&2004-05) Kashmir Tubes v. Dy. CIT ITR 84 (SC). The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Shree Balaji Alloys v. CIT [2011] 333 ITR 335 (J&K) has held interest subsidy to be a capital receipt. The assessee, accordingly, raised an additional ground in its respect before the ld. CIT(A), who rejected the same stating the same to be inconsistent with the assessee’s own stand of interest subsidy being a revenue receipt and, further, eligible for deduction u/s. 80IB. No claim qua the i…

ACIT, Circle-31, Kolkata vs. M/S Agro Life Science Corporation, Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1863/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2013-14 Acit, Circle-31, V/S. M/S Agro Life Science 10B, Middleton Row, Corporation, Fmc Fortuna 4Th Floor, Kolkata-71 Building, 234/3A, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata-20 [Pan No.Aakfa 5781 A] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Sanjeev Kadel, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 08-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 04-04-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Kolkata Dated 21.06.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Acit, Circle-31, Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 28.02.2016 For Assessment Year 2013-14. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Reads As Follows:- “1.”That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(Appeals) Has Erred In Allowing The Amount Of Rs.2,34,84,055/- & Rs.82,192/- On Account Of Excise Duty Refund & Interest Subsidy Respectively As Capital Receipt.” 2. That The Ld. Cit(Appeals)Has Not Taken Into Account The Verdict In The Following Cases: A) Sehanay Steel Pres Works Ltd. & Ors Vs. Cit (1997) 228 Itr 253 B) Kesoram Industries & Cotton Ltd. Vs. Cit (1991) 191 Itr 518

Section 143(3)

…f Jammu and Kashmir. Therefore, the subsidy received by its nature is of capital receipt not chargeable to tax. The assessee in support of its claim relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Jammu & Kashmir High Court in the case of Shree Balaji Alloys vs. CIT (2011) 333 ITR 335 (J&K). However, Assessing Officer assumed that the incentive was given to the assessee for extending assistance in carrying out the business in more profitable and competitive manner after the commencement of commercial production. Therefore the same is in the nature of revenue subsidy and taxable under the Act. The AO also observed that no capit…

Everest Industires Ltd, New Delhi vs. JCIT RG 1, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is treated as allowed and the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed

ITA 3804/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Ramlal Negi (Jm)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” Bench, Mumbai Before S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Ramlal Negi (JM) I.T.A. No. 3804/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year 2009-10) Everest Industries Limited JCIT Range-1 A-32, G-1, Genesis Vs. Ashar I.T. Park Mohan Cooperative 6th Floor, B-Wing Industrial Estate 16-Z, Wagle Mathura Road Industrial Estate New Delhi-110 044. Thane(W)-400 604. (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 3849/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year 2009-10) DCIT Circle-1 Everest Industries Limited Ashar I.T. Park Vs. A-32, G-1, Genesis 6th Floor, B-Wing Mohan Cooperative 16-Z, Wagle Industrial Estate Industrial Estate Mat…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purposes

ITA 6021/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri K.N. Charry

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35DSection 43BSection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘I’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI K.N. CHARRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.-6021/Del/2012 (Assessment Year: 2008-09) Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. vs Addl. CIT Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, Range-6, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. C.R. Building, PAN-AAACM0829Q New Delhi. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Sh. Ajay Vohra Revenue by Sh. Aprender Kumar Date of Hearing 21.08.2017 Date of Pronouncement 09.11.2017 ORDER PER SHRI K.N. CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER This is an appeal challenging the order dated 29.10.2012 passed by the Assessing Officer u/…

The Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 2(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1716/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N K Pradhan, Am The Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Dy. Commissioner Of Limited Income Tax, Range- Neville House, J.N. Heradia Marg, 2(1)(1), Mumbai Vs. Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 Room No.561, Aayakar Pan No.Aaact2328K Bhavan, Mumbai-400 020

Section 144C(5)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI N K PRADHAN, AM The Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Dy. Commissioner of Limited Income Tax, Range- Neville House, J.N. Heradia Marg, 2(1)(1), Mumbai Vs. Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 Room No.561, Aayakar PAN No.AAACT2328K Bhavan, Mumbai-400 020 Appellant .. Respondent Assessee by .. Shri Yogesh A. Thar & Shri D Doshi Ms. Rity Punjabi Ms. Ayushi Madani, Anrs Revenue by .. Shri Jayant Kumar, DR Date of hearing .. 18-08-2017 Date of pronouncement .. 27-10-2017 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: This appeal by the assessee is aris…

DCIT Cir 4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Harinagar Sugar Mills P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA N0

ITA 5584/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Accountnat Member & Shri Pawan Singhdcit-4(2)(2), M/S Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd. Room No. 640, 6Th Floor, 207, Kalbadevi Road, Vs. Mumbai-400002 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan: Aaach2831H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Jayesh Desai (AR)
Section 253Section 254(1)

…Court in the case of CIT Vs Rasoi Ltd. 335 ITR 438 (CAL), the decision of the High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT Vs. Tripti Menthol Industries 35 taxmann.com 515 (Gujarat) and the decision of the J&K High Court in the case of Shree Balaji Alloys Vs. CIT 333 ITR 335 (J&K). 3.3 We have heard both the sides and perused the material on record. It is not disputed that the subsidy scheme formulated by the Government of Bihar is for the purpose of attracting capital investment and to encourage setting up the industry/expand the existing unit. It is pertinent to mention that the character of a subsidy in the hands…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Vardhman Industries Ltd

Appeals are partly allowed, in view of the

ITA/708/2004HC Delhi13 Jul 2017

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 221Section 4

…also relies upon subsequent judgment of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shree Balaji Alloys 2016 (287) CTR 459 (SC) which affirmed the decision of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court in Shri Balaji Alloys vs. Commissioner, Income Tax (2011) 333 ITR 335. It was stated that the Ponni Sugars (supra) principle was applied and the Court held that the excise duty refund received by the eligible unit, was not liable to tax as it was a capital receipt despite absence of any provision in the scheme with regard to the use of funds. 17. Learned counsel also relied upon the decision of a Division…

Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi vs. M/S Bhushan Steels & Strips Ltd

Appeals are partly allowed, in view of the

ITA/317/2003HC Delhi13 Jul 2017

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 221Section 4

…also relies upon subsequent judgment of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shree Balaji Alloys 2016 (287) CTR 459 (SC) which affirmed the decision of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court in Shri Balaji Alloys vs. Commissioner, Income Tax (2011) 333 ITR 335. It was stated that the Ponni Sugars (supra) principle was applied and the Court held that the excise duty refund received by the eligible unit, was not liable to tax as it was a capital receipt despite absence of any provision in the scheme with regard to the use of funds. 17. Learned counsel also relied upon the decision of a Division…