Shri Nagesh Chundur v. CIT

358 ITR 521High Court2013#9716 most cited

What is Shri Nagesh Chundur v. CIT authority for?

A new industrial undertaking qualifies for deduction under section 10A of the Income Tax Act even if it commenced production before seeking registration as a Software Technology Park (STP), provided it meets the requisite conditions.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2022.

Also referred to as

Shri Nagesh Chundur v. CIT · section 10A · new industrial undertaking · Software Technology Park · STP registration · commencement of production · deduction · eligibility

Judgments citing Shri Nagesh Chundur v. CIT

Enviro Technology Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bharuch Circle-2, Bharuch

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1474/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 234DSection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…st April 1995 constitutes a ‘new’ facility since it was not in existence before the appellant set it up. To support his submissions the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Shri Nagesh Chundur Vs CIT (358 ITR 521- Mad). The ld Counsel explained that in the said case, the assessee was claiming deduction under section 10A of the Act since it was a registered Software Technology Park (‘STP’) and fulfilled the requisite requirements as per the provisions of the Act. The assessee sought registration as a STP on 27th March 2002 whereas it had commenced producti…

Enviro Technology Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bharuch Circle-2, Bharuch

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1473/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Jun 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 234DSection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…st April 1995 constitutes a ‘new’ facility since it was not in existence before the appellant set it up. To support his submissions the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Shri Nagesh Chundur Vs CIT (358 ITR 521- Mad). The ld Counsel explained that in the said case, the assessee was claiming deduction under section 10A of the Act since it was a registered Software Technology Park (‘STP’) and fulfilled the requisite requirements as per the provisions of the Act. The assessee sought registration as a STP on 27th March 2002 whereas it had commenced producti…

Enviro Technology Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bharuch Circle-2, Bharuch

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1471/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 234DSection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…st April 1995 constitutes a ‘new’ facility since it was not in existence before the appellant set it up. To support his submissions the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Shri Nagesh Chundur Vs CIT (358 ITR 521- Mad). The ld Counsel explained that in the said case, the assessee was claiming deduction under section 10A of the Act since it was a registered Software Technology Park (‘STP’) and fulfilled the requisite requirements as per the provisions of the Act. The assessee sought registration as a STP on 27th March 2002 whereas it had commenced producti…

Enviro Technology Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Bharuch Circle, Bharuch

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1845/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 234DSection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…st April 1995 constitutes a ‘new’ facility since it was not in existence before the appellant set it up. To support his submissions the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Shri Nagesh Chundur Vs CIT (358 ITR 521- Mad). The ld Counsel explained that in the said case, the assessee was claiming deduction under section 10A of the Act since it was a registered Software Technology Park (‘STP’) and fulfilled the requisite requirements as per the provisions of the Act. The assessee sought registration as a STP on 27th March 2002 whereas it had commenced producti…

Enviro Technology Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax., Bharuch

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 498/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 234DSection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…st April 1995 constitutes a ‘new’ facility since it was not in existence before the appellant set it up. To support his submissions the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Shri Nagesh Chundur Vs CIT (358 ITR 521- Mad). The ld Counsel explained that in the said case, the assessee was claiming deduction under section 10A of the Act since it was a registered Software Technology Park (‘STP’) and fulfilled the requisite requirements as per the provisions of the Act. The assessee sought registration as a STP on 27th March 2002 whereas it had commenced producti…

Enviro Technology Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bharuch

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 497/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 234DSection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…st April 1995 constitutes a ‘new’ facility since it was not in existence before the appellant set it up. To support his submissions the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Shri Nagesh Chundur Vs CIT (358 ITR 521- Mad). The ld Counsel explained that in the said case, the assessee was claiming deduction under section 10A of the Act since it was a registered Software Technology Park (‘STP’) and fulfilled the requisite requirements as per the provisions of the Act. The assessee sought registration as a STP on 27th March 2002 whereas it had commenced producti…

Enviro Technology Limited, Ankleshwar vs. The ACIT., Bharuch Circle, Bharuch

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2019/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 234DSection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…st April 1995 constitutes a ‘new’ facility since it was not in existence before the appellant set it up. To support his submissions the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Shri Nagesh Chundur Vs CIT (358 ITR 521- Mad). The ld Counsel explained that in the said case, the assessee was claiming deduction under section 10A of the Act since it was a registered Software Technology Park (‘STP’) and fulfilled the requisite requirements as per the provisions of the Act. The assessee sought registration as a STP on 27th March 2002 whereas it had commenced producti…

Enviro Technology Limited, Ankleshwar vs. The ACIT., Bharuch Circle, Bharuch

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2018/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Jun 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 234DSection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…st April 1995 constitutes a ‘new’ facility since it was not in existence before the appellant set it up. To support his submissions the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Shri Nagesh Chundur Vs CIT (358 ITR 521- Mad). The ld Counsel explained that in the said case, the assessee was claiming deduction under section 10A of the Act since it was a registered Software Technology Park (‘STP’) and fulfilled the requisite requirements as per the provisions of the Act. The assessee sought registration as a STP on 27th March 2002 whereas it had commenced producti…

The ACIT, Bharuch Circle, Bharuch vs. Bharuch Enviro Infrastructure Ltd., Ankleshwar

In the result, this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1867/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Dec 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 44ASection 80I

…1stApril 1995 constitutes a ‘new’ facility since it was not in existence before the appellant set it up. To support his submissions the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Shri Nagesh Chundur Vs CIT (358 ITR 521- Mad). The ld Counsel explained that in the said case, the assessee was claiming deduction under section 10A of the Act since it was a registered Software Technology Park (‘STP’) and fulfilled the requisite requirements as per the provisions of the Act. The assessee sought registration as a STP on 27thMarch 2002 whereas it had commenced productio…

Bharuch Enviro Infrastructure Ltd., Bharuch vs. The Dy.CIT., Bharuch Circle, Bharuch

In the result, this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1849/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Dec 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 44ASection 80I

…1stApril 1995 constitutes a ‘new’ facility since it was not in existence before the appellant set it up. To support his submissions the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Shri Nagesh Chundur Vs CIT (358 ITR 521- Mad). The ld Counsel explained that in the said case, the assessee was claiming deduction under section 10A of the Act since it was a registered Software Technology Park (‘STP’) and fulfilled the requisite requirements as per the provisions of the Act. The assessee sought registration as a STP on 27thMarch 2002 whereas it had commenced productio…

ITO 1(1)(3), Mumbai vs. Everyday Health India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2936/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2936/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri. Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Shri V.Justin, DR
Section 10BSection 142(1)Section 143(3)

…u/s 10B of the 1961 Act in scrutiny assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the 1961 Act. The assessee relied upon CBDT circular no. 1/2015 dated 06.01.2005. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Nagesh Chundur v. CIT, (2013) 358 ITR 521 (Madras-HC), Mumbai-tribunal decision in the case of Prothious Engineering Services P. Ltd. v. ITO reported in (2016) 46 ITR(T) 438(Mum-trib.). I.T.A. No.2936/Mum/2016 6. We have considered rival contentions and perused the material on record including cited case laws. We have observed that the assessee is engaged in the business of providing d…

Shri Nagesh Chundur v. CIT (358 ITR 521) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax