Shri S.K. Golcha (HUF) v. ACIT

226 ITR 245Reported decision1997#13777 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,375 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2020.

Judgments citing Shri S.K. Golcha (HUF) v. ACIT

DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. Gail (India) Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4642/DEL/2013[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 1996-97

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 80HSection 80I

…Biscuit Factory vs. CST (1985) 60 STC 344 (Allh.) xxix) Dy. CST vs. Pio Food Packers (1980) 46 STC 63 xxx) South Bihar Sugar Mills vs. UOI (1978) ELT (J) 3 xxxi) Empire Industries Ltd. vs. UOI (1986) 162 ITR 846 (SC) xxxii) CIT vs. Lucky Mineral Pvt. Ltd. 226 ITR 245 19. The Ld. DR further submitted that as regards the claim of the assessee that deduction allowed in earlier years cannot be denied in subsequent year, the assessee claimed deduction u/s 80IA of the Act with respect to profit derived from eligible units has been allowed by Revenue till A.Y. 1995-96, the same cannot be denied subsequently. In A.Y…

Gail (India) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT-Ltu Delhi, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4454/DEL/2013[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 1996-97

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 80HSection 80I

…Biscuit Factory vs. CST (1985) 60 STC 344 (Allh.) xxix) Dy. CST vs. Pio Food Packers (1980) 46 STC 63 xxx) South Bihar Sugar Mills vs. UOI (1978) ELT (J) 3 xxxi) Empire Industries Ltd. vs. UOI (1986) 162 ITR 846 (SC) xxxii) CIT vs. Lucky Mineral Pvt. Ltd. 226 ITR 245 19. The Ld. DR further submitted that as regards the claim of the assessee that deduction allowed in earlier years cannot be denied in subsequent year, the assessee claimed deduction u/s 80IA of the Act with respect to profit derived from eligible units has been allowed by Revenue till A.Y. 1995-96, the same cannot be denied subsequently. In A.Y…

Shri S.K. Golcha (HUF), Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 245/JPR/2018[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 May 2019AY 1996-97

Bench: The Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri A.B. Dangayach (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Neena Jeph (JCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80ISection 80J

…al property of the goods, however the outcome is altogether distinct from the input. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Lucky Minmat vs CIT 245 ITR 830 has upheld the Shri S.K. Golcha (HUF) vs. ACIT decision of Hon’ble Jurisdiction High Court reported in 226 ITR 245. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Arihant Tile and Marbles Pvt. Ltd. 320 ITR 79 (supra) while considering an identical issue held in para 11 to 20 as under:- “11. The main judgment on which the Department has placed reliance is the judgment of this Court in Lucky Minmat (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 162 CTR (SC) 404 : (2001) 9 SCC 669. In…

Shri S.K. Golcha (HUF), Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 790/JPR/2017[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 May 2019AY 1998-99

Bench: The Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri A.B. Dangayach (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Neena Jeph (JCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80ISection 80J

…al property of the goods, however the outcome is altogether distinct from the input. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Lucky Minmat vs CIT 245 ITR 830 has upheld the Shri S.K. Golcha (HUF) vs. ACIT decision of Hon’ble Jurisdiction High Court reported in 226 ITR 245. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Arihant Tile and Marbles Pvt. Ltd. 320 ITR 79 (supra) while considering an identical issue held in para 11 to 20 as under:- “11. The main judgment on which the Department has placed reliance is the judgment of this Court in Lucky Minmat (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 162 CTR (SC) 404 : (2001) 9 SCC 669. In…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-5-4, Jaipur vs. Sandeep Singh Choudhary (HUF), Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 689/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: The Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri A.B. Dangayach (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Neena Jeph (JCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80ISection 80J

…al property of the goods, however the outcome is altogether distinct from the input. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Lucky Minmat vs CIT 245 ITR 830 has upheld the Shri S.K. Golcha (HUF) vs. ACIT decision of Hon’ble Jurisdiction High Court reported in 226 ITR 245. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Arihant Tile and Marbles Pvt. Ltd. 320 ITR 79 (supra) while considering an identical issue held in para 11 to 20 as under:- “11. The main judgment on which the Department has placed reliance is the judgment of this Court in Lucky Minmat (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 162 CTR (SC) 404 : (2001) 9 SCC 669. In…

M/S. Fiberfill Engineers, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1853/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Feb 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri A.T. Varkey:Asstt. Yr: 2010-11 M/S Fiberfill Engineers Vs. Acit Circle 38(1), C-9/9574, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. New Delhi-110070. (New Circle 63(1),Civic Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aaaff 6313 P ( Appellant ) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Gautam Jain Adv. P. Kamal Adv. Respondent By : Smt. Rehka Vimal Dr Date Of Hearing : 03/02/2016. Date Of Order : 25/02/2016. O R D E R Per S.V. Mehrotra, A.M:

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Rehka Vimal DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 22(1)Section 22(3)Section 54Section 80Section 80ISection 80l

…Assessing Officer has claimed that the process adopted by the applicant cannot be termed as manufacturing process as no new product has come into being. Reliance is placed on the decision of Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Lucky Minerals Pvt. Ltd. 226 ITR 245. 11 ITA 1853/Del/2015 Applying the above tests, if the present case is analyzed, it emerges that in case of the appellant, the original article i.e. Pipes/Posts, as the photographs furnished indicate, do not undergo a substantial change and a commercially different product with distinctive name, cha se does not come into existence. Some of the me…

Commissioner of Income Tax - I vs. Moole Rami Reddy

The appeal is allowed

ITTA/450/2011HC Telangana01 Feb 2012
Section 80Section 80I

…[2024:RJ-JP:32605-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 450/2011 Smt. Shakuntala Devi W/o Shri Shashikant Jain Aged 52 years, M/s. Nakoda Crashers & Engineers, Ralayati, Distt. Jhalawar ----Appellant-Assessee Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax, Kota ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Mahendra Gargeiya (Through V.C.) Mr. Devang Gargeiya For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shantanu Sharma Mr. Anurag Mathur HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order 31/07/2024 1. This appeal is filed against order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal…

Shri S.K. Golcha (HUF) v. ACIT (226 ITR 245) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax