Soda Silicate and Chemical Works v. CJT(P&H) (179 ITR 588)

NIJHAWAN TRAVEL SERVICES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 18(2), NEW DELHI

ITA 5064/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Delhi03 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmanijhawan Travel Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Services Pvt. Ltd. Circle 18(2) F 53, Bhagat Singh New Delhi 110002 Market, New Delhi 110001 Pan : Aaacn0150D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 72

…t of the termination agreement dated 31.05.2012 and benefit the assessee. 5. In regard to the ground no. 2 it can be observed that the ld. Assessing Officer relying judgment to Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in Soda Silicate and Chemical Works vs. CIT 179 ITR 588 (P&H) held that the loss on account of Chit Fund during the financial year is covered by the principal of Mutuality and disallowed the claim. Before Ld. CIT(A), assessee had submitted that the assessee has offered the discount received in earlier years as its income but the same was not considered by Ld. CIT(A) on the ground that each assessment…

DCIT, CC-3(2),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. VANISHITA ISPAT UDYOG PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2934/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2934/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Vanishita Ispat Udyog Income Tax, V. Private Ltd., Corporate Circle 3(2), C/O. N D Rajagopal & Co., Chennai – 600 03 No. 14, Rani Annadurai Street, Mandavelli, Chennai – 600 028. [Pan: Aabcv-9652-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Varuvooru Sreedhar, Addl. Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. M.V. Swaroop, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 18.10.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.10.2022

For Appellant: Shri. Varuvooru Sreedhar, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri. M.V. Swaroop, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 68

…he Income Tax Officer and deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on the claim of loss on chit. 5. The ld.CIT(A) erred in overlooking the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of M/s.Soda Silicate an Chemical Works Vs CIT ( 1989) 179 ITR 588 (P&H) and deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on the claim of loss on chit. 6. The ld.CIT(A) erred in considering the confirmation letters submitted by the assessee during the appellate proceedings though the sanie were not produced before the Assessing Officer in-spite of the adequate opportunity given to the assessee during the…

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 328/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R

Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Assessment Years: 2008-09 TO 2013-14 Wilfred D’Souza Flat No.903, 9th Floor Plama Icon, Behind Plama Mall, ACIT Central Circle-2 Vs. Mangaluru 575 005. Mangaluru PAN NO : ABFPD3142C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Narendra Sharma, A.R. Respondent by : Smt. S. Praveena, D.R. Date of Hearing : 15.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 07.10.2022 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI,…

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 327/BANG/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R

Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Assessment Years: 2008-09 TO 2013-14 Wilfred D’Souza Flat No.903, 9th Floor Plama Icon, Behind Plama Mall, ACIT Central Circle-2 Vs. Mangaluru 575 005. Mangaluru PAN NO : ABFPD3142C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Narendra Sharma, A.R. Respondent by : Smt. S. Praveena, D.R. Date of Hearing : 15.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 07.10.2022 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI,…

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 326/BANG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R

Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Assessment Years: 2008-09 TO 2013-14 Wilfred D’Souza Flat No.903, 9th Floor Plama Icon, Behind Plama Mall, ACIT Central Circle-2 Vs. Mangaluru 575 005. Mangaluru PAN NO : ABFPD3142C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Narendra Sharma, A.R. Respondent by : Smt. S. Praveena, D.R. Date of Hearing : 15.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 07.10.2022 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI,…

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 325/BANG/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R

Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Assessment Years: 2008-09 TO 2013-14 Wilfred D’Souza Flat No.903, 9th Floor Plama Icon, Behind Plama Mall, ACIT Central Circle-2 Vs. Mangaluru 575 005. Mangaluru PAN NO : ABFPD3142C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Narendra Sharma, A.R. Respondent by : Smt. S. Praveena, D.R. Date of Hearing : 15.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 07.10.2022 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI,…

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 324/BANG/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R

Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Assessment Years: 2008-09 TO 2013-14 Wilfred D’Souza Flat No.903, 9th Floor Plama Icon, Behind Plama Mall, ACIT Central Circle-2 Vs. Mangaluru 575 005. Mangaluru PAN NO : ABFPD3142C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Narendra Sharma, A.R. Respondent by : Smt. S. Praveena, D.R. Date of Hearing : 15.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 07.10.2022 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI,…

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 323/BANG/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R

Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Assessment Years: 2008-09 TO 2013-14 Wilfred D’Souza Flat No.903, 9th Floor Plama Icon, Behind Plama Mall, ACIT Central Circle-2 Vs. Mangaluru 575 005. Mangaluru PAN NO : ABFPD3142C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Narendra Sharma, A.R. Respondent by : Smt. S. Praveena, D.R. Date of Hearing : 15.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 07.10.2022 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI,…

OM SWEETS P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-19(1)&2, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 378/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Sh. Bharti Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR

Section 37

…disallowed the claim of the assessee u/s. 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short). 3. Assessee preferred appeals before the learned CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) placed reliance on the decision reported in Soda Silicates and Chemical Works vs. CIT, 179 ITR 588 and returned a finding that the member of the chit fund company is not entitled to any loss in transaction and such a loss cannot be allowed u/s. 37 of the Act. Learned CIT(A), accordingly, upheld the disallowance made by the ld. Assessing Officer. 4. Aggrieved by such orders of the authorities below, the assessee preferred these two appeals con…

OM SWEET (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 19(1) & (2), NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4139/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Sh. Bharti Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR

Section 37

…disallowed the claim of the assessee u/s. 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short). 3. Assessee preferred appeals before the learned CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) placed reliance on the decision reported in Soda Silicates and Chemical Works vs. CIT, 179 ITR 588 and returned a finding that the member of the chit fund company is not entitled to any loss in transaction and such a loss cannot be allowed u/s. 37 of the Act. Learned CIT(A), accordingly, upheld the disallowance made by the ld. Assessing Officer. 4. Aggrieved by such orders of the authorities below, the assessee preferred these two appeals con…

INDUS STEELS AND ALLOYS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2383/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT (DR)

…383/Bang/2018 Page 6 of 10 4. When the assessee went in appeal before Ld. CIT(A), Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. In view of the decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Soda Silicate and Chemicals Works Vs. CIT 179 ITR 588. 5. I have heard the rival submissions and carefully considered the same along with the orders of the tax authorities below. No doubt, a chit fund incidentally partake of the nature of saving scheme. Chit fund is primarily intended to operate as a scheme for advancing loans from the common fund to this subscribers, their turns for getting such lo…

INDUS STEELS AND ALLOYS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2382/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT (DR)

…383/Bang/2018 Page 6 of 10 4. When the assessee went in appeal before Ld. CIT(A), Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. In view of the decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Soda Silicate and Chemicals Works Vs. CIT 179 ITR 588. 5. I have heard the rival submissions and carefully considered the same along with the orders of the tax authorities below. No doubt, a chit fund incidentally partake of the nature of saving scheme. Chit fund is primarily intended to operate as a scheme for advancing loans from the common fund to this subscribers, their turns for getting such lo…

M/S. SHRI RAM CHITS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, this ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1993/HYD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jun 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri C. Srinivas Reddy

Section 21

…al income, assessee company had claimed dividend income on Company’s chit of Rs. 16,78,75,363/- as not taxable since it was derived from the mutual association based on the decision of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Soda Silicate & Chemical Works, 179 ITR 588. The assessee contends that principle of mutuality is applicable in its case and its dividend income is not taxable as it is not an income chargeable to tax, as there is complete identity between the contributors and the receivers in the chit. On this account, the assessee claims deduction of foreman dividend received by it in respect of the comp…

M/S. SHRI RAM CHITS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, this ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1992/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri C. Srinivas Reddy

Section 21

…al income, assessee company had claimed dividend income on Company’s chit of Rs. 16,78,75,363/- as not taxable since it was derived from the mutual association based on the decision of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Soda Silicate & Chemical Works, 179 ITR 588. The assessee contends that principle of mutuality is applicable in its case and its dividend income is not taxable as it is not an income chargeable to tax, as there is complete identity between the contributors and the receivers in the chit. On this account, the assessee claims deduction of foreman dividend received by it in respect of the comp…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. M/S. SHRI RAM CHITS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, this ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1948/HYD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jun 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri C. Srinivas Reddy

Section 21

…al income, assessee company had claimed dividend income on Company’s chit of Rs. 16,78,75,363/- as not taxable since it was derived from the mutual association based on the decision of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Soda Silicate & Chemical Works, 179 ITR 588. The assessee contends that principle of mutuality is applicable in its case and its dividend income is not taxable as it is not an income chargeable to tax, as there is complete identity between the contributors and the receivers in the chit. On this account, the assessee claims deduction of foreman dividend received by it in respect of the comp…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. M/S. SRIRAM CHITS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, this ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1947/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri C. Srinivas Reddy

Section 21

…al income, assessee company had claimed dividend income on Company’s chit of Rs. 16,78,75,363/- as not taxable since it was derived from the mutual association based on the decision of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Soda Silicate & Chemical Works, 179 ITR 588. The assessee contends that principle of mutuality is applicable in its case and its dividend income is not taxable as it is not an income chargeable to tax, as there is complete identity between the contributors and the receivers in the chit. On this account, the assessee claims deduction of foreman dividend received by it in respect of the comp…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S. SHRIRAM CHITS(KARANATAKA) PVT. LTD, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 543/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Smt. Lalitha Kameshwaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT

Section 145(1)

…tual backdrop, the Andhra Pradesh High Court held that the loss incurred by the assessee in the process of bidding the chit amount could be allowed as a business loss. Of course, the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Soda Silicate & Chemical Works vs. CIT (1989) 179 ITR 588 (P&H) took a contra view that where the assessee secured a chit on discount and claimed deduction of discount amount while computing its assessable income, the loss incurred thereon was not incidental to the business and therefore, disallowed the assessee’s claim during the year in question. We are unable to agree with the decision of the Divisio…

SMT. RAMESH SHOBANA,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2223/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2223/Mds/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Smt. Ramesh Shobana, The Deputy Commissioner Of C/O. M/S. U. Gopinath & Co, V. Income Tax, Guru Nivas, Non Corporate Circle 2, No.5/2, Krishnaswamy Avenue, Chennai – 34. Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. Pan : Bfips0708H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri V.S. Jayakumar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.01.2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement :28.02.2017 आदेश आदेश /O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri V.S. Jayakumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, JCIT

Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’/ एस एम सी "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ / SMC BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "याियक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 2223/Mds/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Smt. Ramesh Shobana, The Deputy Commissioner of C/o. M/s. U. Gopinath & Co, v. Income Tax, Guru Nivas, Non Corporate Circle 2, No.5/2, Krishnaswamy Avenue, Chennai – 34. Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. PAN : BFIPS0708H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri V.S. Jayakumar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by…

PANCHAJANYA CHITS PVT. LTD. vs. DCIT,

In the result, appeal stands dismissed

ITA 393/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri. Abraham P. Georgei.T.A No.393/Bang/2013 (Assessment Year : 2009-10) Panchajanya Chits P. Ltd, No.344, 1St Floor, Vinaya Complex, Chickpet, Bangalore 560 053 .. Appellant Pan : Aaccp5556H V. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle – 12(2), Bangalore .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri. C. R. Nulvi, Ca Revenue By : Dr. P. K. Srihari, Addl. Cit Heard On : 02.05.2016 Pronounced On : 04.05.2016 O R D E R Per Abraham P. George:

For Appellant: Shri. C. R. Nulvi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, Addl. CIT

…count, while computing its total income under the Income-tax Act, it claimed exemption for the said amount on the ground of mutuality relying on the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Soda Silicate and Chemical Works v. CIT [(1989) 179 ITR 588]. However AO was of the opinion that assessee could not take refuge under the principles of mutuality. As per the AO, in the case of CIT v. Bankipur Club Ltd (226 ITR 97), Hon’ble Apex Court had held that profits arising from mutual activity would be taxable when there was a taint of commerciality. As per the AO, by virtue of CBDT instruction No.…

ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S SHRIRAM CHITS (KARNATAKA) PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1074/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Dec 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Smt. Lalitha Rameswaran, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.K.Srihari, Addl.CIT

Section 145(1)

…ual backdrop, the Andhra Pradesh High Court held that the loss incurred by the assessee in the process of bidding the chit amount could be allowed as a business loss. Of course, the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Soda Silicate & Chemical Works vs. CIT (1989) 179 ITR 588 (P&H) took a contra view that where the assessee secured a chit on discount and claimed deduction of ITA Nos.1074to 1076(B)/2015 discount amount while computing its assessable income, the loss incurred thereon was not incidental to the business and therefore, disallowed the assessee’s claim during the year in question. We are unable to agree wi…

Soda Silicate and Chemical Works v. CJT(P&H)

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Soda Silicate and Chemical Works v. CJT(P&H)

NIJHAWAN TRAVEL SERVICES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 18(2), NEW DELHI

DCIT, CC-3(2),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. VANISHITA ISPAT UDYOG PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

OM SWEETS P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-19(1)&2, NEW DELHI

OM SWEET (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 19(1) & (2), NEW DELHI

INDUS STEELS AND ALLOYS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

INDUS STEELS AND ALLOYS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

M/S. SHRI RAM CHITS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

M/S. SHRI RAM CHITS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. M/S. SHRI RAM CHITS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. M/S. SRIRAM CHITS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S. SHRIRAM CHITS(KARANATAKA) PVT. LTD, BANGALORE

SMT. RAMESH SHOBANA,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

PANCHAJANYA CHITS PVT. LTD. vs. DCIT,

ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S SHRIRAM CHITS (KARNATAKA) PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE