Southern Petro Chemical Industries v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

93 TTJ 161Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2005#8756 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 1961 Section 10(34) of the Income Tax Act Section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act Section 144 of the Income Tax Act Section 14A of the Income Tax Act Section 234B of the Income Tax Act

Judgments citing Southern Petro Chemical Industries v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

ASSOCIATED TECHNO PLASTIC P. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1890/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year : 2008-09] Associated Techno Plastic P.Ltd., Vs Dcit, Elegence Level-2, Mathura Road, Circle-2(1), Jasola, New Delhi-110025. New Delhi. Pan-Aaaca2525K Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 22.05.2024

Section 143(1)Section 144Section 14ASection 234BSection 40Section 68

…ion 14A of the Act as also the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. United General Trust Ltd. (supra) and many other following decisions of the Coordinate Benches of the Hon'ble ITAT viz. (a) Southern Petro Chemicals Industries (2005), 93 TTJ 161 (b) Harish Krishnakanta Bhatt (2004), 91 ITD 311 (c) S.G. Investments and Industries Ltd. (2004), 89 ITD 44 (d) Everplus Securities & Finances Ltd. (2006), 285 ITR (AT) 112, It is held that all expenses connected with the exempt income have to be necessarily disallowed regardless of whether they are direct or indirect, fixed or variable, and manag…

JAKHAU SALT COMPANY P LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 367/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.367/Chny/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. M/S. Jakhau Salt Co. P. Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner – No.2, North Crescent Road, Of Income Tax, T. Nagar, Chennai-600 017. Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai. [Pan:Aaacw 0867 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.S.Sridhar, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.S. Senthil Kumaran, Cit : सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing 09.01.2023 : घोषणाक"तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2023

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 263

…elevant submissions, had completed assessment and accepted write off of loss on account of investment in subsidiary. 12. Further, the Chennai tribunal, in Appellant's own case for AY 2000-01, in its order dated 20.10.2004 in ITA No.2252/Mds/2003 (reported in 93 TTJ 161) has held in Para 18 of their order: 18. Now, coming to the second contention of the assessee, we find considerable force in the argument of the learned counsel for the assessee and the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Indian Commerce & Industries Co. (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (supra) squarely covers this issue. In that case, as no…

M/S SOUTHERN TPETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRIES CORPRATION LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD-3(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 232/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.232/Chny/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S.Southern Petrochemical V. The Income Tax Officer, Industries Corporation Ltd., Corporate Ward-3(1), 88, Spic House, Mount Road, Chennai. Guindy, Chennai-600 032. [Pan:Aaacs 4668 K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Adv. &

Section 115JSection 143Section 263

…vant submissions, had completed assessment and accepted write off of loss on account of investment in subsidiary. 12. Further, the Chennai tribunal, in Appellant's own case for AY 2000- 01, in its order dated 20.10.2004 in ITA No.2252/Mds/2003 (reported in 93 TTJ 161) has held in Para 18 of their order: 18. Now, coming to the second contention of the assessee, we find considerable force in the argument of the learned counsel for the assessee and the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Indian Commerce & Industries Co. (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (supra) squarely covers this issue. In that case, as no…

DCIT 5(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. JSW POWER TRADING CO. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 518/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jul 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.518/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit 5(2)(1) बिधम/ Jsw Power Trading Co. Ltd. R. No.525, Aayakar 5A, Jindal Mansion, Vs. Bhawan, M.K. Rd, Mumbai- Dr. G. Deshmukh Marg, Peddar Road, Mumbai- 400020. 400026 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcj5740L (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Padma Ram Mirdha (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Gaurav Kabra (Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/02/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/07/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 03.10.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -10, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2013- 14. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Kabra (AR)For Respondent: Shri Padma Ram Mirdha (DR)

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14ASection 2

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VP AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.518/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) DCIT 5(2)(1) बिधम/ JSW Power Trading Co. Ltd. R. No.525, Aayakar 5A, Jindal Mansion, Vs. Bhawan, M.K. Rd, Mumbai- Dr. G. Deshmukh Marg, Peddar Road, Mumbai- 400020. 400026 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AABCJ5740L (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue by: Shri Padma Ram Mirdha (DR) Assessee by: Shri Gaurav Kabra (AR) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 06/02/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronounce…

THE ACIT,(OSD)CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. TORRENT POWER LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the Cross-objection of the assessee, both are dismissed

ITA 1668/AHD/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Mar 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vartik ChowkshiFor Respondent: Shri Samir Tekriwal, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…s. 2,56,00,942/- is made and added back to the total income of the assessee. Reliance, in this regard is placed upon the following decisions: 1. ITO Vs. Daga Capital Management Pvt.Ltd, 117 ITD 169 (Mum)(SB) . 2. Southern Petrol Chemical Industries Ws. DCIT, 93 TTJ 161. 3. Godrej & Boyce Mfg.Co.Ltd. V/s. DCIT (ITA No. 626 of 2010)(Mumbai High Court)". 8. On the other hand, Ld.AR appearing on behalf of assessee reiterated the same arguments as were raised by him before the Ld.CIT(A) and the same are contained in paragraph No.3.2 of the order of the Ld.CIT(A) which is reproduced hereunder: “3.2. During the cours…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. SOUTHERN PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRIES CORPN. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1466/CHNY/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Dec 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar"नधा(रण वष( /Assessment Year: 2003-04

For Appellant: Mr. R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 35

…l relates to disallowance of proportionate interest relatable to interest free advances to group companies. The Jurisdictional Tribunal, in the assessee’s own case, had occasion to consider the nature of such advances and in its order reported in SPIC v. DCIT(93 TTJ 161) , as also in its order for assessment year 2000-01 in ITA no. 2252/Mds/2003 dated 20-10- 2004 had held that the concerned sister concerns were operating in the same field and there was a close nexus between the raw materials and finished products of the assessee company and its subsidiaries to whom advances has been granted. Interest had not been…

DCIT 5(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. K. GIRDHARILAL INTERNATIONAL LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue are hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 4036/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Shri G. Manjunatha, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 4036 To 4038 /Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dy. Commissioner Of बिधम/ M/S. K. Girdharlal International Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax 5(2)(1) Vs. 1011 Prasad Chambers, Room No. 571, 5Th Floor, Opera House, Mumbai- Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. 400004. Road, Mumbai-400020. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacck6101F (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh (Dr) Assessee By: Ms. Veena Purohit (Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 20/08/2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/08/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Above Mentioned Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 21.03.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys.2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14. Ita. No.4036/M/2018:- 2. The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 21.03.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-10

For Appellant: Ms. Veena Purohit (AR)For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh (DR)

Section 10(34)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, AM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 4036 to 4038 /Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14) Dy. Commissioner of बिधम/ M/s. K. Girdharlal International Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax 5(2)(1) Vs. 1011 Prasad Chambers, Room No. 571, 5th Floor, Opera House, Mumbai- Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. 400004. Road, Mumbai-400020. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AACCK6101F (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue by: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh (DR) Assessee by: Ms. Veena Purohit (AR) सुनवाई क…

MPS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical

ITA 963/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, CIT

Section 14A

…ii) of the Rules. 8. Per contra, the DR supported the order of the DRP. He invited our attention to the DRP order and submitted that the DRP relied on the :-8-: jurisdictional bench of ITAT, Chennai in the case of Southern Petro Chemical Industries vs DCIT 93 TTJ 161, which has approved the disallowance of proportionate management expenses while computing the dividend income. The Special Bench decision of ITAT in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs ITO [2009] 121 ITD 318 (Del) (SB). The AO has relied on the decision of the Delhi ITAT in the case of Escorts Ltd., vs ACIT 102 TTJ 522 etc. 9. We heard the rival su…

SPACO TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 5(3), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 2882/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2882/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S. Spaco Technologies बिाम/ Dcit, Circle 5(3), Aayakar (India) P. Ltd., Bhavan, Mumbai 901, Prasad Chambers, V. Opera House, Mumbai- 400004 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aabcs5307E (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri. M.C. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri. Rajat Mittal

Section 10(33)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…indirect management and administrative expenses qualify for disallowance u/s 14A and there is no decision so far by a similar forum contradicting the above findings. Similar view was also taken by IT, Chennai in the case of Southern Petrochemical Industries (93 TTJ 161) as under: “... Whether to invest or not to invest and whether to retain the investments or to liquidate the same very strategic decisions which the management is called upon to take. These are mind-boggling decisions and top management Is involved in taking these decisions. This decision-making process very complicated and requires very careful a…

NARENDRA AMBWANI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 5(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7628/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am Narendra Ambwani The Deputy Commissioner 1201, Sterling Sea Face, Of Income Tax, Circle- Vs. Dr. Annie B. Road, Worli, 5(2)(1), Mumbai Mumbai-400 018 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aeipa8788F

For Appellant: Mrugakshi K. Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Arju Garodia, DR

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…agement and administrative expenses qualify for disallowance under section 14A and there is no decision so far by any similar forum contradicting the above findings. Similar view was also taken by ITAT Chennai in the case of Southern Petrochemical Industries (93 TTJ 161) as under: - “…whether to invest or not to invest and whether to retain the investments or to liquidate the same very strategic decisions which the management is called upon to take. These are mind-boggling decisions and top management is involved in taking these decisions. This decision- making process is very complicated and requires very caref…

DCIT 7(3), MUMBAI vs. YES BANK LTD, MUMBAI

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

ITA 3388/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3357/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year:2008-09) Yes Bank Limited, बनाम/ Addl.Commissioner Of Income 9Th Floor, Nehru Centre, Tax 7(3), Vs. Discovery Of India Building, Room No.614, 6Th Floor, Dr.A B Road, Worli, Mumbai- Aayakar Bhavan, 400018 M K Road, Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3388/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year:2008-09) बनाम/ Dy.Commissioner Of Income Yes Bank Limited, 9Th Floor, Nehru Centre, Tax 7(3), Vs. Discovery Of India Building, Room No.615, 6Th Floor, Dr.A B Road, Worli, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400018 M K Road, Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

Section 14ASection 35D

…expenses under Rule 8D(2)(iii) is required to be made even if the interest free funds have been used for making investments. In this regard, he placed reliance on the following case law:- (a) Escorts Ltd (102 TTJ 522) (b) Southern Petro chemical industries (93 TTJ 161) (c) Smt. Leena Ramachandran (339 ITR 293)(Ker). 4. We heard the rival contentions on this issue and perused the record. We agree with the contention of the assessee that no disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(i) and (ii) is required to be made, if the non- interest bearing funds available with the assessee are more than the amount of investment which g…

YES BANK LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 7(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 3357/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Section 14ASection 35D

M/S. NUMERIC POWER SYSTEMS LTD., NOW KNOWN AS,CHENNAI vs. ITO (OSD),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1344/CHNY/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Philip George, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT

Section 10Section 10BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 44A

…that the provisions of Sec. 14A are not applicable for the assessment year 2008-09 and the ld.CIT(A) relying on High Court and Supreme Court decisions followed judicial precedent of Jurisdictional ITAT Bench in Southern Petro Chemical Industries vs. DCIT (93 TTJ 161) and concluded that Rule 8D is applicable to the present assessment year and there is no dispute or mistake by Assessing Officer in calculating disallowance and :- 7 -: confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee has assailed appeal before the Tribunal. The ld.AR argued that ld.CIT(A) erred in con…