Subramanian and Anr. v. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr.

156 ITR 11High Court1985#117 most cited

What is Subramanian and Anr. v. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr. authority for?

When there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Courts, the view that favors the assessee should be preferred.

541

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Subramanian v. Siemens India Ltd. · 156 ITR 11 · conflict of High Court decisions · non-jurisdictional High Courts · assessee-favorable interpretation · tax law principle · Section 80P(2)(d) · co-operative society · judicial precedent application

Also reported as

36 CTR 197

Sections most often in play

Section 80P(2)(d)Section 143(3)Section 80P(4)Section 80P(2)(a)(i)Section 263Section 143(1)Section 250Section 2(19)

Issues it is cited on

section 80(2)(d)section 57(i)section 80(p)(2)(a)section 2(19)tax collected at sourcesection 286section 200a(1)(c)section 80p(4)section 161section 80p(2)(c)section 80(p)(2)(d)section 200a(1)

Judgments citing Subramanian and Anr. v. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr.

Samarth Urban Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd, Belgaum vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Belagavi

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

ITA 152/PAN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…ty on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of nonjurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Samarth Urban Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd, Belgaum vs. Pr Commissioner of Income Tax, Belagavi

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

ITA 151/PAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…ty on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of nonjurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Shri Shradha Credit Souhard Sahakari Niymit Nipani, Nipani vs. ITO, Ward-2 Belgaum, Belgaum

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

ITA 144/PAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…ty on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of nonjurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Shivagiri Co-Op Credit Society Ltd, Belagavi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(3), Belagavi

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

ITA 138/PAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…ty on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of nonjurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Shree Mahila Credit Souhard Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, Belagavi vs. ITO Ward 1 Belagavi, Belagavi

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

ITA 117/PAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…ty on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of nonjurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Akshaya Co-Operative Credit Society Limited, Karwar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1), Karwar

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

ITA 161/PAN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…ty on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of nonjurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Akshaya Co-Operative Credit Society Limited, Karwar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1), Karwar

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

ITA 160/PAN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…ty on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of nonjurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Akshaya Co-Operative Credit Society Limited, Karwar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Karwar

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

ITA 159/PAN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…ty on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of nonjurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Akshaya Co-Operative Credit Society Limited, Karwar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1), Karwar

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

ITA 158/PAN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…ty on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of nonjurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Gmedapadu Pacs, Gmedapadu vs. ITO, Ward-1, Kakinada

ITA 574/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.574/Viz/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) G Medapadu Pacs, Vs. Income Tax Officer, East Godavari District, Ward-1, Andhra Pradesh. Kakinada. Pan: Aaaag8455A (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Sri Kss Sarma, Ca राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 16/10/2025 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 14/11/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M:

For Appellant: Sri KSS Sarma, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…ety on its investments held with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court‟s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Navdurga Transport Company, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(1), Hyderabad

Appeal is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 219/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad12 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 251(1)(a)Section 69A

…mpose only 30% rate of tax. 19. Considering the aforesaid conflicting views of the non-non- jurisdictional High Courts, we are guided by the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian & Ors. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. & Anr. (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bombay) that in case of conflicting views of the non-jurisdictional High Courts the view that was favorable to the assessee and not against him is to be adopted. We thus, based on the aforesaid position of law respectfully follow the view taken by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of S.M.I.L.E Microfinance Limited Vs. The Assistant Com…

Navdurga Transport Company, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(1), Hyderabad

Appeal is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 218/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad12 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 251(1)(a)Section 69A

…mpose only 30% rate of tax. 19. Considering the aforesaid conflicting views of the non-non- jurisdictional High Courts, we are guided by the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian & Ors. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. & Anr. (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bombay) that in case of conflicting views of the non-jurisdictional High Courts the view that was favorable to the assessee and not against him is to be adopted. We thus, based on the aforesaid position of law respectfully follow the view taken by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of S.M.I.L.E Microfinance Limited Vs. The Assistant Com…

Paladugu Reshma, Vijayawada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 268/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.268/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Paladugu Reshma V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 2(3) D.No. 57-7-11 Income Tax Office New Postal Colony Cr Building, 1St Floor, Annex Kakatiya Clinic Road M.G.Road, Vijayawada Patamata, Vijayawada - 520010 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Amupp5831A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM“DIVISION” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM (HYBRID HEARING) श्री रिीश सूद ,न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बालाकृष्णन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.268/VIZ/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Paladugu Reshma v. Income Tax officer – Ward – 2(3) D.No. 57-7-11 Income Tax Office New Postal Colony CR Building, 1st Floor, Annex Kakatiya Clinic Road M.G.Road, Vijayawada Patamata, Vijayawada - 520010 Andhra Pradesh [PAN: A…

Elco Arcade Res and Non Res. Premises Co Op Society Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 23(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposesin above terms

ITA 4481/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shriom Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanelco Arcade Res & Non Res Ito 23(1)(3), Premisies Co-Operative Society Vs. Piramal Chamber, Ltd. Mumbai – 400 012 Elco Arcade, Hill Road, Bandra West, Mumbai-400 050 Pan: Aaaae8544N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shripratik Jain, Ld. Ar Department Represented By : Shri Pushkarajbhangepatil, Ld. Dr Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 13.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.09.2025

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…under Sec.80P(2) (d) of the Act. Backed by the aforesaid conflicting judicial pronouncements, we may herein observe, that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. v. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr [1983] 36 CTR 197/[1985] 156 ITR 11/[1983] 15 Taxman 594 (Bombay), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully foll…

Nitin Rajaram Dhane, Satara vs. The DCIT Citrcle, Satara

In the result, for all the reasons discussed, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2748/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamore

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 90

…this 6 ITA No.2748/PUN/2024[A] healthy rule is not followed, the result will only be undue harassment to assessees and chaos in administration of tax laws ………” Unquote. 5.2 Hon’ble Bombay High Court in K. Subramanian, ITO And Another vs Siemens India Ltd1985 156 ITR 11 Bom vide order dated 20 April, 1983 has held as under : Quote, “So far as the legal position is concerned, the ITO would be bound by a decision of the Supreme Court as also by a decision of the High Court of the State within whose jurisdiction he is (functioning), irrespective of the pendency of any appeal or special leave application against tha…

Ganesh Kumar Paidi, Vijayawada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Vijayawada

Appeal is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 135/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250

…mpose only 30% rate of tax. 19. Considering the aforesaid conflicting views of the non-non- jurisdictional High Courts, we are guided by the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian & Ors. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. & Anr. (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bombay) that in case of conflicting views of the non-jurisdictional High Courts the view that was favorable to the assessee and not against him is to be adopted. We thus, based on the aforesaid position of law respectfully follow the view taken by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of S.M.I.L.E Microfinance Limited Vs. The Assistant Com…

Co-Operative Electric Supply Society Ltd., Karimnagar vs. DCIT., Circle-1, Karimnagar

ITA 478/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Us:

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(va)

…ty on its investments held with a co- operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court‟s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Co-Operative Electric Supply Society Ltd., Siricilla vs. DCIT., Circle-1, Karimnagar

ITA 411/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Us:

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(va)

…ty on its investments held with a co- operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court‟s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1 Tirupur, Tirupur vs. Armstront Knitting Mills, Tirupur

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

ITA 1429/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms Padmavathy Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1429/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri S.B. Rajendra KumarFor Respondent: Shri Suraj Nahar, CA
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(xviii)Section 250

…d it is held that the amount received is capital receipt. This decision is rendered by Jurisdictional ITAT which is binding on the undersigned. In view of following decisions I am bound to abide by the decision of Hon’ble ITAT: i. ITO Vs. Siemens India Ltd & 156 ITR 11(BOM) ii. Shree Rajendra Mills Ltd vs CIT 109 ITR 229 iii. Union of India Vs Kamalakshi Finance Corporation Ltd AIR1992SC711 In view of binding judicial discipline explained by above judgments. The Jurisdictional ITAT Chennai, in clear terms has held that the amount received by the appellant is capital receipt and not taxable. Therefore, in view o…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1 Tirupur, Tiruppur vs. Armstrong Knitting Mills, Tirupur

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

ITA 1422/CHNY/2025[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms Padmavathy Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1422/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri S.B. Rajendra KumarFor Respondent: Shri Suraj Nahar, CA
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(xviii)Section 250

…d it is held that the amount received is capital receipt. This decision is rendered by Jurisdictional ITAT which is binding on the undersigned. In view of following decisions I am bound to abide by the decision of Hon’ble ITAT: i. ITO Vs. Siemens India Ltd & 156 ITR 11(BOM) ii. Shree Rajendra Mills Ltd vs CIT 109 ITR 229 iii. Union of India Vs Kamalakshi Finance Corporation Ltd AIR1992SC711 In view of binding judicial discipline explained by above judgments. The Jurisdictional ITAT Chennai, in clear terms has held that the amount received by the appellant is capital receipt and not taxable. Therefore, in view o…