Tata Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT

256 ITR 395High Court2002#1322 most cited

What is Tata Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Interest on borrowings for business purposes is an allowable deduction under section 36(1)(iii) even if capitalized in the books of account. Modifications in business records for accurate accounting do not automatically imply fraudulent intent.

86

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,418 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Tata Chemicals Ltd v CIT · section 36(1)(iii) · capitalization of interest · allowability of interest deduction · business investment · accurate accounting · fraudulent intent · modified bills · damaged goods

Issues it is cited on

section 153b(i)(a)section 132(8)section 132(9a)section 153(1)(a)section 145avaluation of sharessection 65bsection 65section 153(1)icdsdumb documentssection 153b

Judgments citing Tata Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT

Subhdhan Financial Advisory Private Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-9(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2198/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 2198/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Subhdhan Financial Advisory Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(4) Private Limited Vs C/O Sri Jitendra Kaushik, Advocate 19D, Muktaram Babu Street Kolkata - 700007 [Pan : Aamcs7818P] अपीलाथ"/ (Assessee ) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Fca Revenue By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/05/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/07/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 15, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”], Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Dated 13/03/2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. For That The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax(A) 15, Kolkata Is Arbitrary, Illegal & Bad In Law. 2. For That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) 15, Erred In Confirming The Action Of Income-Tax Officer Adding A Sum Of Rs.72,00,000/- Under Section 68 Of The I T Act 1961. 3. For That The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Alter Or Amend Any Ground Before Or At The Time Of Hearing Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT D/R
Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

…pearing for the Revenue also fairly states that the issue of applicability of section 68 of the Act was not urged by the Revenue before the Tribunal. (b) It is a settled position in law as held by this court in CIT v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. [2002] 122 Taxman 643/256 ITR 395 (Bom.) that in an appeal u/s 260A of the Act, the High Court can only decide a question if it had been raised before the Tribunal even if not determined by the Tribunal. Therefore, no occasion to consider the question as prayed for arises. (c) In any case, we may point out that the amendment to section 68 of the Act by the addition of proviso the…

M/S. Icici Bank Ltd ( Erstwhile Icici Ltd), Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 7589/MUM/2007[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2023AY 2001-2002
For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri K.C. Selvamani
Section 10Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 88

…his predecessor for the Assessment Year 2000-01, we deem it appropriate to remand this issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication keeping in view the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Tata Chemicals (256 ITR 395 (Bombay) and the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of DCIT vs. Core Healthcare Ltd. : 298 ITR 194 (SC). In view of the aforesaid, Ground No. [4] raised by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Ground No. [5] 32. Ground No. [5] pertains to claim of exemption made by the Assessee under Section 10(15)(iv)(h) of the Act read a…

Nav Consec P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3258/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri. Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3258/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Nav Consec Pvt Ltd बिधम/ Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(2)(3) Mumbai. Vs. C/O Sanjay Shah, 108, 1St Floor Sujata Niketan, Rani Sati Marg Malad East, Mumbai-400097 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcn1435A (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Anil Surana, Ca (Written Submission) Assessee By: Dr Mahesh Akhade, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Dr Mahesh Akhade, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil Surana, CA (written
Section 68

…earing for the Revenue also fairly states that the issue of applicability of section 68 of the Act was not urged by the Revenue before the Tribunal. (b) It is a settled position in law as held by this court in CIT v. Tata Chemicals, Ltd. f20021 122 Taxman 643/256 ITR 395 (Bom.) that in an appeal under section 260A of the Act, the High Court can only decide a question if it had been raised before the Tribunal even if not determined by the Tribunal. Therefore, no occasion to consider the question as prayed for arises. (c) In any case, we may point out that the amendment to section 68 of the Act by the addition of p…

DCIT Central Circle-2(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Suchir Chemicals Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 677/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit –Central Circle – 2(2) V. M/S. Suchir Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building (Amalgamated Company – Manan Pharma Pvt Ltd. W.E.F 01.04.2013) Room No. 806, 8Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Shiv Ashish M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Andheri Prade, Mumbai - 400005 Pan: Aaccm7533K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Pooja Rander & Shri Rushabh Mehta Department By : Shri Manoj Sinha

For Appellant: Ms. Pooja Rander &For Respondent: Shri Manoj Sinha
Section 115JSection 131Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 68

…pearing for the Revenue also fairly states that the issue of applicability of section 68 of the Act was not urged by the Revenue before the Tribunal. (b) It is a settled position in law as held by this court in CIT v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. [2002] 122 Taxman 643/256 ITR 395 (Bom.) that in an appeal under section 260A of the Act, the High Court can only decide a question if it had been raised before the Tribunal even if not determined by the Tribunal. Therefore, no occasion to consider the question as prayed for arises. (c) In any case, we may point out that the amendment to section 68 of the Act by the addition of p…

Tata Housing Development Company Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- 8(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee ITA

ITA 3491/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhm/S Tata Housing Vs. Dcit – 8(3)(1) Development Company Room No. 615, Ltd.,E Block, Voltas Aayakar Bhavan, Compound, Tb Kadam Mk Marg, Marg, Chinchpokli, Mumbai – 400020. Mumbai – 400033. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaact0191Q Appellant .. Respondent Dcit – 8(3)(1) Vs. M/S. Tata Housing Room No. 615, Aayakar Development Company Bhavan, Ltd.,E Block, Voltas Mk Marg, Compound, Tb Kadam Mumbai – 400020. Marg, Chinchpokli, Mumbai – 400033. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaact0191Q Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri.Madhur Agarwal.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Ajay Kumar. CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

…e ITA is enclosed herewith as Annexure 5. Further, in support of our contention of claim of deduction u/s. 36(1) (ill) r.w.s 43B of the ITA we place reliance on following judicial pronouncement: The Bombay High Court in the case of Tata Chemicals Ltd. [(2002) 256 ITR 395] had occasion to consider the matter of capitalization of interest in the books of accounts and appellants claim U/s. 36(1)(ili) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and relying on the various judicial pronouncements on the matter of Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Court particularly recent one in the case of Veecumsees vs. CIT [(1966) 220 ITR 185 (SC)], C…

M/S Advent Commodities Pvt. Ltd., ITO, Ward-4(3) vs. ITO, Ward-4(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 522/KOL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 131Section 131(1)Section 144(1)Section 250Section 68

…pearing for the Revenue also fairly states that the issue of applicability of section 68 of the Act was not urged by the Revenue before the Tribunal. (b) It is a settled position in law as held by this court in CIT v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. [2002] 122 Taxman 643/256 ITR 395 (Bom.) that in an appeal u/s 260A of the Act, the High Court can only decide a question if it had been raised before the Tribunal even if not determined by the Tribunal. Therefore, no occasion to consider the question as prayed for arises. (c) In any case, we may point out that the amendment to section 68 of the Act by the addition of proviso the…

DCIT 8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Housing Development Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 838/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh
Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…recognization of revenue - in a project completion method - it cannot be allowed till the project is complete and revenue recognized - thus this ground of appeal is dismissed. Reliance placed by Ld. Counsel on the following decisions: (i) Tata Chemicals Ltd. 256 ITR 395 (ii) CIT Vs. Lokhandwala Constructions India Ltd. (2003) 260 ITR 579. CO. NOs. 154 & 153/MUM/2019 M/s. Tata Housing Development Co. Ltd., (iii) Paranjape Griha Ninnan P. Ltd. Vs. Jt. C1T Spl Rg, 50 in ITA No. 2398/Mum/2001 dated 04-04-2006. (iv) Jt. CIT Spl Rg. 6 Vs. K. Raheja (P) Ltd. 102ITD 414. Is of no avail because in all these cases what ha…

DCIT 8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Housing Development Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 837/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh
Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…recognization of revenue - in a project completion method - it cannot be allowed till the project is complete and revenue recognized - thus this ground of appeal is dismissed. Reliance placed by Ld. Counsel on the following decisions: (i) Tata Chemicals Ltd. 256 ITR 395 (ii) CIT Vs. Lokhandwala Constructions India Ltd. (2003) 260 ITR 579. CO. NOs. 154 & 153/MUM/2019 M/s. Tata Housing Development Co. Ltd., (iii) Paranjape Griha Ninnan P. Ltd. Vs. Jt. C1T Spl Rg, 50 in ITA No. 2398/Mum/2001 dated 04-04-2006. (iv) Jt. CIT Spl Rg. 6 Vs. K. Raheja (P) Ltd. 102ITD 414. Is of no avail because in all these cases what ha…

DCIT CC 6(3), Mumbai vs. Horizon Infrastructure Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee ITA No

ITA 844/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodita No.2471/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Horizon Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Dcit,Cc-6(3) (Now Known As Skil Air India Building Infrastructure Ltd.) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 021 Skil House, 209 Bank Street Cross Lane, Fort Mumbai-400 023

Section 14ASection 32

…ding the decision of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of samsara Hospitality Pvt.Ltd. reported in [(2017 59 ITR (Tri) 155 (Mumbai)]. The Ld. AR for the assesee has also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs TATA Chemicals Ltd. 256 ITR 395 and Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the case of Keshoram Industries and Cotton Mills Ltd. vs CIT 191 ITR 845. 9. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, strongly supporting order of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the assessee itself had admitted before the lower authorities that its projects were under construction up to the end of AY 2012-13, because of va…

Horizon Infrastructure Ltd(Now Known As Skil Infrastructure Limited), Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee ITA No

ITA 2470/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodita No.2471/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Horizon Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Dcit,Cc-6(3) (Now Known As Skil Air India Building Infrastructure Ltd.) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 021 Skil House, 209 Bank Street Cross Lane, Fort Mumbai-400 023

Section 14ASection 32

…ding the decision of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of samsara Hospitality Pvt.Ltd. reported in [(2017 59 ITR (Tri) 155 (Mumbai)]. The Ld. AR for the assesee has also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs TATA Chemicals Ltd. 256 ITR 395 and Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the case of Keshoram Industries and Cotton Mills Ltd. vs CIT 191 ITR 845. 9. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, strongly supporting order of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the assessee itself had admitted before the lower authorities that its projects were under construction up to the end of AY 2012-13, because of va…

Horizon Country Wide Logistics Ltd(Now Succeeded on Amalgamation by Skil Infrastructure Limited ), Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(2)(Presently ACIT--6(3)), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee ITA No

ITA 5817/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodita No.2471/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Horizon Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Dcit,Cc-6(3) (Now Known As Skil Air India Building Infrastructure Ltd.) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 021 Skil House, 209 Bank Street Cross Lane, Fort Mumbai-400 023

Section 14ASection 32

…ding the decision of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of samsara Hospitality Pvt.Ltd. reported in [(2017 59 ITR (Tri) 155 (Mumbai)]. The Ld. AR for the assesee has also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs TATA Chemicals Ltd. 256 ITR 395 and Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the case of Keshoram Industries and Cotton Mills Ltd. vs CIT 191 ITR 845. 9. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, strongly supporting order of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the assessee itself had admitted before the lower authorities that its projects were under construction up to the end of AY 2012-13, because of va…

DCIT CC 6(3), Mumbai vs. Horizon Infrastructure Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee ITA No

ITA 5779/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodita No.2471/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Horizon Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Dcit,Cc-6(3) (Now Known As Skil Air India Building Infrastructure Ltd.) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 021 Skil House, 209 Bank Street Cross Lane, Fort Mumbai-400 023

Section 14ASection 32

…ding the decision of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of samsara Hospitality Pvt.Ltd. reported in [(2017 59 ITR (Tri) 155 (Mumbai)]. The Ld. AR for the assesee has also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs TATA Chemicals Ltd. 256 ITR 395 and Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the case of Keshoram Industries and Cotton Mills Ltd. vs CIT 191 ITR 845. 9. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, strongly supporting order of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the assessee itself had admitted before the lower authorities that its projects were under construction up to the end of AY 2012-13, because of va…

ITO, Ward-10(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Gateway Enclave Pvt.Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2269/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 68

…pearing for the Revenue also fairly states that the issue of applicability of section 68 of the Act was not urged by the Revenue before the Tribunal. (b) It is a settled position in law as held by this court in CIT v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. [2002] 122 Taxman 643/256 ITR 395 (Bom.) that in an appeal under section 260A of the Act, the High Court can only decide a question if it had been raised before the Tribunal even if not determined by the Tribunal. Therefore, no occasion to consider the question as prayed for arises. (c) In any case, we may point out that the amendment to section 68 of the Act by the addition of p…

ITO, Ward-10(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Topaz Enclave Pvt.Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2271/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravii.T.A. No. 2271/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata.................................………....………………...…………………….….Appellant

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…pearing for the Revenue also fairly states that the issue of applicability of section 68 of the Act was not urged by the Revenue before the Tribunal. (b) It is a settled position in law as held by this court in CIT v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. [2002] 122 Taxman 643/256 ITR 395 (Bom.) that in an appeal under section 260A of the Act, the High Court can only decide a question if it had been raised before the Tribunal even if not determined by the Tribunal. Therefore, no occasion to consider the question as prayed for arises. 6 I.T.A. No. 2271/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Topaz Enclave Pvt. Ltd (c) In any case, w…

ITO, Ward-10(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Positive Properties Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 2274/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 68

…pearing for the Revenue also fairly states that the issue of applicability of section 68 of the Act was not urged by the Revenue before the Tribunal. (b) It is a settled position in law as held by this court in CIT v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. [2002] 122 Taxman 643/256 ITR 395 (Bom.) that in an appeal under section 260A of the Act, the High Court can only decide a question if it had been raised before the Tribunal even if not determined by the Tribunal. Therefore, no occasion to consider the question as prayed for arises. (c) In any case, we may point out that the amendment to section 68 of the Act by the addition of p…

ITO, Ward-10(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Dreamz Met Construction Projects Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2047/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A T Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 2047/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Dreamz Met Construction Projects Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aagcm 2068 R ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri D.S. Damle, FCA
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…pearing for the Revenue also fairly states that the issue of applicability of section 68 of the Act was not urged by the Revenue before the Tribunal. (b) It is a settled position in law as held by this court in CIT v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. [2002] 122 Taxman 643/256 ITR 395 (Bom.) that in an appeal under section 260A of the Act, the High Court can only decide a question if it had been raised before the Tribunal even if not determined by the Tribunal. Therefore, no occasion to consider the question as prayed for arises. (c) In any case, we may point out that the amendment to section 68 of the Act by the addition of p…

ITO, Ward-10(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Tanish Dealers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1636/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A T Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 1636/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Tanish Dealers Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aadct 1242 K ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri D.S. Damle, FCA
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…pearing for the Revenue also fairly states that the issue of applicability of section 68 of the Act was not urged by the Revenue before the Tribunal. (b) It is a settled position in law as held by this court in CIT v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. [2002] 122 Taxman 643/256 ITR 395 (Bom.) that in an appeal under section 260A of the Act, the High Court can only decide a question if it had been raised before the Tribunal even if not determined by the Tribunal. Therefore, no occasion to consider the question as prayed for arises. (c) In any case, we may point out that the amendment to section 68 of the Act by the addition of p…

ITO, Ward-10(4), Kolkata vs. Ms Savera Towers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2275/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A T Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 2275/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Savera Towers Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aaocs 9744 C ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Manish Tiwari, AR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…pearing for the Revenue also fairly states that the issue of applicability of section 68 of the Act was not urged by the Revenue before the Tribunal. (b) It is a settled position in law as held by this court in CIT v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. [2002] 122 Taxman 643/256 ITR 395 (Bom.) that in an appeal under section 260A of the Act, the High Court can only decide a question if it had been raised before the Tribunal even if not determined by the Tribunal. Therefore, no occasion to consider the question as prayed for arises. (c) In any case, we may point out that the amendment to section 68 of the Act by the addition of p…

ITO, Ward-10(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Happy Bagans Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2273/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A T Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 2270/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Trend Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aadct 6373 M ] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2273/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Happy Bagans Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aacch 3712 K ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Altaf Hussain, Addl. CIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…pearing for the Revenue also fairly states that the issue of applicability of section 68 of the Act was not urged by the Revenue before the Tribunal. (b) It is a settled position in law as held by this court in CIT v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. [2002] 122 Taxman 643/256 ITR 395 (Bom.) that in an appeal under section 260A of the Act, the High Court can only decide a question if it had been raised before the Tribunal even if not determined by the Tribunal. Therefore, no occasion to consider the question as prayed for arises. (c) In any case, we may point out that the amendment to section 68 of the Act by the addition of p…

ITO, Ward-10(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Trend Infra Developers Pvt.Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2270/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A T Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 2270/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Trend Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aadct 6373 M ] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2273/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Happy Bagans Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aacch 3712 K ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Altaf Hussain, Addl. CIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…pearing for the Revenue also fairly states that the issue of applicability of section 68 of the Act was not urged by the Revenue before the Tribunal. (b) It is a settled position in law as held by this court in CIT v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. [2002] 122 Taxman 643/256 ITR 395 (Bom.) that in an appeal under section 260A of the Act, the High Court can only decide a question if it had been raised before the Tribunal even if not determined by the Tribunal. Therefore, no occasion to consider the question as prayed for arises. (c) In any case, we may point out that the amendment to section 68 of the Act by the addition of p…