Textile Ltd. vs. CIT (2001) 252 ITR 686, Tribeni Tissues Ltd. (1994) 206 ITR 92 (Cal), CIT v. Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd.

289 ITR 261High Court2007#11465 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 139 Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144B Section 147 Section 148 Section 32(1)(iia)

Judgments citing Textile Ltd. vs. CIT (2001) 252 ITR 686, Tribeni Tissues Ltd. (1994) 206 ITR 92 (Cal), CIT v. Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd.

SUDARSHAN JEANS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLHAPUR vs. ITO, AMBALA

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 1070/CHANDI/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Goel (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(iia)

…the plant and machinery. The expenditure incurred under this head is thus integral to Plant & Machinery and correctly been classified as such. This being so, the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd. (289 ITR 261) would apply holding that air conditioning plants, electrical installations and transformers constitute an integral part of Plant & Machinery and therefore, eligible for investment allowance. Similar is the view of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Nalwa Steel Power Ltd. (ITA No.4559/Del/2010 dated 09-08-2016) taking the same view. Respectfully foll…

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. DIC INDIA LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1363/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2019AY 2011-12

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

Section 14ASection 28Section 36(1)(vii)Section 43B

…cord and also having regard to the nature of assets and the places at which these electrical installations were commissioned. The Ld. CIT(A) also adverted to the judgments of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the cases of CIT vsOswalWollen Mills Ltd (289 ITR 261), CIT M/s. DIC India Ltd. AYs- 2010-11 & 2011-12 VsMetalman Auto Pvt Ltd (11 taxmann.com 51) and CIT VsSubrataDuttaChoudhury (197 Taxman 71) and recorded the following findings : “From the details of the additions made, I find that the appellant had made additions on account of air compressor, piping, filter housing, fire protection systems, ch…

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. DIC INDIA LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1362/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2019AY 2010-11

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

Section 14ASection 28Section 36(1)(vii)Section 43B

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KOTA vs. M/S SHREE AGENCIES PVT. LTD., KOTA

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 949/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Ran Singh (Addl.CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…f Income Tax, Circle-II, Trichy (in ITA No. 823/Mds/2011), the decision of Gujarat High Court in case of Asstt. CIT vs. Ashima Syntex Ltd., [2002] 251 ITR 133 (Guj.) and the decision of Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of CIT vs. Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd. 289 ITR 261 sides various other decisions and the following legal proposition laid down therein held that the legal opinion also favours the allowability of depreciation in the instant case. Accordingly, depreciation of Rs. 2,51,48,014/- was directed to be allowed. 11. We have heard the rival contentions and purused the material available on record. The cas…

DCIT, CIR-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MAA AMBA INFRASTRUCTURE (P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1309/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Mar 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1309/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Dcit, Circle-10(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Maa Amba Infrastructure (P) Ltd. [Pan: Aaecm 6507 F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, AR

Section 143(3)Section 22

…the factory unit. Accordingly the electrical installations formed an integral part of plant and machinery. The assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs Oswal Woollen Mills Limited reported in 289 ITR 261 (P&H) wherein the assessee in that case had claimed depreciation at 25% on electrical installations in the unit treating it to be ‘plant and machinery’. The AO however treated the same as ‘office equipment’ and allowed depreciation to the extent of 15%. On appeal the High Court held that the electrical installation was in the unit and therefore f…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NALWA STEEL AND POWER LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 238/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 238/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Acit, Vs M/S Nalwa Steel & Power Ltd., Circle-13(1), 1213, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi Delhi-110015 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcn3209L Assessee By : Sh. V. K. Tulsiyan, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Rachna Singh, Cit Dr & Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.04.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 12.10.2012 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xvi, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. V. K. Tulsiyan, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT DR &

Section 115J

…ectric installation and transformers form integral part of plant and machinery. Further reliance is placed on the case laws of Mihir Textile Ltd. vs. CIT (2001) 252 ITR 686, Tribeni Tissues Ltd. (1994) 206 ITR 92 (Cal), CIT vs. Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd. (2007) 289 ITR 261 (P&H), CIT vs. Indian Turpentine and Rosin Co. Ltd. (1070) 75 ITR 533 (All) and of Ahmedabad Bench decision in Raw Flints (P) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer (1987) 21 5 Nalwa Steel Power Ltd. ITD 207 which held that electrical installations are an integral part of manufacturing process and cannot be divorced from 'plant and machinery'. 3.2 I have c…

D.C.I.T. CIR-12, KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. USHA MARTIN TELEMATICS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee on this ground is dismissed

ITA 838/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, J.M. &Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: G. Mallikarjuna, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)

…ered to be a revenue expenditure in view of the following judicial decisions: a.Ambika Prasad Sonar V. CIT 168 ITR 444 b.CIT Vs. RajeevaLochan (1994) 208 ITR 616 ( Kolkata H.C) c.CITVs.Jardine Henderson Ltd. (1994) 210 ITR 981 (Cal) d.SA Builders Ltd. Vs. CIT 289 ITR 261 e. CIT Vs. Dalmic Cement Bharati Ltd (2002) 254 ITR 377 However, the ld CIT (A) rejected the stand taken by the assessee and held that interest expenditure incurred is on account of capital investment and accordingly the interest expenditure incurred on borrowed capital for making an investment in equity shares going to add to the cost of invest…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NALWA STEEL & POWER LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4559/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadi N. Mishraa.Y. : 2006-07 Dcit, Circle 13(1), M/S Nalwa Steel & Power New Delhi Vs. Limited, Room No. 406, Cr Building, 28, Najafgarh Road, Ip Estate, New Delhi New Delhi

For Appellant: Sh. V.K. Tulsiyan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. UC Dubey, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADI N. MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A.Y. : 2006-07 DCIT, CIRCLE 13(1), M/S NALWA STEEL & POWER NEW DELHI VS. LIMITED, ROOM NO. 406, CR BUILDING, 28, NAJAFGARH ROAD, IP ESTATE, NEW DELHI NEW DELHI (AABCN3209L) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Department by : Sh. UC Dubey, Sr. DR Assessee by : Sh. V.K. Tulsiyan, CA Date of Hearing : 02-08-2016 Date of Order : 09-08-2016 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM The Revenue has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 08/7/2010 passed by the Ld. Commissio…

BSES RAJDHANI POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3688/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri Inturi Rama Rao Assessment Year : 2005-06 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Vs. Assistant Cit, Bses Bhawan, Nehru Place, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Deputy Cit, Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Circle 3(1), Bses Bhavan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2006-07 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Vs. Assistant Cit, Bses Bhawan, Nehru Place, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Cit, Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Circle 3(1), Bses Bhavan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 154

…e would form integral part of the machine and would accordingly, be eligible for depreciation as part of the machine: - CIT vs. Elecon Engg. Co. Ltd. : 166 ITR 66 (SC) - CIT vs. Birla Jute & Industries Ltd.: 260 ITR 55 (Cal) - CIT vs. Oswal Woollen Mill Ltd.: 289 ITR 261 (P&H) - CIT vs. Metalman Auto (P.) Ltd: 336 ITR 434 (P&H) - CIT v. India Turpentine & Rosin Co. Ltd.: 75 ITR 533 (All.) - DCIT vs. UAL Industries: 31 taxmann.com 111 (Kolkata - Trib.) (TM) - Ghaziabad footwear (P.) Ltd vs. DCIT: 142 Taxman 18 (Del Tri.) - Madhu Industries Ltd, Ahmedabad vs. ITO: 132 TTJ 233 (Ahd) In view of the above, it is respe…