Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT

168 ITR 190High Court1987#11211 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2023.

Judgments citing Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT

DCIT 7(3), MUMBAI vs. WYETH LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS WYETH LEDERLE LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3508/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jun 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blepfizer Limited V. Acit- Special Range 23 (Earlier Known As Wyeth Lederle Limited) [Now The Dcit-Circle 7(3)] The Capital, G-Block Aayakar Bhavan Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai- 400020 Bandra (E), Mumbai -400012 Pan: Aaacp3334M (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit- Ltu V. M/S. Wyeth Limited 28Th Floor, Centre - 1 (Formerly Known As Wyeth Lederle Ltd) Rbc Mahindra Towers World Trade Centre 4Th Floor, A- Wing Cuffe Parade, Mumbai Dr G.M. Bhosale Road Worli, Mumbai- 400055 Pan: Aaacw2641Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vishal Kalra Department Represented By : Smt. Sujatha Iyangar

Section 43(6)Section 80H

…ted iii. CIT [1966] 62 ITR 566 (SC) iv. CIT v. Madras Auto Services (P.) Ltd. 233 ITR 468 (SC) v. Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT 124 ITR 1 (SC) vi. Assam Bengal Cement Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of ITC (27 ITR 34) (SC) vii. CIT vs B.N. Elias & Co. (P) Ltd. [1987] 168 ITR 190 (Cal.) viii. Gannon Norton Metal Diamond Dies Ltd. v. CIT [1987] 163 ITR 606 (Bom.) ix. FennerWoodroffe& Ltd. v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 665 (Mad.) Cases wherein it is held that treatment in the books of accounts is irrelevant for determining the tax allowability of the expense i. Kedarnath Jute Mfg Co. vs CIT: [1971] 82 ITR 363 (SC) ii. Taparia Tools…

KADAVANTHARA BUILDERS PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. ITO, WARD -4(2), CHENNAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2485/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 May 2023AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)

…ds upon the purpose for which the payment has been made and expenditure has been incurred. In this regard, the assessee relied on the following judgments. i. MK Bross (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 86 ITR 38 (SC) ii. CIT Vs. BN Elias & Co. (P) Ltd. reported in 168 ITR 190 (Cal) iii. Gamon Norton Metal Diamond Dies Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 163 ITR 606 (Bom) 16. He further submitted that the interest received by the assessee on deposits is income from business, the funds were kept for the business purpose. The AO & CIT (A) have wrongly held that it is income from other sources. He further submitted that even if the…

KADAVANTHARA BUILDERS PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. ITO, WARD -4(2), CHENNAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2484/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 May 2023AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)

…ds upon the purpose for which the payment has been made and expenditure has been incurred. In this regard, the assessee relied on the following judgments. i. MK Bross (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 86 ITR 38 (SC) ii. CIT Vs. BN Elias & Co. (P) Ltd. reported in 168 ITR 190 (Cal) iii. Gamon Norton Metal Diamond Dies Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 163 ITR 606 (Bom) 16. He further submitted that the interest received by the assessee on deposits is income from business, the funds were kept for the business purpose. The AO & CIT (A) have wrongly held that it is income from other sources. He further submitted that even if the…

HITACHI METGLAS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(2), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 5906/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[A.Y 2010-11]

For Appellant: Shri Saleel Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar Meel, CIT- DR

…. Sugar Factory & Oil Mills P. Ltd. v. CIT: 125 ITR 293 (SC) · Dalmia Jain & Co. Ltd. v. CIT: 81 ITR 754 (SC) · • M.K. Bros. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT: 86 ITR 38 (SC) · • Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT: 62 ITR 566 (SC) · • CIT v. B.N. Elias & Co. (P.) Ltd.: 168 ITR 190 (Cal.) · • CIT v. Hindustan General Electric Corpn. Ltd.: 81 ITR 243 (Cal.) · Gannon Norton Metal Diamond Dies Ltd. v. CIT: 163 ITR 606 (Bom.) · CIT v. Mehta Transport Co.: 160 ITR 35 (Guj.) · • Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. v. CIT: 137 ITR 886 (Punj. &Har.) CIT v. Oblum Electrical Industries.: 127 ITR 409 (AP) Further, attention is invit…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 467/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 467/Del/2014 (A.Y 2009-10)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

…38 (Bom) • Triveni Engineering Works Ltd. V. CIT: 136 ITR 340 (Del) ACIT v. Shama Engine Valves Ltd.: 138 ITR 216 (Del) • • Shriram Pistons and Rings Ltd.: 219 CTR 228 (Del.) CIT v. J.K. Synthetics Ltd.: 176 Taxman 355 (Del.) • • CIT v. B. N Elias & Co. Ltd.: 168 ITR 190 (Guj) SRP Tools Ltd. v. CIT: 237 ITR 684 (Mad.) • • Mysore Kirloskar Ltd.: 114 ITR 443 (Kar) • CIT v. Power Build Ltd.: 244 ITR 19 (Guj.) • CIT v. Gujarat Carbon Ltd.: 254 ITR 294 (Guj.) • CIT v. Kanpur Cigarettes (P) Ltd.: 287 ITR 485 (All.) The Ld. AR further submitted that the mode of payment is irrelevant. Under the agreement, in consideratio…

M/S HERO HONDA MOTORS LTD,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2148/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh C.M.Garg & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Honda Motors Ltd, Dcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, Circle-12(1), Vs. New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacg0812J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. AK Saroha, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 263Section 32Section 37(1)Section 40Section 9

…uction. The court observed that when the business realities and rapid technological changes in the automobile field were taken into account, the payment made by the assesses could not he regarded as capital expenditure. In CITvs. BN Elias & Co. (F) Ltd 1198?! 168 ITR 190, it was emphasized at pages 204-205 by the Calcutta High Court that if under the agreement there was no out and out of out transfer of the foreign know-how to the assessee and the know-how supplied by the foreign company remains the property of the foreign company for all times to come and the assessee assessee had only a right In use the know-ho…

M/S. HONDA SIEL POWER PRODUCTS LTD.,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 551/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: S/Sh. Neeraj Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Armendra Kumar, CIT/ DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 2Section 92B

…• L.H. Sugar Factory & Oil Mills P. Ltd. v. CIT: 125 ITR 293 (SC) • Dalmia Jain & Co. Ltd. v. CIT: 81 ITR 754 (SC) • M.K. Bros. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT: 86 ITR 38 (SC) • Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT: 62 ITR 566 (SC) • CIT v. B.N. Elias & Co. (P.) Ltd.: 168 ITR 190 (Cal.) • CIT v. Hindustan General Electric Corpn. Ltd.: 81 ITR 243 (Cal.) • Gannon Norton Metal Diamond Dies Ltd. v. CIT: 163 ITR 606 (Bom.) • CIT v. Mehta Transport Co.: 160 ITR 35 (Guj.) • Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. v. CIT: 137 ITR 886 (Punj. &Har.) • CIT v. Oblum Electrical Industries.: 127 ITR 409 (AP) Further, attention is invited t…

JCIT(OSD), CIRCLE - 8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SICPA INDIA PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the CO of assessee is allowed and appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 36/KOL/2012[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Mar 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Soumen Adak & Shri Harish Agarwal, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ty for patents on percentage basis of annual production where the ownership rights of patents are retained by the owners, the expenditure is revenue in nature. Similar view was taken by Hon’ble Calcutta High court in CIT Vs. B. N. Elias & Co. Pvt. Ltd. (1987) 168 ITR 190 (Cal), wherein the assessee entered into collaboration agreement with a foreign company to use technical know-how for manufacture of machines upto the termination of agreement. Hon’ble Calcutta High Court considering the facts and also the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Southern Switchgear Ltd., supra, held that once the know-ho…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV vs. HERO HONDA MOTORS LIMITED

ITA/694/2011HC Delhi03 Feb 2015

…ITA 694, 696, 698, 699/2011 & 625, 633/2012 Page 1 of 20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + INCOME TAX APPEAL NOS. 694/2011, 696/2011, 698/2011, 699/2011, 625/2012 & 633/2012 Reserved on : 10th November, 2014 Date of decision: 3rd February, 2015 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV ..... Appellant Through Mr. Rohit Madan, Mr. P. Roy Chaudhury & Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Advocates. versus HERO HONDA MOTORS LIMITED .....Respondent Through Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Kav…

Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT (168 ITR 190) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax