Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT

227 ITR 172Supreme Court of India1997#96 most cited

What is Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Interest income earned on deposits, particularly before the commencement of business operations or as a requirement for business licensing, is taxable as "income from other sources" under Section 56, and cannot be treated as business income or set off against interest on borrowed funds.

621

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 371,887 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT · 227 ITR 172 · Section 28 · Section 56 · Section 57 · income from other sources · business income · interest income · commencement of business · capitalization of interest · year of expenditure claim

Also reported as

141 CTR 387

Sections most often in play

Section 250Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 14ASection 40(a)(ia)Section 37(1)Section 147Section 28(iv)

Issues it is cited on

section 57profits and gains of business or professionsection 56section 32revenue expenditureincome from other sourcessection 28section 37(1)capital expendituresection 43section 37previous year

Judgments citing Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT

Golden Jubilee Hotels Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1536/HYD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamonya.Y. 2013-14 M/S. Golden Jubilee Hotels Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle-2(2), Pan: Aaccg5200D Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sri S. Rama Rao. Revenue By Sri Swapnil Patil, Dr Date Of Hearing: 02/12/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 03/01/2022 O R D E R Per A. Mohan Alankamony, A.M:

Section 143(3)

…he project and hence the same was reduced from the project cost. However, the ld.AO denied to subscribe to the view of the assessee by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilisers Limited reported in 227 ITR 172 (SC) and also the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case Bongaigaon Refinery and Petrochemicals Limited reported in 251 ITR 329 (SC) and thereby made addition of Rs.17,27,404/- with respect to the interest earned during the relevant assessment under the head ‘Income from Other Sources’. On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Hyderabad vs. Ksk Wind Power Sankonahatti Athni Private Limied, Hyderabad

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 34/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Energy Ward-2(1), Halagali Benchi Private Hyderabad. Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1965 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue By: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. Ar Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Power Ward-2(1), Sankonahatti Athni Hyderabad. Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1900 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue By: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. Ar Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Power Ward-2(1), Aminabhavi Chikodi Hyderabad. Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1888 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 56

…osits are made only for the effective utilization of funds and have nothing to do with the activity of construction. 9. The ratio of decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court In the cases of Tutlcorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers ltd. v. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 172, and CIT v Bokaro Steel ltd. [19991 236 ITR 315. have been extensively relied upon by various High Courts while deciding the issue -ln number of other cases which are squarely covered in the instant case. A few of such recent judgments rendered by other High courts-are as under: I) Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Bharat Oman Refineries l…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Hyderabad vs. Ksk Wind Energy Halagali Benchi Private Limied, Hyderabad

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 33/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Energy Ward-2(1), Halagali Benchi Private Hyderabad. Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1965 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue By: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. Ar Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Power Ward-2(1), Sankonahatti Athni Hyderabad. Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1900 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue By: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. Ar Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Power Ward-2(1), Aminabhavi Chikodi Hyderabad. Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1888 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 56

…osits are made only for the effective utilization of funds and have nothing to do with the activity of construction. 9. The ratio of decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court In the cases of Tutlcorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers ltd. v. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 172, and CIT v Bokaro Steel ltd. [19991 236 ITR 315. have been extensively relied upon by various High Courts while deciding the issue -ln number of other cases which are squarely covered in the instant case. A few of such recent judgments rendered by other High courts-are as under: I) Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Bharat Oman Refineries l…

Mmrf Reality and Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 4 (1), Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 627/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.627/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Mmrf Realty & Infrastructure Pvt. The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Ltd., No. 21, Indira Nagar, Income Tax, 1St Avenue, Adyar, Corporate Circle -4(1), Chennai – 600 020. Chennai. [Pan: Aahcm1575E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri I. Dinesh, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 04.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.01.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Impugned Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 8, Chennai Dated 20.12.2017 In Ita No. 162/15-16 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Enhancing The Assessment Is Wrong, Illegal, Unjust, Arbitrary & Is Liable To Set Aside.

For Appellant: Shri I. Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 35D

…cannot be considered as inextricably linked to business conducted and inalienable to the business activity of the company and thus, by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT (227 ITR 172), the ld. CIT(A) has held that the interest receipt of ₹.10,36,165/- is liable to be taxed separately as income from other sources. 11.1 We have considered the rival contentions. Admittedly, the assessee is engaged in the construction, development & Marketing of residential and commercial flats. The contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad vs. L & T Metro Rail (Hyderabad) Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 1412/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Vs. L & T Metro Rail Circle-16(1), (Hyderabad) Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcl 8521 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ashik Shah Revenue By: Sri B. Sunil Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 25/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/01/2022 Order Per A. Mohan Alankamony, Am.:

For Appellant: Shri Ashik ShahFor Respondent: Sri B. Sunil Kumar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 56

…come of the assessee from other sources. The assessee has not filed any appeal (rom this finding which is given against it. In any case, this question is now concluded by a decision of this court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 172 (sq. Hence, we are not called upon to examine that issue." (Emphasis supplied). This issue of difference between the treatment of income received from contractor and the interest income received from the banks on account of short term deposits is once again highlighted by Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of Bokaro Steels (supra) at Para No.7. Th…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd

In the result, the appeals stand dismissed

ITA/118/2015HC Karnataka23 Nov 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

Section 10(35)Section 260

…ese appeals were admitted to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was correct in not following the settled law of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizer Ltd., reported in 227 ITR 172 wherein it has been clearly held that if the capital of the company in fruitfully utilized instead of keeping it idle, the income generated will be of revenue nature and not accretion to capital. 2. Whether the Tribunal is correct in holding that the company is a nodal agency for the government to implement the infrastructure project rel…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd

In the result, the appeals stand dismissed

ITA/117/2015HC Karnataka23 Nov 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

Section 10(35)Section 260

…ese appeals were admitted to consider the following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether the Tribunal was correct in not following the settled law of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizer Ltd., reported in 227 ITR 172 wherein it has been clearly held that if the capital of the company in fruitfully utilized instead of keeping it idle, the income generated will be of revenue nature and not accretion to capital. 2. Whether the Tribunal is correct in holding that the company is a nodal agency for the government to implement the infrastructure project rel…

DCIT 2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tal Manufacturing Solutions Ltd, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1411/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2021AY 2011-12
Section 143(3)

…rmed as compensation should be treated as interest earned prior to commencement of business and taxed separately under the head ‘income from other sources’ in the light of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals reported in 227 ITR 172 (SC). 2.8. It is not in dispute that the assessee had entered into aerospace project with Boeing Co. and started making investments in the said project. Though the assessee was ready to commence its activities from the said project during the year under consideration, the same got delayed at the behest of Boeing Co. as they were suggesting some…

Kashmita Properties Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 12(3)(2), Mumbai

The appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 3434/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.3434/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Kashmita Properties Pvt.Ltd. Income Tax Officer-12(3)(2) Room No.147 A, 1St Floor बिाम/ Ground Floor, 288, Vijay Raj 9Th Road, Khar (W) Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Mumbai-400 052 Mumbai- 400 020 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaack-8122-C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Gosalia - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 25

…4 Kashmita Properties Pvt.Ltd. Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ld. CIT(A) also upheld the action of Ld.AO in assessing the interest income as ‘income from other sources’ in terms of the decision of Hon’ble Apex court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilisers Ltd. (227 ITR 172) wherein it was held that where the assessee had surplus funds which were invested, the same would be assessed as Income from other sources. Further, Ld. AO had established that the assessee carried out business of sister concerns from one premises only and therefore, the Ld. AO was justified in disallowing the expenditure. Aggrieved, the assesse…

DCIT 10(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Kdd India P. Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed being devoid of any merit

ITA 3408/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vikas Awasthyआ.अ. सं. 3408/मुं/2019 (िन.व. 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Gurbinder SinghFor Respondent: Shri Lalchand Choudhary
Section 143(3)Section 35DSection 37(1)

…of account are not determinative or conclusive and the matter is to be examined on the touchstone of provisions contained in the Act [See - Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363 (SC); Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 172/93 Taxman 502 (SC); Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 116 ITR 1 (SC) and United Commercial Bank v. CIT [1999] 240 ITR 355/106 Taxman 601 (SC). 20. At the most, an inference can be drawn that by showing this expenditure in a spread over manner in the books of account, the assessee had initially intended to make such an option. However, it aba…

Quadro Info Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-1(4), Kolkata

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

ITA 2617/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Aug 2021AY 2011-12
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80I

…of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers decision of the Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers 3 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Quadro Info Technologies Pvt. Ltd Quadro Info Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Ltd., Vs. CIT - [227 ITR 172] (SC). It was categorically held that interest earned on surplus funds [227 ITR 172] (SC). It was categorically held that interest earned on surplus funds [227 ITR 172] (SC). It was categorically held that interest earned on surplus funds deposited in banks during installation of company, prior to commencement of business, has to be in banks duri…

DCIT, Circle- 1(1), New Delhi vs. Aakriti Hotels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Accordingly, appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2012-13 is allowed and appeal of the ld AO for Assessment Year 2013-14 is dismissed

ITA 5682/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Aakriti Hotels Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, 2Nd Floor, 30, Community Centre, Central Circle-19, Saket, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aabca0250D (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. Aakriti Hotels Pvt. Ltd, 2Nd Floor, 30, Community Centre, Circle-1(1), New Delhi Saket, New Delhi Pan: Aabca0250D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Tashi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…tarted its business operation and all expenses are capitalized. However, according to him the whole interest income of FDR is required to be taxed as income from other sources in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Tuticorn Alkali Ltd 227 ITR 172 and therefore, he made an addition amount of interest income of Rs. 1,30,58,182/- to the total income of the assessee and assessed at Rs. 2,60,40,150/- by order dated 28.03.2014 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act. 9. Assessee preferred an appeal before the ld CIT(A) stating that the assessee is engaged in the business of construction and running a hote…

Technologies Ltd) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

ITA/214/2020HC Delhi05 Jul 2021
For Appellant: -.................................................................... 8For Respondent: - .................................................................. 10
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 254Section 35D

…account are not determinative or conclusive and the matter is to be examined on the touchstone of provisions contained in the Act [See - Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363 (SC); Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 172/93 Taxman 502 (SC); Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 116 ITR 1 (SC) and United Commercial Bank v. CIT [1999] 240 ITR 355/106 Taxman 601 (SC). 20. At the most, an inference can be drawn that by showing this expenditure in a spread over manner in the books of account, the assessee had initially intended to make such an option. However, i…

Technologies Ltd) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

ITA/215/2020HC Delhi05 Jul 2021
For Appellant: -.................................................................... 8For Respondent: - .................................................................. 10
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 254Section 35D

…account are not determinative or conclusive and the matter is to be examined on the touchstone of provisions contained in the Act [See - Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363 (SC); Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 172/93 Taxman 502 (SC); Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 116 ITR 1 (SC) and United Commercial Bank v. CIT [1999] 240 ITR 355/106 Taxman 601 (SC). 20. At the most, an inference can be drawn that by showing this expenditure in a spread over manner in the books of account, the assessee had initially intended to make such an option. However, i…

Technologies Ltd) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

ITA/213/2020HC Delhi05 Jul 2021
For Appellant: -.................................................................... 8For Respondent: - .................................................................. 10
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 254Section 35D

…account are not determinative or conclusive and the matter is to be examined on the touchstone of provisions contained in the Act [See - Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363 (SC); Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 172/93 Taxman 502 (SC); Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 116 ITR 1 (SC) and United Commercial Bank v. CIT [1999] 240 ITR 355/106 Taxman 601 (SC). 20. At the most, an inference can be drawn that by showing this expenditure in a spread over manner in the books of account, the assessee had initially intended to make such an option. However, i…

M/S. Ganpati Global Private Ltd., Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward1(4), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 302/JPR/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jun 2021AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Anoop Bhatia (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT) a

…ng so, the Authorities most often quote the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilisers Ltd vs. CIT’ reported in 227 ITR 172. 8. It was submitted that in the said case of ‘Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals’ [1997] 227 ITR 172, it was found by the authorities that the borrowed funds, being surplus and idle, were utilized by the assessee in investing in fixed deposits to earn interest income and, therefore, the Hon’ble Supreme Court have held that the interest earned on surplus borrowed funds, would have to be treated as “Income from other sources”. However, in numerous…

M/S H.P.. Power Transmission Corporation Ltd., Shimla vs. DCIT, Cricle, Shimla

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed in

ITA 789/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Jun 2021AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Vishal Mohan, AdvFor Respondent: Smt.C.Chandrakanta, CIT DR
Section 250(6)

…for assessment year 2010-11 and that the issue ITA Nos.789 & 790/Chd/2019 A.Ys. 2014-15 &2015-16 Page 7 of 21 was squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 172 (SC). Accordingly, the interest of Rs.11,64,79,756/- was assessed to tax in the hands of the assessee as ‘income from other sources”. 11. The matter was carried in appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) who upheld the order of the AO stating that no distinguishing facts had been pointed out by the assessee from the preceding years wherein the issue had…

Encorp E-Service Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1883/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jun 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 41(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH „B‟, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1882 & 1883/Del/2013 (Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2008-09) Encorp E – Service Ltd. Assistant Commissioner of Office No.303, 3rd Floor DLF Vs Income Tax Courtyard, Saket Circle – 10 (1) New Delhi -110017 New Delhi PAN: AABCE3129L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. M. K. Giri, Advocate Shri Satish Khosla, Adv Respondent by Shri Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 26/03/2021 Date of Pronouncement: 23/06/2021 ORDER PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM…

Encorp E-Service Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1882/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 41(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH „B‟, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1882 & 1883/Del/2013 (Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2008-09) Encorp E – Service Ltd. Assistant Commissioner of Office No.303, 3rd Floor DLF Vs Income Tax Courtyard, Saket Circle – 10 (1) New Delhi -110017 New Delhi PAN: AABCE3129L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. M. K. Giri, Advocate Shri Satish Khosla, Adv Respondent by Shri Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 26/03/2021 Date of Pronouncement: 23/06/2021 ORDER PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM…

ITO, Ward- 13(1), New Delhi vs. Nabinagar Power Generating Co. Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 4748/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 May 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh[Through Video Conferencing]

Section 5Section 56

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Through Video Conferencing] ITA No.4748/Del./2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 ITO, Vs. Nabinagar Power Generating Ward-13(1), Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi Core-7, Scope Complex, Industrial Area, Lodhi Road, New Delhi PAN :AACCN9448C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr.DR Respondent by None Date of hearing 13.04.2021 Date of pronouncement 11.05.2021 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, AM: This appeal by the Revenue is directed against order dated 30/05/2017 passe…