Tuticorin Alkalis Chemical & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT

27 ITR 172Supreme Court of India1997#15562 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2022.

Judgments citing Tuticorin Alkalis Chemical & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(2), CHENNAI vs. CHENNAI METRO RAIL LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2181/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2180 & 2181/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Chennai Metro Rail Limited, Income Tax, Administrative Building, Chennai Metro Corporate Circle 1(2), Rail Depot, P.H. Road, Opp. To Daniel Chennai 600 034. Thomas School, Koyambedu, Chennai 600 107. [Pan: Aadcc2233K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.05.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 4, Chennai Dated 14.05.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15. Since Common Ground Involved, Both The Appeals Were Heard & Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. The Only Common Ground Raised In Both The Appeals Relates To Deletion Of Addition Made Towards Interest Income.

For Appellant: Shri M. Rajan, CITFor Respondent: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate
Section 14Section 4

…items A to E. therefore in the present case the income is chargeable to tax under the head Income from Other sources. The assessee has further countered that, the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd Vs CIT 227 ITR 172 (SC) deals with only interest earned out of "surplus" funds, which is not the case of the assessee where the funds are parked temporarily. The submissions of the assessee are not acceptable. Even in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. the funds that were borrowed for the purpose of the setting up of the plant was invested i…

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(2), CHENNAI vs. CHENNAI METRO RAIL LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2180/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2180 & 2181/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Chennai Metro Rail Limited, Income Tax, Administrative Building, Chennai Metro Corporate Circle 1(2), Rail Depot, P.H. Road, Opp. To Daniel Chennai 600 034. Thomas School, Koyambedu, Chennai 600 107. [Pan: Aadcc2233K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.05.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 4, Chennai Dated 14.05.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15. Since Common Ground Involved, Both The Appeals Were Heard & Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. The Only Common Ground Raised In Both The Appeals Relates To Deletion Of Addition Made Towards Interest Income.

For Appellant: Shri M. Rajan, CITFor Respondent: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate
Section 14Section 4

…items A to E. therefore in the present case the income is chargeable to tax under the head Income from Other sources. The assessee has further countered that, the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd Vs CIT 227 ITR 172 (SC) deals with only interest earned out of "surplus" funds, which is not the case of the assessee where the funds are parked temporarily. The submissions of the assessee are not acceptable. Even in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. the funds that were borrowed for the purpose of the setting up of the plant was invested i…

HAZARIBAG RANCHI EXPRESSWAY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 14(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6696/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negihazaribagh Ranchi Vs. Ito-14(2)(1) 4Th Floor, Expressway Ltd. The Il&Fs Financial Center Aaykar Bhawan Plot No.C-22, G Block M.K.Road Bkc, Bandra(E) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 051 Pan/Gir No.Aacch2490J Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 234BSection 56(1)

…nterest earned from time deposits shall be assessable under the head income from other sources. He, further observed that this legal position has been settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. vs CIT 227 ITR 172, where it was held that even, if the surplus funds at the disposal of the assessee, where deployed for earning income like interest etc., but the interest income earned was to be offered to tax under the head income from other sources. The relevant findings of the AO are as under:- 5.6 The submissions made by the assessee has been carefully peru…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S JSL LTD.,, HISAR

Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the learned AO for 2007 – 08 is dismissed

ITA 4110/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Parnav, Sr. DR
Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…ITA No 4249 / Del/2012, 4110/Del/2013 & 6337/Del/2013 A Y 2007-08 and 2008-09 Jindal Steel Limited Vs ACIT Cen Circle 4(1) , New Delhi INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―I-I‖ NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA number 6337/Del/2012 (A.Y. 2008 – 09) JSL Limited, ACIT, Vs. (Now known as Jindal Stainless Ltd, OP Central Circle-9, Jindal Marg, Hissar New Delhi PAN: AABCJ1969M (Appellant) (Respondent) DCIT, JSL Limited, Vs. Central Circle-4(1), (Now known as Jindal Stainless New Delhi Ltd, OP Jindal Marg, Hissar PAN: AABCJ1969M (Appellant) (Respo…

JINDAL STAINLESS LTD.,HISAR vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the learned AO for 2007 – 08 is dismissed

ITA 6337/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Parnav, Sr. DR
Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…ITA No 4249 / Del/2012, 4110/Del/2013 & 6337/Del/2013 A Y 2007-08 and 2008-09 Jindal Steel Limited Vs ACIT Cen Circle 4(1) , New Delhi INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―I-I‖ NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA number 6337/Del/2012 (A.Y. 2008 – 09) JSL Limited, ACIT, Vs. (Now known as Jindal Stainless Ltd, OP Central Circle-9, Jindal Marg, Hissar New Delhi PAN: AABCJ1969M (Appellant) (Respondent) DCIT, JSL Limited, Vs. Central Circle-4(1), (Now known as Jindal Stainless New Delhi Ltd, OP Jindal Marg, Hissar PAN: AABCJ1969M (Appellant) (Respo…

REWAS PORTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT RG 7(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 758/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Dr.P.Danial
Section 10(35)Section 143(3)Section 56(1)Section 57

…iness in the instant case of the appellant has to be assessed as 'income from other sources'. For the same assessing officer has relied upon decisions given by honourable courts in the case of Tuticorin alkali chemicals and fertilisers Ltd versus C.LT (SC) to 27 ITR 172, C.I.T versus Petroff is co- operative (Guj) 241 ITR 139, CIT versus Cochin Shipyard Ltd (Ker) 158 CTR 208, C.I.T V/s Rassii cement Ltd (AP) 232 ITR 554, South India shipping Corporation versus ACIT (Mad) 240 ITR 24, C.LT V/s Kisan Sahakari Genie bills (All) 280 ITR 617, Chanderpaul sugar: company Ltd versus C.LT (All) 280 ITR 612, Bokaro steel Lt…

Tuticorin Alkalis Chemical & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT (27 ITR 172) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax