← All Phrases

“Section 2(24)(viii)”

Section References (mined)Section 2Section 2(24)(viii)4 judgments

MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 2113/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri. H. P. Mahajani, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Satyaprakash R. Singh, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 2(24)(viii)Section 2(24)(xviii)Section 250

According to the assessee, industrial promotional subsidy is ought to be treated as capital receipt even in the light of amended section 2(24)(viii) for normal provisions as well as book profit u/s. 115JB of the Act. 4. Assessee did not raise this issue in the assessment proceedings though ... raise this before the ld. Assessing Officer under the belief that this subsidy would fall within the definition of income in terms of section 2(24)(viii) introduced with effect from Assessment Year 2016-17 by the Finance Act, 2015. By raising the additional ground before the first appellate authority

ORICON ENTERPRISES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIR-8(2)(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the appellant is dismissed for the reasons mentioned above

ITA 2810/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2025AY 2017-18
Section 2(24)(xviii)Section 270A

nbank and seen from that angle also, appellant got benefit and hence comes\nunder section 2(24) of the Act.\n6.13 The amended section 2(24)(viii) used the words “concession” and “any\nname called” to come under this section. The appellant got a “concession” by\nState Government

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , JAMMU vs. GRAVITA METAL INC, KATHUA

ITA 594/ASR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri. P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mehra, CIT DR
Section 10Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(xviii)

Excise Duty it treated as income of the assessee in view of Notification No. 19 of 2008 and amended section 2(24)(viii) of the Income-tax Act. The sole Ground of appeal is partly allowed. 4. The Ld. CIT(DR) for the department submitted that on the facts

MEASAGE GRAVITA METAL INC,KATHUA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 1(4), KATHUA

ITA 587/ASR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri. P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mehra, CIT DR
Section 10Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(xviii)

Excise Duty it treated as income of the assessee in view of Notification No. 19 of 2008 and amended section 2(24)(viii) of the Income-tax Act. The sole Ground of appeal is partly allowed. 4. The Ld. CIT(DR) for the department submitted that on the facts