Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 127 (2.14 seconds)
Documents citing M/S. Berger Paints India Ltd vs C.I.T., Delhi-V on 28 March, 2017

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs Addl. Cit, New Delhi on 17 October, 2018

12.7. When a similar question was dealt with by the first appellate authority and the Revenue accepted the same without preferring any appeal thereon, it is not open for the Revenue now to contend that Assessee's reliance on the case of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Radha Saomi Satsang v. CIT reported in 193 ITR 321 and, Berger Paints v. CIT reported in 266 ITR 199, is also misplaced because in these cases Hon'ble Supreme Court was considering the situation where the liability was certain, but what was not certain was the quantum of such liability. There is no dispute that the same method of accounting is regularly and consistently followed by the assessee as such rule of consistency is applicable as per which under the similar facts and circumstances, department ought to follow same approach on an issue in other assessment years. We, therefore, respectfully following the reasoning adopted by the coordinate Bench of this Tribinal for the AY 2007-08, set aside the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with direction to decide the issue afresh after affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per the first appellate order on the issue in the assessment year 2003-04, as followed by this Tribunal for the AY 2007-08 also. Grounds 12 to 12.5 145 ITA No. 467/Del/2014 are disposed of accordingly."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 243 - Cited by 39 - Full Document

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs Addl. Cit, New Delhi on 9 November, 2017

3.5.9. Ld. AR further submitted that the provisions of Section 43B, while overriding all the other provisions of the Act, also override Section 145A. Section 145A does not in any manner prevail over or in any way limit the operation of Section 43B of the Act, and that in the Berger Paints case, the closing stock valuation of the assessee 12 ITA No.-6021/Del/2012 included the amount of duties. In other words the position was as if the provisions of Section 145A had been given effect to and implemented. Therefore provisions of Section 145A do not adversely affect the judgment in the case of Berger Paints.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 179 - Cited by 13 - Full Document

Hgi Finance & Leasing Ward Ltd., New ... vs Department Of Income Tax

It has been further submitted that during the year under consideration, there was no change in the facts and circumstances of the case when compared with earlier 9 years and neither the AO has brought on record any new fact for justifying the denial of such deduction u/s 350 of the 1.1. Act. Hence, Rule of consistency does apply to the facts of this case for which reliance is placed on the case laws in the case of Berger Paints Vs CIT 266 ITR 99 (SC), Radhasoami Satsand Vs CIT 193 ITR 321 (SC).
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dcit, New Delhi vs M/S Maruti Suzuki India Ltd, New Delhi on 12 March, 2024

12.7. When a similar question was dealt with by the first appellate authority and the Revenue accepted the same without preferring any appeal thereon, it is not open for the Revenue now to contend that Assessee's reliance on the case of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Radha Saomi Satsang v. CIT reported in 193 ITR 321 and, Berger Paints v. CIT reported in 266 ITR 199, is also misplaced because in these cases Hon'ble Supreme Court was considering the situation where the liability was certain, but what was not certain was the quantum of such liability. There is no dispute that the same method of accounting is regularly and consistently followed by the assessee as such rule of consistency is applicable as per which under the similar facts and circumstances, department ought to follow same approach on an issue in other assessment years. We, therefore, respectfully following the reasoning adopted by the coordinate Bench of this Tribinal for the AY 2007-08, set aside the matter to the file of 82 the Assessing Officer with direction to decide the issue afresh after affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per the first appellate order on the issue in the assessment year 2003-04, as followed by this Tribunal for the AY 2007-08 also. Grounds 12 to 12.5 624 145 ITA No. 467/Del/2014 are disposed of accordingly." Thus, the issue is identical in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2008-09. Therefore, we are remanding back this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with direction to decide the issue afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Hence Ground No. 9 to 9.5 are partly allowed for statistical purpose.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 62 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Shree Rama Multi-Tech Ltd.,, Ahmedabad vs The Dy.Cit.,Crcle-8,, Ahmedabad on 28 January, 2022

It is therefore, I am inclined with the contention of A.O. that appellant failed to - establish the nexus between interest income and interest expenditure. Further the appellant failed to substantiate its contention that borrowed funds were utilized for earning such interest. The verification part as discussed above and as directed by Hon'ble ITAT also reflects that there is no nexus between borrowed fund and investment so made. As per the latest available decision of Hon'ble ITAT Ahmedabad in the case of ABM Steels Pvt. Ltd. (supra) as relied on by appellant also, it is only the expenditure which has nexus with the earning of such income only will be reduced from total income for netting purpose. But, in the case of appellant no such nexus is there. The A.O. is fully justified in disallowing interest income of Rs. 5,91,30,485/- from the claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act resulting into reduction of claim u/s 80IA of the Act at Rs. 17,68,251/-. This ground is therefore dismissed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 36 - Cited by 10 - Full Document

Abb India Ltd, Bangalore vs Joint Commissioner Of Income ... on 21 August, 2024

9. In addition to these three High Court judgments, it appears that, noticing the conflicting views taken by the Tribunals, a Special Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was constituted to resolve the issue. In Indian Communication Network (P.) Ltd. v. IAC [1994] 206 ITR 96 (SB - AT), the Special Bench of the Tribunal considered all the conflicting judgments and the judgment in Lakhanpal National Ltd.'s case (supra) as also its own order in the case of the appellant-assessee reported in Berger Paints India Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 44 ITD 573 (Cal.).
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Bangalore Cites 175 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... vs Mahyco Monsanto Biotech (India) ... on 29 November, 2024

13.3 Since the facts and circumstances in the present case is similar to that of the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Allegis Services (India) Ltd. (supra), taking a consistent view, we remit the issue back to the file of the 16 ITA No.3325/M/2024 & CO No.154/M/2024 Mahyco Monsanto Biotech (India) Private Limited Assessing Officer with similar directions as contained in the aforesaid order of the Tribunal and for decision afresh in accordance with law on due verification of the claim of deduction u/s 80G of the Act.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 49 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Acit, New Delhi vs Nalwa Steel And Power Ltd., New Delhi on 27 April, 2017

7.1 After going through the findings of the Ld. CIT(A), as aforesaid, in our considered view, on the anvil of the decision in the case of CIT vs. Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd. (supra), the Punjab and Haryana High Court applied Berger Paints India Ltd. vs. CIT 266 ITR 99 by following the case of Bharat Earthmovers vs. CIT 245 ITR 428, CIT vs. Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd. 254 ITR 666, CIT vs. Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd. 257 ITR 737 and CIT vs. Starlight Silk Mills P. Ltd. 280 ITR 257 the Hon'ble High Court has upheld the Tribunal's decision and hence, we are of the view that the electrical installations formed an integral part of the assessee's plant, therefore, depreciation was allowable at the rate applicable to plant and machinery. We are also of the considered view that electrical installation is integral to the plant and machinery used for manufacturing steel and as the Assessing Officer has not controverted the contentions of the assessee company hence, Ld. CIT(A) has rightly directed the AO to allow depreciation on electrical installations @ 15% i.e. the rate applicable to 'plant & machinery'. We further note that Ld. CIT(A) was justified in holding that as a natural corollary, additional depreciation amounting to Rs.1,02,12,533/- is also required to be allowed as the Assessing Officer disallowed the same considering electrical installations as part of furniture and fixture, which does not need any interference.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 11 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Cognizant Technology Solutions India ... vs Acit, Large Taxpayer Unit-1, Chennai on 13 September, 2023

Further, the case law relied upon by the ld. Counsel for the assesse in Berger Paints India Limited vs. CIT (266 ITR 99) does not applicable to present case, because in this case, the AO did not discriminate appellant and its shareholders and in fact, it was the assessee by mistaken of law has applied incorrect provisions and alleged that the AO had taken different stand and thus, we reject case law relied upon by the assesse.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai Cites 72 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next