Sr. No.

Appeal No.

Name of the Assessee

To whom assigned the Special Bench

Points involved

Date

MUMBAI BENCHES

1.

ITA No. 5568 & 5569/M/1995 & 6448/M/1994
A.Y. 1991-92 to 1993-94

DHL Operations B.V. Netherlands

1.

2.

3.

Shri. D.Manmohan, Vice-President
(Mumbai Zone)
Shri. Pramod Kumar, A.M.
Shri.B.Ramakotaiah, A.M.

“Whether or not, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper interpretation of Art. 5.5 and Art. 5.6 of the DTA (with Netherlands) and having regard to its activities, it can be said that Airfreight Ltd. was the agent of the assessee so that it can be held that the assessee had a PE in India?  And if the answer is in the affirmative, whether or not the income from inbound shipments can be treated as attributable to the PE?”

15/06/2011.

2.

ITA Nos. 6566/M/2002
& 606/M/2003
A.Ys.1998-99 & 1999-2000

M/s Indusind Bank Ltd., Mumbai

1.

2.
3.

Shri. D.Manmohan, Vice-President(MZ)
Shri. R.S.Syal, A.M.
Shri.R.S.Padvekar, JM

1.Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case in law, the agreement in question could be called “financial lease agreement”?
2.Whether on the facts and in circumstances the lessor is entitled to depreciation on assets leased by it in the event of the transaction being held as a financial lease in the light of the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Asian Brown Boveries Ltd. reported in 54 Taxman 512 (SC)?

 07/06/2011.

3.

ITA No. 5402/Mum/2006 & 5458/Mum/2006, A.Y.2003-04

Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corp.

1.

2.
3.
4.
5.

S/Shri.
R.V.Easwar, President
R.S.Syal, A.M.,
D.K.Agarwal,J.M.,  P.M.Jagtap,A.M., T.R.Sood, A.M.

In Assessee’s appeal i.e. in ITA No. 5402/Mum/2006.

“Whether or not, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) was justified in holding that interest payable by the Indian PE of the foreign bank, to its head office and other overseas branches, is not deductible in computing its total income.”
In Revenue’s appeal (i.e.ITA No. 5458/M/06):
“Whether or not ,or the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in holding interest income earned by the Indian PE of a foreign bank, from its head office and branch offices abroad, cannot be taken into account for the purpose of computing its income liable to be taxed in India”.

29/06/2011

4.

ITA  No. 6591/Mum/2007 A.Y.2003-04

Tandon Information Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

1.
2.
3.

S/Shri.
D.Manmohan(VP-MZ)
S.V.Mehrotra, A.M.
P.M.Jagtap, A.M.

“Whether or not, on the facts and in the circumstances, deduction u/s 10 A is to be allowed without setting off of brought forward losses of earlier year”?

Heard on 16.11.2010 (Put up for larger Bench) Pending for fixation           

5.

ITA Nos. 6490 & 6491/Mum/2008
A.Ys.2004-05 & 2005-06

M/s Tulip Hotels Pvt. Ltd.

1.
2.
3.

S/Shri.
D.Manmohan(VP-MZ) R.S. Syal, A.M., D.K.Agarwal, J.M.

“Whether on a proper interpretation of sub-section (4) of section 255 of the Income Tax Act, the order proposed by the learned AM while giving effect to the opinion of the majority consequent  to the opinion expressed by the learned  Third Member, can be said to be a valid or lawful order passed in accordance with the said provision?"

Pending for fixation            

6.

ITA No. 3013/Mum/2007
A.Y.2002-03

Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd.

1.

2.
3.

S/Shri.
D.Manmohan, Vice-President(MZ),
R.S.Syal, A.M.
S.V.Merhotra, A.M.

”Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT (A) was justified in declaring long term capital loss of Rs.22,21,85,693/- on account of reduction in paid up equity share capital?”

 Pending for fixation          

7.

ITA No. 2404/M/2009
A.Y.2005-06

M/s.Bharti Shipyard Ltd.

1.
2.
3.

S/Shri.
R.S.Syal, A.M.
D.K.Agarwal, J.M.
Rajendra Singh,A.M.

“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amendment brought out by the Finance Act, 2010 to section 40(a)(ia) w.e.f. 01.04.2010, is remedial and curative in nature and is, therefore, retrospective in nature.?”

 07/07/2011

8.

ITA  No.
5792/M/2009

M/s. Dalal and Broacha Stock Broking P.Ltd.

1.
2.
3.

S/Shri.
D.K.Agarwal, J.M.
N.V.Vasudevan,J.M.
Ranjendra Singh,A.M.

“Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the payment of commission to the extent of Rs.1,20,00,000/- is disallowable under the provisions of section 36(1)(ii) or not”

16/05/2011

9.

ITA No.
5059, 5018 to 5022/M/2010

M/s. Allcargo Global Logistics Ltd.

1.

2.

3.

S/Shri.
D.Manmohan Vice-President (MZ)
N.Bharathvaja Shankar, Vice-President (BZ)
K.G.Bansal, A.M.

1. “Whether, on the facts and in law, the scope of assessment u/s 153 A encompasses additions, not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search?”
2. “Whether, on the facts  and in the circumstances of the  case, the ld.CIT (Appeals) was justified in upholding  the disallowance of deduction u/s.80IA (4) of the Act, on merits”?

Pending for fixation          

DELHI BENCHES

1.

ITA No. 1976/Del/2006

M/s C.L.C. & Sons Pvt. Ltd.

1.
2.
3.

Hon’ble President
Hon’ble VP(Zonal)
Shri. Rajpal Yadav, JM.

“Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, assessee is entitled to claim depreciation on the value of all intangible assets falling in the category of “any other business or commercial rights”, without coherence of such rights with the distinct genusis/ catogary if intangible assets like know how, patents, copyrights, trade marks, licences and franchises as defined U/s 32(1) (II) of the I.T. Act.”

Fixed after the disposal of Hon’ble High Court in the case of CLC Global Ltd. which is pending before Hon’ble High Court.

2.

ITA No. 1999 & 2000/Del/2008

M/s National Agricultural Co-op. Mkt. Federation of India, New Delhi.

1.
2.
3.     

 S/Shri.
 R.P.Tolani, J.M.
 I.P.Bansal, JM.
 R.C.Sharma, AM.

“Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, where claim of damages and interest thereon is deputed by the assessee in the court of law, deduction can be allowed for the interest claimed on such damages while computing business income.”

04.07.11.
(‘F’Bench)

KOLKATA BENCH ES

1.

ITA Nos.
1463/Kol/2007
1173/Kol/2007
2039/Kol/2006

2089/Kol/2007                         

M/s Madhu Jayanti
 International Ltd.
M/s. M.K.Industries
M/s. Rajrani Exports P. Ltd.
M/s. Narendra Tea Co.P.Ltd.

1
2

3

Hon’ble President,  
Hon’ble Vice-President (KZ) &
Shri.B.R. Mittal, J.M.

“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case , the assesses, who are in the business of blending & processing of tea and export thereof can be said to be “Manufacturer/Producer” of the tea for the purpose of Section 10A/10B of the I.T.Act, 1961?”

Pending for  fixation

2.

ITA No. 1305/Kol//08

Shri. Rajesh Kr. Drolia, HUF

1

2

3

Hon’ble Vice-President(KZ),

 Shri. B.R. Mittal, J.M.
               
Shri. Mahavir Singh J.M.

“1.     Whether Ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as in fact in allowing        deduction u/s. 80 IB to the assessee on the income earned from “job work” which comprises of repairs and maintenance?”

“2.  Whether Ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as in fact in treating the   income from repairing and maintenance at par with the income from manufacturing for the purpose of Sec. 80 IB?”

23.05.2011

3.

ITA Nos.1548 & 1549/Kol/2009
A.Y.2003-04 & 2004-05

M/s. Instrumentarium  Corporation Ltd.

1.

2.

3.
  

Hon’ble President

Hon’ble Vice President(KZ)

Shri B.R.Mittal, JM

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, no arm’s length rate of interest was required to be charged on the loan granted by the non-resident assessee-company to its wholly owned subsidiary Indian company M/s Datex Ohmeda(Indian) Pvt. Ltd.(Datex)?
2. Whether, in the given facts and circumstances of the case, CBDT Circular No. 14 of 2001 [252 ITR (St.) 104] and Taxation Ruling TR 2007/1 issued by Australian Taxation Office are relevant in the context of Transfer Pricing Regulations of India, in particular to the case of the assessee?
3. Whether, setting off of loss with future profits and not assessing the interest income in the hands of the assessee on arm’s length price will cause real loss to the Govt. exchequer?

Pending for fixation

BANGALORE BENCHES

1.

 Misc.  Petition  Nos.26 & 29/B/99
MP Nos.
97-105/B/01
Arising out of
ITA Nos.
946, 952 to 957/Bang/1998 & ITA 959/Bang/1998
         

Mrs. Arathi Shenoy (alongwith),
 Mrs. M. Pushpalatha,
Mr. M.Suresh Rao,
 Mrs. Vatsala Shenoy,
 Mr. B. Raguramprasad Estate,
L/R by Mrs. M. Kaveri Bai, Mrs. Hemalatha,
Mr. M. Janardhana Rao & M. Anand Rao,
Mysore.

1

2

3

Zonal Vice-President (BZ)
 Senior most Judicial Member of the Bangalore Benches.
Senior most Accountant Memberof the Bangalore Benches

As per direction of the Hon’ble High Court, the Miscellaneous petition filed by Department to be heard.

 
09.05.2011

2.

ITA  No. 546/Bang/08

M/s Nandi Steels Ltd.

1

2

3

N.Bharathvaja Shankar Vice-President (BZ)
Shri. G.C.Gupta,Vice-President
Smt.P. Madhavi Devi, JM

That the learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts that the appellant is not entitled to set off carry forward business loss of Rs. 39,99,652 against the long term capital gain arising on sale of land used for the purpose of business. That the authorities below ought to have appreciated that there is no cessation of business and the appellant is entitled to set off the carry forward business loss.

09.06.2011

AHMEDABAD  BENCHES

1.

ITA No. 2654/AHD/2004 A.Y.2001-02

Sardar Sarover Narmada Nigam Ltd.

1

2
3

S/Shri
G.D.Agarwal, Vice-President(AZ)
N.V.Vasudevan, JM.
D.K. Srivastava, AM.

1. Whether interest expenditure incurred by the assessee on amount though borrowed for the purpose of business but pending such utilization, is actually utilized for earning interest income can such  interest expenditure be held as expended for the purpose of earning interest income in view of the provisions of section 57 (iii) of the Act or not?.
2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, interest expenditure incurred on borrowed funds which were actually utilized for earning of interest income is to be allowed as deduction from the gross interest receipts or not for computing the income assessable under section 56 of the Act?

Pending for fixation

3.

ITA No. 36/Ahd/2004, ITA No. 48/Ahd/2004, A.Y. 1999-2000, ITA No. 35/Ahd/2005, A.Y. 2001-02 & ITA No. 1095/Ahd/2006, A.Y. 2002-03, ITA No. 515/Ahd/2005, A.Y. 2001-02.

Gujarat Fas Financial Services Ltd., Ahmedabad.

1

S/Shri
R.V.Easwar, President,
Hon’ble President

“Whether, on the fact and it the circumstances of the case, the assessee company is financial company under the Interest tax Act,1974 liable to tax thereunder on the rev income earned on its financial transaction?”

Pending for  fixation

CHENNAI BENCHES

1.

Int. T.A. 101 & 161/Mds/2003
A.Y. 1999-2000
A.Y.2000-2001

M/s Bharat Overseas Bank Ltd., Chennai

1.

2.

3.

Dr. O.K.Narayanan, Vice-President(BZ)
Shri. Hari Om Maratha, J.M.
Smt.P.Madhavidevi,
J.M.

“Whether the amount collected from the borrowers to meet the interest tax liability could be taxed as interest under the Interest-Tax Act, 1974?"

 27/06/2011

AMRITSAR BENCH

1.

ITA No. 65(ASR)/2010

Sh. Vinod Kumar Jain, Prop.
M/s V,K,Metal Works, Jammu

1.

2.

3.

Hon’ble Zonal Vice-President
Senior most Judicial Member, Chandigarh
Senior most Accountant Member, Chandigarh

1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the excise duty refund set off is a capital receipt or revenue receipt.
2.  If the excise duty refund/set off is held to be revenue receipt, whether the said amount is to be included in the business profits for the purpose of deduction u/s 80IB of the Income-tax Act.

Pending for fixation.

JODHPUR BENCH

1.

ITA No.27/JDPR/06
C.O.No.37/Ju/06
(A/o ITA No. 27/JDPR/06)  Block A.Y. 1997-98 to 2003-04)

M/s Shree Ram Lime Products Ltd., Jodhpur

1.
2.
3.

 Zonal Vice-President
Shri I.P.Bansal, JM
Shri P.M.Jagtap,AM

“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the period of limitation for completion of the block assessment as per sec. 158BE read with

Explanation 2 is to be reckoned from the end of the month in which ‘last Panchanama on the conclusion of search is drawn on the assessee’ or ‘last Panchnama of the last authorization even when it is not last Panchanama drawn on the assessee and one or more valid panchanamas are drawn on the assessee thereafter in execution of any former authorization’.”

As per order dt. 14.11.2007 of the Hon’ble President “Special Bench comprising of S/Shri.
R.P.Garg, Vice-President, I.C.Sudhir, J.M.
Hari Om Maratha, J.M. would hear  the entire appeal.  Can also modify the question referred to Special Bench.”

Pending for fixation

ITA 6987/M/03

ITA 5280/M/04 ITA 5281/M/04

A.Y. 1996-97to 1998-99

1. Whether the impugned transactions of leasing out of assets to the assessee is a lease transactions or afinancial lease?

2. Whether the assessee can be held to be the owner of theasset acquired under the above transactions and is entitledfor depreciation over the said assets or assessee being alessee is entitled to claim the lease rent paid to the lessor asa revenue expenditure?

ITA 210/Kol/08

A.Y. 2004-05

ITA 2680-2681/M/08

A.Y. 2005-06

ITA 2830/M/07

A.Y. 2002-03

ITA 525 to 530/M/08

A.Y. 1999-00 to 2004-05

1) Whether non-issuance of the notice as provided in Sub-sec.(2) to Section 143 of the I.T. Act in the case of assessmentframed u/sec. 153 A, in consequence of search under sec.132,is merely an irregularity and the same is curable?

2) Whether on the facts of the case, failure on the part of theAssessing Officer (A.O.) to issue notice to the assessee as per provisions of Sub-sec (2) to Section 143 shall have theeffect of rendering the entire assessment framed u/sec. 153 Aof the Act as null and void?

ITA 635/M/10

A.Y. 2005-06

ITA 6490/M/08

ITA 6491/M/08
A.Y. 2004-052005-06

"Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case;

i) the additions of Rs.4,78,12,403/- and Rs. 1,02,91,176/-made and confirmed by the lower authorities u/s 68 for AY 2004-05 and 2005-06 respectively are liable to be deletedor to be confirmed?

ii) the addition made and confirmed by the CIT(A) on accountof reimbursement of expenses to M/s Cox & King (India) Pvt.Ltd. and to M/s Tulip Star Hotels Pvt. Ltd. for AY 2004-05and 2005-06 are liable to be deleted or confirmed?"

ITA 8880/M/04

A.Y. 1998-99

ITA 4613/M/05

A.Y. 1998-99

"Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case;

1) Proceedings initiated by the AO u/s 147 is liable to beconfirmed or quashed where there was no fresh materialavailable with the AO and assessment had been completedoriginally u/s 143 (1)?

2) the order of the AO is liable to be quashed or to be set asidewhere copy of the reasons recorded for taking action u/s 147were not provided to the assessee in spite of specific requests?"

ITA 2808/M/02

ITA 5056/M/03 CO 112/M/03 CO 254/M/04

A.Y. 1998-99-1999-2000