1. CIT v. Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd.

379 ITR 326Supreme Court of India2015#20675 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 344,197 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Judgments citing 1. CIT v. Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd.

ACIT 5 (1), Bhopal vs. M/S Vindhya Solvent Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 281/IND/2018[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore18 Oct 2022

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy& Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: RespondentbyFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Nema, Sr

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…at liability ceased to exist and that too in the year under consideration. Reliance is placed on the following judgments that support the above proposition: • CIT v, Sugauli Sugar Works (P.) Ltd., [1999] 236 ITR 518 (SC)) • CIT v. SI Group India Ltd. ([2015] 379 ITR 326) • Chief CIT v. Kesaria Tea Co. Ltd. ([2002] 254 ITR 434 (SC)) • CIT v. Jain Exports (P.) Ltd. ([2013] 35 taxmann.com 540 (Delhi • PCIT v. Matruprasad C. Pandey ([2015] 377 ITR 363(Guj HC)) • ITO v. Bhavesh Prints (P.) Ltd. ([2011] 46 SOT 268 (Ahd. ITAT) • Nitin S. Garg v. Asstt. CIT([2010] 40 SOT 253 (Ahd. ITAT)) 9.19 The Delhi High Court in IT…

Larsen & Toubro Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3076/MUM/2012[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2020AY 2000-01

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajiv Harit CIT, DR

Section 115Section 115JSection 14ASection 37Section 40A(9)Section 42Section 80Section 80HSection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORESHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAMLAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. ITA No. A.Y Appellant Respondent No. 1 3076/Mum/2012 2000-01 M/s Larsen ACIT, &Tourbro Ltd., Range 2(2) Taxation Rm No. 577, 5th Department, L&T Floor, House, N.M. Marg, AayakarBhgavan, Bal; lard estate MK Marg, Mumbai. 2 3573/Mum/2012 2000-01 M/s Larsen ACIT, &Tourbro Ltd., Range 2(2) Taxation Rm No. 577, 5th Department, L&T Floor, House, N.M. Marg, AayakarBhgavan, Bal; lard estate MK Marg, Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAACL0104P अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant…

Shri Om Parkash Legal Heiar Smt Pushpa Verma, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(3), Jalandhar

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 756/ASR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Oct 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 756/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 41(1)Section 41(1)(a)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (SMC) BEFORE SH. SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 756/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Om Parkash L/H of Smt. Pushpa Vs. Income Tax Officer, Verma Plot No. 02, Ward-1(3), Jalandhar Village Waryana, Sangal Sohal Road, Jalandhar [PAN: AAHPV 0008Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Ashray Sarna (C.A.) Respondent by: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.) Date of Hearing: 20.09.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 31.10.2018 ORDER Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Assessee agitating the Order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-…

Madan Mohla, Mumbai vs. ITO 11(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 5936/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09 Mr. Madan Mohla, Ito 11(1)(2) 301, Kings Apartments, Juhu Aayakar Bhavan, बनाम/ Tara Road, M.K. Rd. Vs. Mumbai-400049 Mumbai- (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aaopm1470C "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Sanjiv M. Shah (Ar) Shri Rajguru (Dr) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By 21/04/2016 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 29/04/2016 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order: आदेश / O R D E R Per Ashwani Taneja (): This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai-3 {(In Short ‘Cit(A)’}, Dated 22.07.2011 Passed Against

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…n the following cases in support of proposition that no addition could have been made u/s 41(1), unless the liabilities actually ceased to exist and that too during the impugned year:- 1. CIT vs. Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd 236 ITR 518(SC) 2. CIT vs. SI Group 379 ITR 326(SC) 3. CCIT v. Kesaria 254 ITR 434 (SC) 4. CIT v. Jain 85 CCH 66 (DEL) 5. PCIT v. Matruprasad 377 ITR 363(Guj) 6. ITO v. Bhavesh 46 SOT 268(AHM) 7. Mitin v. ACIT 40 SOT 253 (AHM) 4 Madan Mohla 3.5. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the lower authorities. 3.6. We have gone through the orders of the lower authorities and judgme…