166 (Mum.) and Dredging International v. Asstt. D1T (IT) 1201II

48 SOT 430Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2011#8108 most cited
14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2023.

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing 166 (Mum.) and Dredging International v. Asstt. D1T (IT) 1201II

TREMCO ROFFING & FACILITY SERVICES PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CORP CIR-3(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3350/CHNY/2018[2012-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2012-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3350/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Tremco Roofing & Facility The Asst. Commissioner Of Services Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, No.60, B-1, First Floor, Vs. Corporate Circle-3(1), Ganesh Towers, First Avenue, Chennai. 100 Feet Road, Ashok Nagar, Chennai – 600 083. [Pan: Aadct 5389H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Farookh Irani, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri S. Bharath, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.10.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.12.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Chennai In I.T.A No.85/2016-17 Dated 26.09.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012- 13. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: “Based On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Tremco Roofing & Facility Services Private Limited (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Appellant') Craves Leave To Prefer An Appeal Against The Order Dated 26 September 2018

For Appellant: Shri Farookh Irani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Bharath, CIT
Section 250

…ited vs CIT, Chennai (2009) 180 taxman 422 (SC); 2. CIT vs Woodward Governor India Private Limited (2009) 179 Taxman 326; 3. Jacobs Engineering India Pvt. Ltd. vs ACIT (2011) 14 taxmann.com 186 (Mumbai \Tribunal); 4. Dredging International N.V. vs ADIT (2011) 48 SOT 430 (Mumbai Tribunal); 5. Mazagon Dock Ltd vs JCIT (2009) 29 SOT 356 (Mumbai Tribunal); 6. ACIT vs Triveni Engineering & Industries (ITA 346 of 2009) (Delhi HC); 7. ACIT vs M/s ITD Cementation India Ltd (ITA 2991/Mum/2011) (Mumbai Tribunal); 8. ACIT vs Ashoka Buildcon Ltd (ITA 394/PN/2007) (Pune Tribunal); 9. Bharat Earth Movers vs CIT (2000) 112 Taxm…

DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. MCNALLY BHARAT ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of revenue stands dismissed

ITA 99/KOL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jan 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.99/Kol/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2003-2004) Dcit, Circle-1, Vs. M/S Mcnally Bharat 7Th Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Engineering Company Ltd, Kolkata-700069 4, Mangoe Lane,Kolkata-1 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcm 9443 R .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ram Bilas Meena, Cit "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Shah Ca सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 21/12/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 11/01/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am: The Above Appeal Is Directed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 20.09.2010, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Kolkata In Appeal No.605/Cit(A)-1/Cir.1/.09-10, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2003-04, Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 31.12.2009, Passed By The Cit-1 Kolkata U/S.143(3)/254 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :-

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Shah CAFor Respondent: Shri Ram Bilas Meena, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 37

…xecuting an infrastructure development fixed price contract, the foreseeable losses of future years can be recognized following the rationale of AS-7 issued by ICAl, and such a Provision is an allowable deduction.” 3. Dredging International -vs.- ADIT (2011) 48 SOT 430 (Mum) “Assessee's claim for provision for loss, which was made in accordance with guidelines of AS-7 and duly debited in the audited accounts of the company is an allowable expenditure.” 4. Jacobs Engineering Pvt Ltd -vs.- ACIT (2009) 30 DTR 614 (Mum) “Since the foreseeable losses were provided in the books in accordance with AS-7 which is mand…