239 ITR 161 (b) S. VeeriahReddiar v CIT,(1960) 38 ITR 152, 170 (ker) (c) CIT v. Mcmillan& Co.

6 ITR 36High Court1938#8694 most cited
13

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2005 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 40A(9)Section 41(4)

Issues it is cited on

right to receivemercantile system of accountingsection 145section 28section 37section 154section 10section 80previous yeartransfercompanysection 14

Judgments citing 239 ITR 161 (b) S. VeeriahReddiar v CIT,(1960) 38 ITR 152, 170 (ker) (c) CIT v. Mcmillan& Co.

DCIT 2(2), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and 2007 – 08 is partly allowed

ITA 4952/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm A.Y.2006-07 [ By Assessee] &

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

…` IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL , JM A.Y.2006-07 [ by Assessee] & ITA No. 4952/MUM /2013 [By AO ] ITA No 4128/MUM /2014 A.Y.2007-08 [ By AO] & [By Assessee] Vs. State Bank of India The Additional 3rd Floor, Commissionerof Income tax Corporate Centre Circle 2 (2) Mumbai Madam Cama Road Room No 545, Aykar Bhavan Nariman Point Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai 400021 Mumbai 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN AAACS8577K Assessee by Shri Ketan Ved &Abdulkadir Jawad Wala Revenue by Shri P C Chhhotaray Special Counsel Shri Dr Kishor Dhule…

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT CIR 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 3868/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

…Page | 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL , JM ITA No. 3868/MUM/2013 [ by Assessee] & ITA No . 4952/MUM /2013 [By AO ] Vs. ITA No 4128/MUM /2014 [ By AO] & ITA no 4105/MUM/2014 [By Assessee] A.Y .2006-07 A.Y .2007-08 State Bank of India 3 r d Floor, Corporate Centre Madam Cama Road Nariman Point Mumbai 400021 The Add it ional Commissionerof Income tax Circle 2 (2) Mumbai Room No 545 , Aykar Bhavan Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN AAACS8577K Assessee by Shri Ketan Ved &Abdulka…

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. M/S. SHAKTI PUMPS (INDIA) LTD., INDORE

ITA 1358/IND/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Virtual Hearing) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Acit (Central)-2, Shakti Pumps (India) Ltd. Indore 226, Shastri Market, बनाम/ M.G. Road, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Assessee) Pan: Aaecs 5027 L Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti & Vijay Bansal, Ars Date Of Hearing 23/11/2022 / 22.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26.04.2023

Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 263

…e profits and gains of the assessee most approximating to truth and must exercise his discretion and dgment judicially and reasonably.[emphasis supplied] Page 11 of 16 Shakti Pumps (India ) Ltd. Assessment years 2010-11 a) Sarangpur Cotton Mfg. Co. [1938] 6 ITR 36 (PC) b) McMillan & Co. [1958] 33 ITR 182 (SC) c) KY Pilliah & Sons [1967] 63 ITR 411 (SC) 2.41 Jurisdictional Hon'ble ITAT Indore Bench dealt with similar disallowance of deduction u/s 80HHC on a charge that assessee might have incurred other expenses than debited in P&L, in the case of Bhaskar Trading Corporation [2007] 91TJ 141 wherein at Para 17.…

C.U. INSPECTIONS & CERTIFICATIONS INDIA PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 15(1) (2) , MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1633/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1633/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1634/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Cu Inspections & बिधम/ Acit-15(1)(2) Certifications India Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 483, Aayakar Vs. 2201, 2205,2206, 22Nd Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Floor, 2301 To 2306 23Rd Road, Mumbai-400020. Floor, B Wing, Arihant Aura, Plot No. 13/1, Ttc, Opp Turbhe Railway Station, Thane Belapur Road, Midc Side, Turbhe Navi Mumbai-400705. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaecc7885N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri H. N. Motiwala Revenue By: Shri Hiren Bhatt (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 31/10/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/12/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/(Nfac), Delhi Dated 18.05.2022 & For Ay. 2014-15 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri H. N. MotiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Hiren Bhatt (Sr. AR)
Section 143(3)

…ed by the assessee, he can proceed to make the A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 CU Inspections and Certifications India assessment to the best of his judgment. It is well settled, as a result of the Privy Council decision in CIT v. Sarangpur Cotton Mfg Co. Ltd. [1938] 6 ITR 36 at p. 40 that the section clearly makes such regularly employed method of accounting compulsory basis of computation unless in the opinion of the ITO the income profits and gains cannot properly be deduced there from 9. Though these provisions provide for charging the income by way of profits and gains of business and prescribe the manner of computa…

ACIT,CIRCLE-30(1), NEW DELHI vs. AKASH PODDAR, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 4344/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Kanav Bali, Sr. DR
Section 17(3)(iii)

…such time, the taxation principles have to be precisely based on the nature of income earned by the assessee. Reliance is placed on the following judgments of the Hon’ble Courts which are mentioned as under:  CIT vs. Sarangpur Cotton Manufacturing Co. Ltd., 6 ITR 36  CIT vs. A. Krishnaswami Mudaliar & Ors., 53 I.T.R. 122, 128 and 132  CIT Vs. Mc-Milan & Co., 33 I.T.R. 182;  S.N. Namasivayam Chettiar vs. CIT 38 ITR 579, 588  Commissioners of Inland Revenue v. Cock, Russell and Co. Ltd., 29 Tax Cases 387, 392, 13. From the facts, we find that the one reason of the settlement was allotment of shares and as pe…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 4(1), RAIPUR vs. M/S SUPER IRON AND STEEL PVT LTD.,, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and Cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 261/RPR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.261/Rpr/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Acit-4(1), Raipur Vs M/S Super Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd., Pritpal Farm House, Vip Road, Raipur(C.G.) Pan No. : Aaics 2579 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) & Cross Objection No.13/Rpr/2017 (Arising Out Of Ita No.261/Rpr/2017) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) M/S Super Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit-4(1), Raipur Pritpal Farm House, Vip Road, Raipur(C.G.) Pan No. : Aaics 2579 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N.Singh, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, रायपुर "यायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी र"वश सूद, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"ण खोड़"पया, लेखा सद"य के सम" । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.261/RPR/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) ACIT-4(1), Raipur Vs M/s Super Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd., Pritpal Farm House, VIP Road, Raipur(C.G.) PAN No. : AAICS 2579 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) AND Cross Objection No.13/RPR/2017 (Arising out of ITA No.261/RPR/2017) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) M/s Super Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd., Vs ACI…

KANAK CHAKRABORTY ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 43, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13 &

ITA 2352/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Sri Manish Borad

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 3Section 3aSection 40ASection 40A(3)Section 44A

…opinion that the correct profits could not be deduced from the accounts, he was obliged to have recourse of the proviso to section 145 of the Income Tax Act 1961. [536C, G] Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bombay v. Sarangpur Cotton Manufacturing Co. Ltd., [1938] 6 ITR 36; Page 5 of 10 I.T.A. Nos.: 2351 & 2352/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Kanak Chakraborty. Commissioner of IncomeTax, Madras v. A. Krishnaswami Mudaliar & Ors., [1964] 53 I.T.R. 122, 128 and 132; Commissioner of Income- Tax v. Mc-Milan & Co., [1958] 33 I.T.R. 182; S.N. Namasiva- yam Chettiar v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras [1960]…

KANAK CHAKRABORTY ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 43, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13 &

ITA 2351/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Sri Manish Borad

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 3Section 3aSection 40ASection 40A(3)Section 44A

…opinion that the correct profits could not be deduced from the accounts, he was obliged to have recourse of the proviso to section 145 of the Income Tax Act 1961. [536C, G] Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bombay v. Sarangpur Cotton Manufacturing Co. Ltd., [1938] 6 ITR 36; Page 5 of 10 I.T.A. Nos.: 2351 & 2352/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Kanak Chakraborty. Commissioner of IncomeTax, Madras v. A. Krishnaswami Mudaliar & Ors., [1964] 53 I.T.R. 122, 128 and 132; Commissioner of Income- Tax v. Mc-Milan & Co., [1958] 33 I.T.R. 182; S.N. Namasiva- yam Chettiar v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras [1960]…

DCIT 1(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. TATA MOTORS FINANCE LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, for assessment year 2013 – 14 of appeal of the AO as well as the assessee are dismissed

ITA 7550/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

Section 143(3)

…hether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in not following the settled legal position in the case of Keshav Mills Limited Vs. CIT 23 ITR 2301 (Supreme Court) and in CIT Vs. Sarangpur Cotton Manufacturing Co. Limited 6 ITR 36 (Gujarat High Court) that there cannot be ITA Nos. 7550/Mum/16, 2640 & 244/Mum/19 Tata Motors Finance Ltd; AYs: 12-13 & 13-14 two different method of accounting, one for writing books of accounts and another for computing the tax liability and allowed the entire DMA commission as deduction against the income of the current year. 5. "Whether on the…

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN GRANITO INDIA LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2451/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2019AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Ankit Talsania, A.RFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Sharma, C.I.T.DR
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 14A

…port of his contention referred the following orders: (a) CIT v Vikram Plastics & ORS reported in 239 ITR 161 (b) S. VeeriahReddiar v CIT,(1960) 38 ITR 152, 170 (ker) (c) CIT v Mcmillan& Co (1958) 33 ITR 182 SC (d) CIT v Sarangpur Cotton Mfg . Co. Ltd. (1938) 6 ITR 36 (PC) 14. The learned CIT (A) after considering the submission of the assessee referred to the informations about the 4 companies on the basis of which the addition was made by the AO on account of suppressed production and sale of such production outside the books of accounts. The learned CIT (A) accordingly held that such information about the 4 c…

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ASIAN GRANITO INDIA LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1517/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Ankit Talsania, A.RFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Sharma, C.I.T.DR
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 14A

…port of his contention referred the following orders: (a) CIT v Vikram Plastics & ORS reported in 239 ITR 161 (b) S. VeeriahReddiar v CIT,(1960) 38 ITR 152, 170 (ker) (c) CIT v Mcmillan& Co (1958) 33 ITR 182 SC (d) CIT v Sarangpur Cotton Mfg . Co. Ltd. (1938) 6 ITR 36 (PC) 14. The learned CIT (A) after considering the submission of the assessee referred to the informations about the 4 companies on the basis of which the addition was made by the AO on account of suppressed production and sale of such production outside the books of accounts. The learned CIT (A) accordingly held that such information about the 4 c…

ADDL CIT 2(1), MUMBAI vs. GTL LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 5419/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 10BSection 143(1)

…, in his opinion, is the correct taxable income.—British Paints India Ltd. vs. CIT (1978) 111 ITR 53 (Cal) : TC2R.122 reversed; B.S.C. Footwear Ltd. vs. Ridgway (Inspector of Taxes) (1971) 2 WLR 1313 (HL) CIT vs. Sarangpur Cotton Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (1938) 6 ITR 36 (PC) : TC1R.109, CIT vs. A. Krishnaswami Mudaliar & Ors. (1964) 53 ITR 122 (SC) : (1964) TAX 18(3) 88 : TC1R.131, S.N. Namasivayam Chettair vs. CIT (1960) 38 ITR 579 (SC) : (1960) TAX 13(3) -105 : TC1R.532, IRC vs. Cock, Rusell and Co. Ltd. (1949) 29 Tax Cases 387, Whimster and Co. vs. IRC (1917-26) 12 Tax Cases 813 and Chainrup Sampatram vs. CIT (1…

M/S. SANJEEV WOOLEN MILLS vs. COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

The appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs

C.A. No.-006735-006736 - 2003Supreme Court24 Nov 2005
For Respondent: Commissioner of Income-tax, Mumbai
Section 80

…INDIA Page 9 of 10 could not be deduced from the accounts, he would then be obliged to have recourse to the proviso to section 13 of 1922 Act which corresponds to Section 145 of the Act In C.I.T. vs. Sarangpur Cotton Mfg. Ltd. ,(1938) 6 ITR 36, Lord Thankerton stated that section 13 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, related to a method of accounting regularly employed by the assessee. The section postulated that such a method of accounting was the necessary basis of computation, unless in the opinion of the Income-tax Officer, the income, profits and gains could not properly be de…