273 ITR 353 (Cal.) (v) ClT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody

151 ITR 653High Court1985#8206 most cited

What is 273 ITR 353 (Cal.) (v) ClT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody authority for?

The assessee contended that an addition to income should be deleted on the grounds of consistency, as no new material fact had emerged since the prior assessment.

13

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Rajan Prasad Moody · 273 ITR 353 · CIT v. Sujani Textile Pvt. Ltd. · 151 ITR 653 · addition to income · deletion of addition · consistency in assessment · no new material fact · search and seizure · section 132(1)

Issues it is cited on

tax recovery officersection 36(1)(ii)section 51interest free advancesmistake apparent from recordsection 10aacomputer softwaresection 36(1)(iii)section 10acommercial expediencysection 36(1)section 36

Judgments citing 273 ITR 353 (Cal.) (v) ClT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody

Diamonds 'R' Us, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 6(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 539/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…submission has been made, the nexus between advances and realization from debtors stand unproved and unsubstantiated. Moreover, it is clear that the huge advances made are not for business purpose. It has been held in CIT vs. Sujani Textiles (P) Ltd., [1985] 151 ITR 653 (Mad.), CIT vs. Coimbatore Salem Transports (p) Ltd. [1966] 61 ITR 480 (Mad.) and Mr. Mohd. Ali vs. CIT [1960] 38 ITR 413 (Mad.) that it is for the assessee to prove that each of the loans on which he paid interest were utilized for business. In the case of S.A. Builders vs. CIT [2007] 158 Taxman 74 (SC), the Supreme Court has held that the prese…

Diamonds 'R' Us, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 6(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 538/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…submission has been made, the nexus between advances and realization from debtors stand unproved and unsubstantiated. Moreover, it is clear that the huge advances made are not for business purpose. It has been held in CIT vs. Sujani Textiles (P) Ltd., [1985] 151 ITR 653 (Mad.), CIT vs. Coimbatore Salem Transports (p) Ltd. [1966] 61 ITR 480 (Mad.) and Mr. Mohd. Ali vs. CIT [1960] 38 ITR 413 (Mad.) that it is for the assessee to prove that each of the loans on which he paid interest were utilized for business. In the case of S.A. Builders vs. CIT [2007] 158 Taxman 74 (SC), the Supreme Court has held that the prese…

Diamonds 'R' Us, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 6(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 537/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…submission has been made, the nexus between advances and realization from debtors stand unproved and unsubstantiated. Moreover, it is clear that the huge advances made are not for business purpose. It has been held in CIT vs. Sujani Textiles (P) Ltd., [1985] 151 ITR 653 (Mad.), CIT vs. Coimbatore Salem Transports (p) Ltd. [1966] 61 ITR 480 (Mad.) and Mr. Mohd. Ali vs. CIT [1960] 38 ITR 413 (Mad.) that it is for the assessee to prove that each of the loans on which he paid interest were utilized for business. In the case of S.A. Builders vs. CIT [2007] 158 Taxman 74 (SC), the Supreme Court has held that the prese…

Diamonds 'R' Us, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 6(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 536/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…submission has been made, the nexus between advances and realization from debtors stand unproved and unsubstantiated. Moreover, it is clear that the huge advances made are not for business purpose. It has been held in CIT vs. Sujani Textiles (P) Ltd., [1985] 151 ITR 653 (Mad.), CIT vs. Coimbatore Salem Transports (p) Ltd. [1966] 61 ITR 480 (Mad.) and Mr. Mohd. Ali vs. CIT [1960] 38 ITR 413 (Mad.) that it is for the assessee to prove that each of the loans on which he paid interest were utilized for business. In the case of S.A. Builders vs. CIT [2007] 158 Taxman 74 (SC), the Supreme Court has held that the prese…

Matrix Cellular Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 16(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5846/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 5846/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Matrix Cellular Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, 7, Khullar Farm, Mandi Road, Circle-16(2), Mehrauli, New Delhi-110030 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcm9420A Assessee By : Sh. A. K. Khanna, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Alka Gautam, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 07.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 08.02.2022

For Appellant: Sh. A. K. Khanna, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, Sr. DR

…elying on the provisions of section 36(1)(iii) and the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sarabhai Sons Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (201 ITR 465) and the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in tire case of CIT vs. Sujani Textiles Pvt. Ltd. (151 ITR 653), the AO held that the assessee was not eligible for deduction under section 36(1)(iii). 8. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition holding that the assessee failed to establish any direct nexus between own funds vis-a-vis interest free loans and advances given. 9. During the arguments before us, the ld. AR relied on the submissions made before t…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Pvp Ventures Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly

ITA 1706/CHNY/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Mar 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Respondent: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 28Section 36(1)

…f which were purchased out of the loan amount. This is also squarely covered by the provisions of section 28(iv) of the Act. 2.4. The Ld CIT(A) ought to have considered the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s Sujani Textiles (P) Ltd (151 ITR 653) wherein it was held that the investment in shares cannot be considered as an investment for the purpose of business and that applicability of section 36(1) (iii) stands excluded in such circumstances ‘ 3. For these and other grounds that may be adduced at the time of hearing, it is prayed that the order of the Ld CIT(A) may be set aside and that…

DCIT, Circle- 7(1), New Delhi vs. Dlf Utilities Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4156/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4156/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S Dlf Utilities Ltd., 9Th Floor, Dlf Centre, Sansad Tax, Circle-7(1), New Delhi Marg, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacn3199A Assessee By : Sh. R. S. Singhvi, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.12.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.12.2019

For Appellant: Sh. R. S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 36(1)(iii)

…DLF Utilities Ltd. subsequently taken out of the business by diverting it as interest free loans or loans on lower rate of interest. 6. He relied on the following case laws: " Sarabhai Sons P. Ltd. Vs CIT 201 ITR 465 (Guj.) " CIT Vs Sujani Textiles P. Ltd. 151 ITR 653 (Mad.) " India Metals & Ferro Alloys Ltd. Vs CIT 193 ITR 344 " CIT Vs Abishek Industries Ltd. 286 ITR 1 (P&H) 7. The ld. CIT (A) deleted the addition on the grounds that the amounts extended as loan are neither colorable nor illusionary transactions and since the monies have been rightly used for the purpose of the business no disallowance is wa…

Future Ideas Co Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr.CIT -9, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 3062/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainfuture Ideas Co. Ltd. Principal Cit – 9 Knowledge House, Shyam Nagar 2Nd Floor, Room No. 214 Vs. Off Jogeshwari Vikroli Link Rd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai 400060 Mumbai 400020 Pan – Aaacf9519L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi &For Respondent: Ms. S. Padmaja
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 36(1)(iii)Section 57

…vs. G.K. Kabra Cooperative Industrial Estate (1995) 211 ITR 336 (AP) 4.2.4 The learned A.R. submitted that the reliance placed by the learned Principal CIT on the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sujani Textiles P. Ltd. (1985) 151 ITR 653 (Mad) is not tenable as it is clearly distinguishable on facts from the facts on hand. It was a case where the assessee therein had advanced some amount to a broker, who in turn loaned it to a Director of the assessee company. The assessee stopped receiving interest income on such amount. It was in that factual circumstances that the claim of the…

Future Corporate Resources Ltd.(Formerly Known As Simpleton Investrade Pvt. Ltd.), Mumbai vs. Pr.CIT -9, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 3061/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainfuture Corporate Resources Ltd. Principal Cit – 9 (Formerly Simpleton Investrade P. Ltd.) 2Nd Floor, Room No. 214 Knowledge House, Shyam Nagar Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Off Jogeshwari Vikroli Link Rd. Mumbai 400020 Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai 400060 Pan – Aajcs3979E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi &For Respondent: Ms. S. Padmaja
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…vs. G.K. Kabra Cooperative Industrial Estate (1995) 211 ITR 336 (AP) 4.2.4 The learned A.R. submitted that the reliance placed by the learned Principal CIT on the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sujani Textiles P. Ltd. (1985) 151 ITR 653 (Mad) is not tenable as it is clearly distinguishable on facts from the facts on hand. It was a case where the assessee therein had advanced some amount to a broker, who in turn loaned it to a Director of the assessee company. The assessee stopped receiving interest income on such amount. It was in that factual circumstances that the claim of the…

DCIT Cen Cir 23 Cen RG 7, Mumbai vs. Rasesh B Kanakia, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3195/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 57

…mada Valley Fertilizers Co. Ltd. (2013) 215 Taxman 616 (Gujarat) (iv) Consolidated Fibres & Chemicals Ltd. v. ClT - 273 ITR 353 (Cal.) (v) ClT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody - 115 ITR 516 ITA 3192-3196/Mum/14 10 (vi) ClT v. Sujani Textile Pvt. Ltd. - 151 ITR 653 (vii) ClT v. Amritaben Shah – 238 ITR 777 (Del.) (viii) ClT v. Neo Poly Pack Pvt. Ltd. - 245 ITR 492 (ix) Parshuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO - 106 ITR 1 (SC)” Thus, the assessee contended that the addition of Rs. 78,51,111/- made by the AO to the income of the assessee needs to be deleted on account of consistency as no new material fact ha…

DCIT Cen Cir 23 Cen RG 7, Mumbai vs. Rasesh B Kanakia, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3194/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 57

…mada Valley Fertilizers Co. Ltd. (2013) 215 Taxman 616 (Gujarat) (iv) Consolidated Fibres & Chemicals Ltd. v. ClT - 273 ITR 353 (Cal.) (v) ClT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody - 115 ITR 516 ITA 3192-3196/Mum/14 10 (vi) ClT v. Sujani Textile Pvt. Ltd. - 151 ITR 653 (vii) ClT v. Amritaben Shah – 238 ITR 777 (Del.) (viii) ClT v. Neo Poly Pack Pvt. Ltd. - 245 ITR 492 (ix) Parshuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO - 106 ITR 1 (SC)” Thus, the assessee contended that the addition of Rs. 78,51,111/- made by the AO to the income of the assessee needs to be deleted on account of consistency as no new material fact ha…

DCIT Cen Cir 23 Cen RG 7, Mumbai vs. Rasesh B Kanakia, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3193/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 57

…mada Valley Fertilizers Co. Ltd. (2013) 215 Taxman 616 (Gujarat) (iv) Consolidated Fibres & Chemicals Ltd. v. ClT - 273 ITR 353 (Cal.) (v) ClT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody - 115 ITR 516 ITA 3192-3196/Mum/14 10 (vi) ClT v. Sujani Textile Pvt. Ltd. - 151 ITR 653 (vii) ClT v. Amritaben Shah – 238 ITR 777 (Del.) (viii) ClT v. Neo Poly Pack Pvt. Ltd. - 245 ITR 492 (ix) Parshuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO - 106 ITR 1 (SC)” Thus, the assessee contended that the addition of Rs. 78,51,111/- made by the AO to the income of the assessee needs to be deleted on account of consistency as no new material fact ha…

DCIT Cen Cir 23 Cen RG 7, Mumbai vs. Rasesh B.Kanakia, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3192/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 57

…mada Valley Fertilizers Co. Ltd. (2013) 215 Taxman 616 (Gujarat) (iv) Consolidated Fibres & Chemicals Ltd. v. ClT - 273 ITR 353 (Cal.) (v) ClT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody - 115 ITR 516 ITA 3192-3196/Mum/14 10 (vi) ClT v. Sujani Textile Pvt. Ltd. - 151 ITR 653 (vii) ClT v. Amritaben Shah – 238 ITR 777 (Del.) (viii) ClT v. Neo Poly Pack Pvt. Ltd. - 245 ITR 492 (ix) Parshuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO - 106 ITR 1 (SC)” Thus, the assessee contended that the addition of Rs. 78,51,111/- made by the AO to the income of the assessee needs to be deleted on account of consistency as no new material fact ha…

273 ITR 353 (Cal.) (v) ClT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody (151 ITR 653) — Cited in 13 Judgments | BharatTax