What is A.V. Thomas and Co. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

For a bad debt to be allowable as a deduction, it must be a debt that, if good, would have increased the taxable profits. An expenditure for running a school for employees' children in a remote area can be considered an allowable expenditure for the welfare of employees.

How many judgments cite A.V. Thomas and Co. Ltd. v. CIT?

27 judgments on BharatTax cite A.V. Thomas and Co. Ltd. v. CIT (48 ITR 67), spanning 2017 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does A.V. Thomas and Co. Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 144C(13), Section 144C(5), Section 234B, Section 270A, Section 28.

A.V. Thomas and Co. Ltd. v. CIT (48 ITR 67)

Metso Oyj, Finland vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (International Taxation), Circle-1(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed and the order of the Ld

ITA 616/KOL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 270ASection 56Section 9

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 616/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Metso OYJ ACIT, (International Taxation), Circle-1(2), Vs. Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCO2957Q Appearances: Assessee represented by : K.M. Gupta, AR. Department represented by : Praveen Kishore, CIT, DR. Date of concluding the hearing : 11-June-2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 25-August-2025 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the…

Ajitsinh Takhatsinh Baraiya, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1213/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Jignesh Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 28Section 36

…found that no such amount was deposited under the PF or ESIC by the assessee. When the AO confronted the appellant, the appellant changed the stand that it is a bad debt. The AO relied upon the judgements of SC in the cases of i) A.V. Thomas & CO, Ltd. V. CIT 48 ITR 67 ii) CIT vs Coates of India Ltd. 232 ITR 324 and made the addition. 6.1.1 Now before me in the appellate proceedings, the appellant has filed written submission. The appellant has stated that the expenses are not related to PF and ESIC but also to Canteen expenses and bus fare. Hence it is clear that the time and again the appellant is changing his…

Siddhayu Aaurvedic Research Foundation Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/ACIT/ITO/NFAC/// the ACIT Circle 34(3) (2), Delhi

In the result this appeal is dismissed with costs

ITA 745/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Gagan Goyalsiddhayu Aayurvedic Research Foundation Pvt. Ltd., C/704, Pramukh Plaza, Cardinal Gracious Road, Chakala, Andheri East, Mumbai-400 069. Pan No. Aaacs8335F ..... Appellant Vs. Acit Circle 4(3) (2) Aaykar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash Singh, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri K. C. Selvamani, Ld. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 234BSection 270ASection 271ASection 28Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Siddhayu Aayurvedic Research Foundation Pvt. Ltd., C/704, Pramukh Plaza, Cardinal Gracious Road, Chakala, Andheri East, Mumbai-400 069. PAN No. AAACS8335F ..... Appellant Vs. ACIT Circle 4(3) (2) Aaykar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. ..... Respondent Appellant by : Shri Satyaprakash Singh, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri K. C. Selvamani, Ld. DR Date of hearing : 19/08/2024 Date of pronouncement : 24/09/2024 ORDER PER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M: This appeal by assessee is d…

Shri. Moolchand Kiran Kumar Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1(4), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment years 2020-21 & 2021-22 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1418/CHNY/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1417 & 1418/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22 Shri. Moolchand Kiran Kumar Deputy Commissioner Of Jain, V. Income-Tax, No. 123, Usman Road, Central Circle 1(4), T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Achpm-2247-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. D. Anand, Advocate : Shri. V. Nandakumar, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.03.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.04.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. D. Anand, Advocate

Section 153ASection 28Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 37Section 37(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी मंजुनाथा. जी, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1417 & 1418/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22 Shri. Moolchand Kiran Kumar Deputy Commissioner of Jain, v. Income-tax, No. 123, Usman Road, Central Circle 1(4), T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. Chennai – 600 034. [PAN: ACHPM-2247-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri…

Shri. Moolchand Kiran Kumar Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1(4), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment years 2020-21 & 2021-22 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1417/CHNY/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1417 & 1418/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22 Shri. Moolchand Kiran Kumar Deputy Commissioner Of Jain, V. Income-Tax, No. 123, Usman Road, Central Circle 1(4), T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Achpm-2247-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. D. Anand, Advocate : Shri. V. Nandakumar, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.03.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.04.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. D. Anand, Advocate

Section 153ASection 28Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 37Section 37(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी मंजुनाथा. जी, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1417 & 1418/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22 Shri. Moolchand Kiran Kumar Deputy Commissioner of Jain, v. Income-tax, No. 123, Usman Road, Central Circle 1(4), T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. Chennai – 600 034. [PAN: ACHPM-2247-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri…

Tata Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT Circle- 2 (3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 217/MUM/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Section 115Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 80G

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘E‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. Tata Industries Limited Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Bombay House, Income Tax, Circle 2(3)(1) 24, Homi Mody Street Mumbai Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 PAN/GIR No.AAACT4058L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Jt. CIT (OSD)- Vs. M/s. Tata Industries Limited 2(3)(1) Bombay House, Broom No.552, 5th Floor 24, Homi Mody Street Aayakar Bhavan Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 M.K.Road, Mumbai- 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AAACT4058L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Percy Pardiwala, Ms. Aarti…

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2281/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT

Section 143(3)

…e business of the assessee to run a school and accordingly, construction expenditure at the best can be held to be capital in nature. For this, ld.CIT-DR relied on the case laws of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A.V. Thomas and Co. Ltd., vs. CIT, [1963] 48 ITR 67(SC) and CIT vs. Amalgamation (P) Ltd., [1997] 92 taxmann 132 (SC). 13.3 We noted that no doubt the assessee is not in the business of running an educational institute but the assessee’s employees numbering more than 850 are residing in remote area where their children cannot go to school as there is no nearby school in the rural area. According to…

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2280/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT

Section 143(3)

…e business of the assessee to run a school and accordingly, construction expenditure at the best can be held to be capital in nature. For this, ld.CIT-DR relied on the case laws of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A.V. Thomas and Co. Ltd., vs. CIT, [1963] 48 ITR 67(SC) and CIT vs. Amalgamation (P) Ltd., [1997] 92 taxmann 132 (SC). 13.3 We noted that no doubt the assessee is not in the business of running an educational institute but the assessee’s employees numbering more than 850 are residing in remote area where their children cannot go to school as there is no nearby school in the rural area. According to…

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2279/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT

Section 143(3)

…e business of the assessee to run a school and accordingly, construction expenditure at the best can be held to be capital in nature. For this, ld.CIT-DR relied on the case laws of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A.V. Thomas and Co. Ltd., vs. CIT, [1963] 48 ITR 67(SC) and CIT vs. Amalgamation (P) Ltd., [1997] 92 taxmann 132 (SC). 13.3 We noted that no doubt the assessee is not in the business of running an educational institute but the assessee’s employees numbering more than 850 are residing in remote area where their children cannot go to school as there is no nearby school in the rural area. According to…

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2278/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT

Section 143(3)

…e business of the assessee to run a school and accordingly, construction expenditure at the best can be held to be capital in nature. For this, ld.CIT-DR relied on the case laws of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A.V. Thomas and Co. Ltd., vs. CIT, [1963] 48 ITR 67(SC) and CIT vs. Amalgamation (P) Ltd., [1997] 92 taxmann 132 (SC). 13.3 We noted that no doubt the assessee is not in the business of running an educational institute but the assessee’s employees numbering more than 850 are residing in remote area where their children cannot go to school as there is no nearby school in the rural area. According to…

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2277/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT

Section 143(3)

…e business of the assessee to run a school and accordingly, construction expenditure at the best can be held to be capital in nature. For this, ld.CIT-DR relied on the case laws of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A.V. Thomas and Co. Ltd., vs. CIT, [1963] 48 ITR 67(SC) and CIT vs. Amalgamation (P) Ltd., [1997] 92 taxmann 132 (SC). 13.3 We noted that no doubt the assessee is not in the business of running an educational institute but the assessee’s employees numbering more than 850 are residing in remote area where their children cannot go to school as there is no nearby school in the rural area. According to…

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2276/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT

Section 143(3)

…e business of the assessee to run a school and accordingly, construction expenditure at the best can be held to be capital in nature. For this, ld.CIT-DR relied on the case laws of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A.V. Thomas and Co. Ltd., vs. CIT, [1963] 48 ITR 67(SC) and CIT vs. Amalgamation (P) Ltd., [1997] 92 taxmann 132 (SC). 13.3 We noted that no doubt the assessee is not in the business of running an educational institute but the assessee’s employees numbering more than 850 are residing in remote area where their children cannot go to school as there is no nearby school in the rural area. According to…

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2275/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT

Section 143(3)

…e business of the assessee to run a school and accordingly, construction expenditure at the best can be held to be capital in nature. For this, ld.CIT-DR relied on the case laws of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A.V. Thomas and Co. Ltd., vs. CIT, [1963] 48 ITR 67(SC) and CIT vs. Amalgamation (P) Ltd., [1997] 92 taxmann 132 (SC). 13.3 We noted that no doubt the assessee is not in the business of running an educational institute but the assessee’s employees numbering more than 850 are residing in remote area where their children cannot go to school as there is no nearby school in the rural area. According to…

M/S. V.V.Vanniaperumal & Sons, Virudhunagar vs. PCIT-2, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1765/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT

Section 143(3)

…e business of the assessee to run a school and accordingly, construction expenditure at the best can be held to be capital in nature. For this, ld.CIT-DR relied on the case laws of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A.V. Thomas and Co. Ltd., vs. CIT, [1963] 48 ITR 67(SC) and CIT vs. Amalgamation (P) Ltd., [1997] 92 taxmann 132 (SC). 13.3 We noted that no doubt the assessee is not in the business of running an educational institute but the assessee’s employees numbering more than 850 are residing in remote area where their children cannot go to school as there is no nearby school in the rural area. According to…

Pranava Electronics P Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-12(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 415/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, Advocate and Ms. Girija, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshini Mishra, Addl. CIT

Section 115JSection 14Section 14ASection 234BSection 37(1)

…siness and to be incidental to it. If that is established, then the deduction must be allowed, provided of course there is no prohibition against it, express or implied, in the Act.’’ (6) The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A.V.Thomas & Co Ltd vs CIT in 48 ITR 67 has held as reproduced as hereunder: ‘’7……..Sec. 10(2)(xi) is in two parts. One part deals with an assessee who carries on the business of a banker or money- lender. Another part deals with business other than the aforesaid. Since this was not a loan by a banker or money-lender, the debt to be a debt proper had to be one which if good would have sw…

Refex Industries Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 5(3), Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 2939/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar (CA) – Ld ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Palani Kumar, Ld. CIT - DR

Section 143(3)Section 32

…s sought to counter the arguments of Ld. AR. It has been submitted that clauses in Memorandum of Association do not support the case of the assessee. The Ld. CIT-DR has referred to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A.V.Thomas & Co. V/s ITO (48 ITR 67) which held that Memorandum of Association is not a conclusive proof as to the real nature of transaction and the nature of transaction has to be deduced not from the Memorandum but from the circumstance in which the transaction took place. There could be no quarrel as to this proposition. In fact, our adjudication is not based on the clauses in th…

Refex Industries Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 5(3), Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 2938/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar (CA) – Ld ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Palani Kumar, Ld. CIT - DR

Section 143(3)Section 32

…s sought to counter the arguments of Ld. AR. It has been submitted that clauses in Memorandum of Association do not support the case of the assessee. The Ld. CIT-DR has referred to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A.V.Thomas & Co. V/s ITO (48 ITR 67) which held that Memorandum of Association is not a conclusive proof as to the real nature of transaction and the nature of transaction has to be deduced not from the Memorandum but from the circumstance in which the transaction took place. There could be no quarrel as to this proposition. In fact, our adjudication is not based on the clauses in th…

DCIT Cir 3, Thane vs. Sequent Scientific Ltd, Thane

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 14/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ravish Soodassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri H.P. Mahajani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri T.S. Khalsa, D.R

Section 10B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 DCIT, Circle -3, M/s. Sequent Scientific Room No.02, Ltd., 6th Floor, Ashar IT Park, (formerly known as PI B-Wing, Drugs Pharmaceuticals Wagle Indl. Estate, Vs. Ltd.) Thane (W)- 400 604 301, Dosti Pinnacle, Plot No.E-7, Road No.22, WIE, Thane –(W) 400 601 PAN: AAACV1501G (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri H.P. Mahajani, A.R. Revenue by : Shri T.S. Khalsa, D.R. Date of Hearing : 14.07.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 27.07.2021…

The DCIT, Circle-4, Ahmedabad vs. Ghcl Limited, Ahmedabad

ITA 976/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIR-D.R. &

Section 143(2)Section 144C(2)(b)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 92C

…e u/s. I.T.A Nos. 976/Ahd/2014 & 10 others Page No 29 Dy. CIT vs. GHCL Ltd. & 10 others 37(1} of the IT Act, and it can in no way be considered as capital loss. This finding is also supported by the decisions in following cases: (a) CITvs. Amalaamated Ltd. (92 Taxmann 132) SC In this case, the Supreme Court was concerned with a case where 'the assessee's business Includes furnishing guarantee to debts' borrowed by subsidiary companies'. It was held that the guarantee devolvement liability which fell upon the assessee In respect of a newly acquired subsidiary was in the course of the taxpayer's business and henc…

Ghcl Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-4, Ahmedabad

ITA 1042/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIR-D.R. &

Section 143(2)Section 144C(2)(b)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 92C

…e u/s. I.T.A Nos. 976/Ahd/2014 & 10 others Page No 29 Dy. CIT vs. GHCL Ltd. & 10 others 37(1} of the IT Act, and it can in no way be considered as capital loss. This finding is also supported by the decisions in following cases: (a) CITvs. Amalaamated Ltd. (92 Taxmann 132) SC In this case, the Supreme Court was concerned with a case where 'the assessee's business Includes furnishing guarantee to debts' borrowed by subsidiary companies'. It was held that the guarantee devolvement liability which fell upon the assessee In respect of a newly acquired subsidiary was in the course of the taxpayer's business and henc…

A.V. Thomas and Co. Ltd. v. CIT

What is A.V. Thomas and Co. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing A.V. Thomas and Co. Ltd. v. CIT

Metso Oyj, Finland vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (International Taxation), Circle-1(2), Kolkata

Ajitsinh Takhatsinh Baraiya, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(2)(1), Ahmedabad

Siddhayu Aaurvedic Research Foundation Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/ACIT/ITO/NFAC/// the ACIT Circle 34(3) (2), Delhi

Shri. Moolchand Kiran Kumar Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1(4), Chennai

Shri. Moolchand Kiran Kumar Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1(4), Chennai

Tata Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT Circle- 2 (3)(1), Mumbai

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

M/S. V.V.Vanniaperumal & Sons, Virudhunagar vs. PCIT-2, Chennai

Pranava Electronics P Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-12(2), Bangalore

Refex Industries Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 5(3), Chennai

Refex Industries Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 5(3), Chennai

DCIT Cir 3, Thane vs. Sequent Scientific Ltd, Thane

The DCIT, Circle-4, Ahmedabad vs. Ghcl Limited, Ahmedabad

Ghcl Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-4, Ahmedabad