Alfa Laval India Ltd. v. DCIT

266 ITR 418High Court2004#2059 most cited

What is Alfa Laval India Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

A deduction for obsolete inventory or provision for obsolete stock is permissible under Section 37(1) if justified by a certified auditor's report and valued at cost or market price/net realizable value, whichever is lower, with consistent valuation in subsequent years.

56

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Alfa Laval India Ltd. v. DCIT · Section 37(1) · obsolete inventory deduction · obsolete stock valuation · closing stock valuation · cost or market value lower · auditor's report · net realizable value

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Alfa Laval India Ltd. v. DCIT

The ACIT, Circle-1(2), Baroda vs. M/S. Fag Bearings India Ltd., Vadodara

ITA 551/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.R
Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(9)Section 92C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘डी’, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’D’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.4565/AHD/2007 – AY 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1529/AHD/2009 – AY 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1256/AHD/2012 – AY 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.1941/AHD/2012 – AY 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.551/AHD/2016 – AY 2009-10 1-4. A.C.I.T/DCIT 1-4. M/s FAG Bearing India Ltd., Circle-1(2), At & PO. Maneja, Vs. Baroda-390010. Baroda. PAN: AAACF 3357 Q (Applicant) (Respondent) And…

M/S. Fag Bearings India Ltd., Baroda vs. The ACIT., Circle-1(2), (Tpo), Baroda

ITA 2061/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.R
Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(9)Section 92C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘डी’, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’D’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.4565/AHD/2007 – AY 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1529/AHD/2009 – AY 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1256/AHD/2012 – AY 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.1941/AHD/2012 – AY 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.551/AHD/2016 – AY 2009-10 1-4. A.C.I.T/DCIT 1-4. M/s FAG Bearing India Ltd., Circle-1(2), At & PO. Maneja, Vs. Baroda-390010. Baroda. PAN: AAACF 3357 Q (Applicant) (Respondent) And…

M/S. Fag Bearings India Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-1(2), Baroda

ITA 1197/AHD/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4565/Ahd/2007 – Ay 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1529/Ahd/2009 – Ay 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1256/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.1941/Ahd/2012 – Ay 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No.551/Ahd/2016 – Ay 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.R
Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(9)Section 92C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘डी’, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’D’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.4565/AHD/2007 – AY 2004-05 2. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1529/AHD/2009 – AY 2005-06 3. आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1256/AHD/2012 – AY 2007-08 4. आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.1941/AHD/2012 – AY 2008-09 5. आयकर अपील सं./IT(TP)A No.551/AHD/2016 – AY 2009-10 1-4. A.C.I.T/DCIT 1-4. M/s FAG Bearing India Ltd., Circle-1(2), At & PO. Maneja, Vs. Baroda-390010. Baroda. PAN: AAACF 3357 Q (Applicant) (Respondent) And…

DCIT 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Rallis India Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 456/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri R. C. Sharma, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 456/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2009-10) Dcit 3(3)(1) M/S Rallis India Ltd Room No. 609, 6Th Floor, Aayakar बिधम/ 156/157, Nariman Bhavan, M.K. Road, Bhavan, Nariman Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Point, Mumbai-400 021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabcr2657N (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : C.O. No. 117/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S Rallis India Ltd Dcit 3(3)(1) Room No. 609, 6Th 156/157, Nariman Bhavan, बिधम/ Nariman Point, Floor, Aayakar Vs. Mumbai-400 021 Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2728/Mum/2014 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2009-10) M/S Rallis India Ltd Dcit 3(3)(1) Room No. 609, 6Th 156/157, Nariman Bhavan, बिधम/ Nariman Point, Floor, Aayakar Vs. Mumbai-400 021 Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri A. MohanFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Jain /H
Section 143(3)Section 263

…of 2012); CIT v. Hotline Teletube & Components Ltd. (Del) (ITA 694/2008); CIT v. Wolkem India Ltd. (315 ITR 211 (Raj); IAC v. Consolidated Pneumatic Tool Co. India Ltd. (15 ITD 564) (Born); A.L.A. Firm v. CIT (189 ITR 285) (SC); Alfa Laval India Ltd. v. DCIT (266 ITR 418) (Born); DCIT v. Indroyal Fumiture Co. P. Ltd. (2 ITR (Trib) 628) (Cochin). It was stated that first two judgments specifically deal with the issue of provision for diminution in the value of stock. It was thus stated that the disallowance be deleted.” 17. The ld. DR vehemently submitted before us that the order of ld.CIT(A) was against the prov…

DCIT - 3(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Kuoni Travels (I) Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, Ground no.5 & 6 of the appeal are dismissed

ITA 1924/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2018AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran,Accountant Mamber & Shri Pawan Singhdcit 3(3)(1), M/S Sotc Travel Services Pvt. Room No. 609, 6Th Floor, Ltd. (Previously Known As Kuoni Aayakar Bhavan, Travels (India) Pvt. Ltd.),Now Mumbai-400020. Vs. Merged With Travel Corporation (India) Ltd. Kuoni House, N.F. Road, Behind Taj Mahal Hotel, Colaba, Mumbai-400001 Pan: Aaacs0170L (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S Sotc Travel Services Pvt. Dcit 3(3)(1), Room No. 609, 6Th Floor, Ltd. (Previously Known As Kuoni Travels (India) Pvt. Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd.),Now Merged With Travel Mumbai-400020. Corporation (India) Ltd. Kuoni Vs. House, N.F. Road, Behind Taj Mahal Hotel, Colaba, Mumbai-400001 Pan: Aaacs0170L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri S. Padmaja CIT –DR with & with Ms Pooja Swaroop ( Sr
Section 253Section 254(1)Section 80HSection 8O

…sset allowing depreciation. The ld. CIT(A) upheld the same without considering the relevant provision of law. In support of his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Alpha Laval India Ltd. vs. DCIT (266 ITR 418)and the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT vs. IAEC (Pumps) Ltd. (232 ITR 316). On the other hand, the ld. ITA No.1924 & 2075/M/2007- Kuoni Travels (India) Pvt. Ltd. DR for the Revenue supported the order of authorities below. The ld. DR argued that the assessee made the payment for use of brand for a period of 5½ years. The agreement fo…