Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT

255 ITR 273Supreme Court of India2002#88 most cited

What is Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

For the purpose of computing book profits under Section 115J, arrears of depreciation, including those arising from assets working extra shifts, are a necessary charge on profits if debited to the profit and loss account and are allowable as such.

657

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,735 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Apollo Tyres Ltd v CIT · Section 115J · Section 115JB · book profits · minimum alternate tax · MAT · depreciation arrears · extra shift depreciation · debit to profit and loss account · allowable charge on profits

Also reported as

122 Taxmann 562174 CTR 521

Sections most often in play

Section 115JBSection 14ASection 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 147Section 8DSection 92CA(3)Section 195
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 115jb(2)section 115jabook profitssection 115jsection 115jbsection 35disallowance u/s 14adisallowance under section 14asection 115section 80iasection 32section 14a

Judgments citing Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT

Soma Enterprises Limited, Mumbai vs. The PCIT(Central), Mumbai-1, Mumbai

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

ITA 1137/MUM/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2022AY 2009-10
Section 115JSection 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 154Section 263

…he Act and he cannot tinker with the audited accounts of the assessee which had been approved by the shareholders in Annual General Meeting. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd reported in 255 ITR 273(SC). Hence we hold that the ld. AO had correctly followed the ratio decidendi of Hon’ble Apex Court in Apollo Tyres Ltd referred supra. Hence there cannot be any addition to book profit u/s 115JB of the Act in respect of alleged non- genuine purchases. Accordingly, there cannot be any error in the order of the ld. AO in this regard. Hence the rev…

Bhupati Investments & Finance P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 5(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1134/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhm/S Bhupati Investments Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of & Finance Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax-6 B-34/35, 3Rd Floor, 501, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Paragon Condominium, Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Pandurang Budhkar Road, Marg, Worli, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400013 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaacb0441P Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Aarti Vissanji Respondent By : Ajay Chandra Date Of Hearing 11.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 17.10.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Pr. Cit-6, Mumbai, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The A.O U/S 143(3) Of The Act For A.Y. 2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Pr. Cit) Erred In Passing An Order U/S 263 & Directing The Assessing Officer To Modify The Order Dated 16/12/2019 Passed U/S 143(3) Of Income Tax Act, 1961. Your Appellants Submit That The Order Of The Pr. Cit Is Illegal, Bad In Law & Void & The Same Ought To Be Quashed.

For Appellant: Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Ajay Chandra
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…provision for computation of disallowable expenditure u/s 115JB of the Act. This itself shows that the mechanism of s. 14A (2) cannot be extended to s. 115JB of the Act.  Further, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. vs. CIT [255 ITR 273 (SC)] the Assessing Officer, while computing the income under section 115] (now s 115JB), has very limited powers. What applies to calculation of book profit can reasonably be said to apply also to the quantification of the adjustments provided in various clauses of the Explanation 1. Thus, there is no scope for making any artificial disallowance…

Shree Garuda Plant Products Ltd, Nashik vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1 (2), Nashik

ITA 492/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.492/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shree Garuda Plant Products The Income Tax Officer, Ltd., Vs Ward-1(2), Nashik. B-26, Additional Midc Area, Ambad, Nashik. Pan: Aaacg 0563 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nishint Gandhi – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 20/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 14/10/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Nashik For The Assessment Year 2015-16, Dated 19.02.2019, Emanating Out Of Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 26.12.2017. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1.In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 1, Nashik ["The Cit (A)" For Short] Erred In Confirming The Order Of The Learned Income Tax Officer - 1 (2), Nashik, ["The Ao" For Short] Which Was Passed In Violation Of Principles Of Natural Justice Without Affording A Proper Opportunity Of Being Heard To The Appellant. 2. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Ao In Invoking Section 14A R.W.R. 8D Of The Act, Whereby A Disallowance Of Rs.12,81,831/- Was Made In The Hands Of The Appellant.

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 2Section 2(22)(e)

…to the Assessing Officer to recast the accounts for the purposes of Section 115JB of the Act. The Tribunal, by the impugned order negative the revenue’s contention by relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Apollo Tyres Ltd. V/s C.I.T., reported in 255 ITR 273. It has very pertinently quoted the following observations from Apollo Tyres Ltd. in the impugned order as under: The Assessing Officer, while computing the book profits of a company under section 115J of the Income Tax Act, 1961, has only the power of examining whether the books of account are certified by the authorities under the Companies Ac…

Reliance Industries Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asstt. CIT-CC-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 579/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vice Preside & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh Vora a/wFor Respondent: Shri Chetan M. Kacha, Sr. AR
Section 115JSection 143Section 144C(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 250(6)Section 32Section 92CSection 92C(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDE AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.579/Mum./2021 (Assessment Year : 2016–17) Reliance Industries Ltd. Maker Chamber–IV, 3rd Floor ……………. Appellant 222, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 PAN – AAACR5055K v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax …………….Respondent Central Circle–3(4), Mumbai ITA No.1438/Mum./2021 (Assessment Year : 2016–17) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Central Circle–3(4), Mumbai v/s Reliance Industries Ltd. Maker Chamber–IV, 3rd Floor …………….Respondent 222, Nariman Point…

ACIT -3(4), Mumbai vs. Reliance Industries Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1438/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vice Preside & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh Vora a/wFor Respondent: Shri Chetan M. Kacha, Sr. AR
Section 115JSection 143Section 144C(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 250(6)Section 32Section 92CSection 92C(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDE AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.579/Mum./2021 (Assessment Year : 2016–17) Reliance Industries Ltd. Maker Chamber–IV, 3rd Floor ……………. Appellant 222, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 PAN – AAACR5055K v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax …………….Respondent Central Circle–3(4), Mumbai ITA No.1438/Mum./2021 (Assessment Year : 2016–17) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Central Circle–3(4), Mumbai v/s Reliance Industries Ltd. Maker Chamber–IV, 3rd Floor …………….Respondent 222, Nariman Point…

Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), -4, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1149/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2012-13
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 263Section 92C

…back while computing book profits u/s 115JB of the Act, which had admittedly not done by the ld. PCIT in the instant case. The ld. PCIT has also not applied the ratio decidendi laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd reported in 255 ITR 273 (SC), wherein the ld. AO could not make any additions or deletions beyond what is prescribed in the list of 16 M/s. Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt. Ltd., items as per Explanation 1 to section 115JB (2) of the Act. In the instant case, there is no dispute that the said provision for foreseeable loss has been made in accordance with the guidel…

ACIT Cent. Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. M/S. Aym Syntex Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2550/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asst. Cit Cc-3(3), Central Range-3, M/S Aym Syntex Ltd., Room No. 1923, 19Th Floor, Air India 9Th Floor Trade World, Senapati Building, Nariman Point, Vs. Bapat Marg, Kmala Mills Mumbai-400021. Compound, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400011. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent

Section 14A

…see can only be altered in line with the items enumerated in assessee can only be altered in line with the items enumerated in the section itself (Apollo Tyres Limited the section itself (Apollo Tyres Limited [2002] 122 Taxman 562 [2002] 122 Taxman 562 (SC) / 255 ITR 273 (SC). (SC) / 255 ITR 273 (SC). 8.22 In its submission, the assessee has relied on the above decision In its submission, the assessee has relied on the above decision In its submission, the assessee has relied on the above decision of the Supreme Court to conclude that an item which cannot be of the Supreme Court to conclude that an item which ca…

ACIT- CC -3, Mumbai vs. Aym Syntex Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 2549/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asst. Cit Cc-3(3), Central Range-3, M/S Aym Syntex Ltd., Room No. 1923, 19Th Floor, Air India 9Th Floor Trade World, Senapati Building, Nariman Point, Vs. Bapat Marg, Kmala Mills Mumbai-400021. Compound, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400011. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent

Section 14A

…see can only be altered in line with the items enumerated in assessee can only be altered in line with the items enumerated in the section itself (Apollo Tyres Limited the section itself (Apollo Tyres Limited [2002] 122 Taxman 562 [2002] 122 Taxman 562 (SC) / 255 ITR 273 (SC). (SC) / 255 ITR 273 (SC). 8.22 In its submission, the assessee has relied on the above decision In its submission, the assessee has relied on the above decision In its submission, the assessee has relied on the above decision of the Supreme Court to conclude that an item which cannot be of the Supreme Court to conclude that an item which ca…

Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Known As M/S. Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Mumbai vs. DCIT- CC- 3(4), Mumbai

ITA 2342/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asst. Cit Cc-3(3), Central Range-3, M/S Aym Syntex Ltd., Room No. 1923, 19Th Floor, Air India 9Th Floor Trade World, Senapati Building, Nariman Point, Vs. Bapat Marg, Kmala Mills Mumbai-400021. Compound, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400011. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent

Section 14A

…see can only be altered in line with the items enumerated in assessee can only be altered in line with the items enumerated in the section itself (Apollo Tyres Limited the section itself (Apollo Tyres Limited [2002] 122 Taxman 562 [2002] 122 Taxman 562 (SC) / 255 ITR 273 (SC). (SC) / 255 ITR 273 (SC). 8.22 In its submission, the assessee has relied on the above decision In its submission, the assessee has relied on the above decision In its submission, the assessee has relied on the above decision of the Supreme Court to conclude that an item which cannot be of the Supreme Court to conclude that an item which ca…

M/S. Aym Syntex Ltd (Formerly Known As M/S. Welspun Syntex Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT -Cent Cir-3(4), Mumbai

ITA 2341/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asst. Cit Cc-3(3), Central Range-3, M/S Aym Syntex Ltd., Room No. 1923, 19Th Floor, Air India 9Th Floor Trade World, Senapati Building, Nariman Point, Vs. Bapat Marg, Kmala Mills Mumbai-400021. Compound, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400011. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent

Section 14A

…see can only be altered in line with the items enumerated in assessee can only be altered in line with the items enumerated in the section itself (Apollo Tyres Limited the section itself (Apollo Tyres Limited [2002] 122 Taxman 562 [2002] 122 Taxman 562 (SC) / 255 ITR 273 (SC). (SC) / 255 ITR 273 (SC). 8.22 In its submission, the assessee has relied on the above decision In its submission, the assessee has relied on the above decision In its submission, the assessee has relied on the above decision of the Supreme Court to conclude that an item which cannot be of the Supreme Court to conclude that an item which ca…

Aym Syntex Ltd.(Formerly Known As M/S. Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Mumbai vs. DCIT- CC- 3(3), Mumbai

ITA 2340/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Aym Syntex Ltd. (Formerly Dcit-Central Circel-3(3), Known As M/S Welspun Syntex Ltd.), Air India Building Nariman 9Th Floor, B Wing, Trade World, Vs. Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asst. Cit Cc-3(3), Central Range-3, M/S Aym Syntex Ltd., Room No. 1923, 19Th Floor, Air India 9Th Floor Trade World, Senapati Building, Nariman Point, Vs. Bapat Marg, Kmala Mills Mumbai-400021. Compound, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400011. Pan No. Aaacw 0489 L Appellant Respondent

Section 14A

…see can only be altered in line with the items enumerated in assessee can only be altered in line with the items enumerated in the section itself (Apollo Tyres Limited the section itself (Apollo Tyres Limited [2002] 122 Taxman 562 [2002] 122 Taxman 562 (SC) / 255 ITR 273 (SC). (SC) / 255 ITR 273 (SC). 8.22 In its submission, the assessee has relied on the above decision In its submission, the assessee has relied on the above decision In its submission, the assessee has relied on the above decision of the Supreme Court to conclude that an item which cannot be of the Supreme Court to conclude that an item which ca…

ACIT, Ltu, Circle-1, New Delhi vs. Jindal Poly Films Ltd., New Delhi

In the result the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes and by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

ITA 7511/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 10(34)Section 14Section 14ASection 250(6)

…the provisions of the Companies Act and Accounting Standard -12 and no interference/tinkering on this account was warranted. The Assessee in support of its case also relied on the judgment passed by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. vs. CIT 225 ITR 273 (SC). 7.2 The Assessing Officer not being satisfied with the claim/contention of the Assessee while analysing schedule III to the Companies Act, 2013 which was introduced w.e.f. 01.04.2014 and applicable from 01.04.2014 and Part II of the said schedule which prescribes form of “statement of profit and loss”, which specifically requires disclosur…

Jindal Poly Films Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Ltu, Circle-1, New Delhi

In the result the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes and by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

ITA 7464/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 10(34)Section 14Section 14ASection 250(6)

…the provisions of the Companies Act and Accounting Standard -12 and no interference/tinkering on this account was warranted. The Assessee in support of its case also relied on the judgment passed by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. vs. CIT 225 ITR 273 (SC). 7.2 The Assessing Officer not being satisfied with the claim/contention of the Assessee while analysing schedule III to the Companies Act, 2013 which was introduced w.e.f. 01.04.2014 and applicable from 01.04.2014 and Part II of the said schedule which prescribes form of “statement of profit and loss”, which specifically requires disclosur…

ACIT, Central Circle-3, New Delhi vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed and that of the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 4873/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh.Ved Jain, Ld. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Sapna Bhatia, Ld. CIT/DR
Section 143(2)Section 250Section 80I

…appellant by the decision of Hon’ble ITAT, Bangalore in the case of B&B Infotech Ltd., 155 ITD 1040. The ld. Commissioner further held that the issue is also covered against the appellant by the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd., 255 ITR 273. The Assessee before us submitted that for bringing to tax under MAT provisions, the first and foremost condition is that such a receipt should be first held as an income under the charging section and if it is not an income, then the same cannot be brought to tax under the MAT provisions also. Further what cannot be taxed directly, cannot be tax…

M/S. Insecticides (India) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed and that of the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 3297/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh.Ved Jain, Ld. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Sapna Bhatia, Ld. CIT/DR
Section 143(2)Section 250Section 80I

…appellant by the decision of Hon’ble ITAT, Bangalore in the case of B&B Infotech Ltd., 155 ITD 1040. The ld. Commissioner further held that the issue is also covered against the appellant by the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd., 255 ITR 273. The Assessee before us submitted that for bringing to tax under MAT provisions, the first and foremost condition is that such a receipt should be first held as an income under the charging section and if it is not an income, then the same cannot be brought to tax under the MAT provisions also. Further what cannot be taxed directly, cannot be tax…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle-1(3), Bangalore vs. M/S. Manyata Promoters Private Limited (Erstwhile Embassy Office Parks Private Limited ), Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes, while the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 573/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, CAFor Respondent: Shri V S Chakrapani, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14ASection 154Section 232

…tted that the computation of book profits by making addition on account of disallowance u/s. 14A cannot be treated as a mistake apparent on record and hence cannot be rectified u/s. 154 and relied on the following decisions:- - Apollo Tyres Ltd v. CIT (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC) - Vireet Investments [2017] 82 taxmann.com 415 (Del Trib) - Golf Links Software Parks P. Ltd. v. DCIT, ITA No.333/Bang/2017 13. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We notice that the CIT(Appeals) while allowing the issue in favour of the assessee has considered the issue both from the point of view, w…

M/S. Manyata Promoters Private Limited (Erstwhile Embassy Office Parks Private Limited Since Merged With Manyata Promoters Private Limited), Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD)- Central Circle-1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes, while the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 548/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, CAFor Respondent: Shri V S Chakrapani, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14ASection 154Section 232

…tted that the computation of book profits by making addition on account of disallowance u/s. 14A cannot be treated as a mistake apparent on record and hence cannot be rectified u/s. 154 and relied on the following decisions:- - Apollo Tyres Ltd v. CIT (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC) - Vireet Investments [2017] 82 taxmann.com 415 (Del Trib) - Golf Links Software Parks P. Ltd. v. DCIT, ITA No.333/Bang/2017 13. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We notice that the CIT(Appeals) while allowing the issue in favour of the assessee has considered the issue both from the point of view, w…

The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Kansara Popatlal Tribhovandas Metal Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed while the Cross

ITA 412/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri M.J. Shah, AR &For Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr DR
Section 143(2)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘A’ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 412/Ahd/2018 & CO No. 17/Ahd/2019 Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner of Kansara Popatlal Tribhovandas Income-tax, Vs Metal Pvt. Ltd., Circle 2(1)(2), 1820/2, Satej Khatraj Road, Tal. Ahmedabad Kalol, Dist. Gandhinagar PAN : AABCK 2339 N (Appellant) (Responde…

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

ITA 1621/CHNY/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha(अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) S.

For Appellant: Mr. Percy J. PardiwallaFor Respondent: Mr. M.Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 195Section 3Section 40Section 5

…unexpired risk and no adjustment is permitted to such profits other than those listed in Explanation 1 to section 115JB of the Act. Reliance in this regard is rightly placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd reported in 255 ITR 273 (SC). 12. We further find that the premium deficiency of Rs 773000 has been allowed by the ld. AO under the normal provisions of the Act but the same has been added back while computing book profits ITA Nos. 40/Chny/2009, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011, 1366/Chny/2013 & 949 to 951/Chny/2018 u/s 115JB of the Act. As stated supra, this is not an item conte…

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

ITA 1620/CHNY/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha(अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) S.

For Appellant: Mr. Percy J. PardiwallaFor Respondent: Mr. M.Swaminathan, Sr.Standing
Section 195Section 3Section 40Section 5

…unexpired risk and no adjustment is permitted to such profits other than those listed in Explanation 1 to section 115JB of the Act. Reliance in this regard is rightly placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd reported in 255 ITR 273 (SC). 12. We further find that the premium deficiency of Rs 773000 has been allowed by the ld. AO under the normal provisions of the Act but the same has been added back while computing book profits ITA Nos. 40/Chny/2009, 1759 & 1676/Chny/2011, 1366/Chny/2013 & 949 to 951/Chny/2018 u/s 115JB of the Act. As stated supra, this is not an item conte…