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 367,518 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

DCIT, Circle-7(1), Delhi vs. Dlf Limited, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 715/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl.No. ITA No. AY Name of Name of Appellant Respondent 1. 713/Del/2024 2019-20 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 2. 714/Del/2024 2020-21 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 3. 715/Del/2024 2021-22 DCIT, DLF Limite…

DCIT, Circle-7(1), Delhi vs. Dlf Limited, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 714/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl.No. ITA No. AY Name of Name of Appellant Respondent 1. 713/Del/2024 2019-20 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 2. 714/Del/2024 2020-21 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 3. 715/Del/2024 2021-22 DCIT, DLF Limite…

DCIT, Circle-7(1), Delhi vs. Dlf Limited, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 713/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl.No. ITA No. AY Name of Name of Appellant Respondent 1. 713/Del/2024 2019-20 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 2. 714/Del/2024 2020-21 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 3. 715/Del/2024 2021-22 DCIT, DLF Limite…

Dlf Limited, Delhi vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 677/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl.No. ITA No. AY Name of Name of Appellant Respondent 1. 713/Del/2024 2019-20 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 2. 714/Del/2024 2020-21 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 3. 715/Del/2024 2021-22 DCIT, DLF Limite…

Dlf Limited, Delhi vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 676/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl.No. ITA No. AY Name of Name of Appellant Respondent 1. 713/Del/2024 2019-20 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 2. 714/Del/2024 2020-21 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 3. 715/Del/2024 2021-22 DCIT, DLF Limite…

DCIT, Circle-1, Faridabad, Income Tax Department vs. Nhpc Limited, Faridabad

In the result, both the appeals for AYs 2017-18 & 2018-19 filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2652/DEL/2023[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 80Section 801ASection 80I

…ell settled through judicial pronouncements that section 115JB is a self-contained code, and only specific adjustments provided in the Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2) can be made to the book profits. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT [(2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC)] “Assessing Officer has no power to tinker with the profit declared in the Profit and Loss Account prepared in accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act, except to the extent provided in the Explanation to section 115J.”  No Scope for Importing Section 14A into Section 115JB (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2), which refers t…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Faridabad, Income Tax Department vs. Nhpc Limited, Faridabad

In the result, both the appeals for AYs 2017-18 & 2018-19 filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2651/DEL/2023[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 80Section 801ASection 80I

…ell settled through judicial pronouncements that section 115JB is a self-contained code, and only specific adjustments provided in the Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2) can be made to the book profits. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT [(2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC)] “Assessing Officer has no power to tinker with the profit declared in the Profit and Loss Account prepared in accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act, except to the extent provided in the Explanation to section 115J.”  No Scope for Importing Section 14A into Section 115JB (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2), which refers t…

Vodafone Idea Ltd. (Earlier Knwon As Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd.), Mumbai vs. ACIT, . Circle-26(2), New Delhi

In the result, all above said grounds are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8361/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shriyogesh Kumar U.S.Vodafone Idea Ltd Vs. Acit, (Earlier Known As Vodafone Circle-26(2), Mobile Services Ltd) New Delhi 10Th Floor, Birla Centurion, Century Mills Compound, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbai, Maharastra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacb2100P

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S. K,. Jadav, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…her we observed that the AO cannot make any adjustments to the net profits of the company for the year other than those prescribed in Explanation 1 to Section 115JB(2) of the Act as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres v/s. CIT (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC) wherein a three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court has held that while computing income under section 115J, the assessing officer has no jurisdiction to question the Vodafone Idea Ltd net profit shown in the profit and loss account, except to the extent of making adjustments specifically permitted under the Explanation to the said section, an…

DCIT Cir-5(1), Kolkata vs. Dhunseri Ventures Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1780/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata..……………………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. M/S Dhunseri Ventures Ltd…………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent 4A, Dhunseri House, Woodburn Park, Kol - 700020.. [Pan: Aabck1597K] Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 08, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 16, 2025

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14ASection 250

…profits tax u/s 115JB of the Act which was rendered after considering the decisions of Hyderabad Special Bench in Rain Commodities Rain Commodities Ltd vs DCIT, 41 DTR 449, and the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Apollo Tyres Ltd. vs. CIT (2002) reported in 255 ITR 273 (SC). The Hon'ble Kolkata Tribunal also in the case of Binani Industries Ltd., vs DCIT issued in favour of assessee as detailed under : The issue in the above case was raised as under : "The last issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether, the forfeiture of share warrants amounting to Rs. 12,65,75,000/-, being a capital receipt, would be…

Te Connectivity India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Office of the Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2346/BANG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Darpan Kriplani, CAFor Respondent: Dr. KJ Dhivya, CIT (DR)

…it was held that when accounts or returns are accepted by competent authorities under one statute, the income tax authorities cannot take a contradictory view on the same issue without cogent reasons. Similarly, reference was made to Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT [255 ITR 273 (SC)], where it was reiterated that once the accounts are certified by the competent statutory authorities, the income tax authorities are bound by the same unless otherwise varied by law. In the assessee’s case, the IT(TP)A No.2346/Bang/2024 Page 28 of 44 receipt of services and payment of Concur and corporate service charges have already been…

Lupin Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 3, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3257/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanassessment Year : 2019-20 Lupin Limited, Principal Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Kalpataru Inspire, Income Tax-3, Off Western Express Highway, Vs. Room No. 612, 6Th Floor, Santacruz (East), Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400055. Maharshi Karve Road, Pan : Aaacl1069K Mumbai-400020. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajan Vora & Shri Pranay Gandhi Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 43(6)

…17) 87 taxmann.com 215 (Guj HC); v. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. ACIT (2024) 162 taxmann.com 220 (Ahd); vi. PCIT v. Vaibhav Global Ltd. (2023) 151 taxmann.com 114 (Raj) [SLP dismissed in (2023) 151 taxmann.com 115 (SC), vii. Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT [(2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC)] 16 viii. CIT v. Kirloskar Systems Ltd. [(2014) 220 Taxman 0001 (Karnataka)] ix. CIT v. Saint Gobain Glass India Ltd [[2020] 269 Taxman 610 (Madras HC)] x. CIT v. Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd [2016] 74 taxmann. com 163 (Gujarat HC) Affirmed in [2025] 171 taxmann.com 48 (SC)) xi. Asian Paints Limited [ITA No. 2700/Mum/2023, 2697/Mum…

JCIT (OSD) -3(4), Mumbai vs. Sterlite Technologies Limited, Aurangabad

In the result, appeals of both, the Revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 612/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17 Sterlite Technologies Limited Principle Commissioner Of E-1 Waluj, Midc Industrial Income Tax- 27, Vs. Area, Aurangabad - 431136 Navi Mumbai Maharashtra (Pan: Aaecs8719B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Principle Commissioner Of Sterlite Technologies Limited Income Tax- 27, E-1 Waluj, Midc Industrial Vs. Navi Mumbai Area, Aurangabad - 431136 Maharashtra (Pan: Aaecs8719B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Nikhil Tiwari & Ms. Palak Mehta, Cas Revenue : Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Cit Dr & Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Pune, Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/M/250/2023-24/1058725938(1), Dated Sterlite Technologies Ltd. Ay 2016-17 13.12.2023 Passed Against The Assessment Order By Acit, Ltu, Circle- 1, Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 21.12.2018 For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: 1.1 Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Learned Assessing Officer ('Ao') In Not Allowing The Claim Of Appellant That The Rate Of Ddt In Respect Of Dividend Distributed To Its Overseas Holding Company Ought To Be Restricted To The Rate Of Tax Of 5% Prescribed Under Article 10(2) Of Applicable India- Mauritius Dtaa & That The Appellant Is Eligible For Refund Of Ddt Paid In Excess Of Such Rate.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Tiwari and Ms. Palak Mehta, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, CIT DR and Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sterlite Technologies Limited Principle Commissioner of E-1 Waluj, MIDC Industrial Income Tax- 27, Vs. Area, Aurangabad - 431136 Navi Mumbai Maharashtra (PAN: AAECS8719B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Principle Commissioner of Sterlite Technologies Limited Income Tax- 27, E-1 Waluj, MIDC Industrial Vs. Navi Mumbai Area, Aurangabad - 431136 Maharashtra (PAN: AAECS8719B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: assessee : Shri Nikhil Tiwa…

Sterlite Technologies Limited, Aurangabad vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu Circle 1, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of both, the Revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 584/MUM/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17 Sterlite Technologies Limited Principle Commissioner Of E-1 Waluj, Midc Industrial Income Tax- 27, Vs. Area, Aurangabad - 431136 Navi Mumbai Maharashtra (Pan: Aaecs8719B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Principle Commissioner Of Sterlite Technologies Limited Income Tax- 27, E-1 Waluj, Midc Industrial Vs. Navi Mumbai Area, Aurangabad - 431136 Maharashtra (Pan: Aaecs8719B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Nikhil Tiwari & Ms. Palak Mehta, Cas Revenue : Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Cit Dr & Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Pune, Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/M/250/2023-24/1058725938(1), Dated Sterlite Technologies Ltd. Ay 2016-17 13.12.2023 Passed Against The Assessment Order By Acit, Ltu, Circle- 1, Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 21.12.2018 For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: 1.1 Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Learned Assessing Officer ('Ao') In Not Allowing The Claim Of Appellant That The Rate Of Ddt In Respect Of Dividend Distributed To Its Overseas Holding Company Ought To Be Restricted To The Rate Of Tax Of 5% Prescribed Under Article 10(2) Of Applicable India- Mauritius Dtaa & That The Appellant Is Eligible For Refund Of Ddt Paid In Excess Of Such Rate.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Tiwari and Ms. Palak Mehta, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, CIT DR and Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sterlite Technologies Limited Principle Commissioner of E-1 Waluj, MIDC Industrial Income Tax- 27, Vs. Area, Aurangabad - 431136 Navi Mumbai Maharashtra (PAN: AAECS8719B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Principle Commissioner of Sterlite Technologies Limited Income Tax- 27, E-1 Waluj, MIDC Industrial Vs. Navi Mumbai Area, Aurangabad - 431136 Maharashtra (PAN: AAECS8719B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: assessee : Shri Nikhil Tiwa…

Innovative Textiles Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-10(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 1160/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Innovative Textiles Limited, Vs. Dcit, Circle 10(1), 81, Vighyan Vihar, New Delhi. Delhi – 110 092. (Pan : Aaaci0473J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2025 Date Of Order : 24.09.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against Assessment Order Dated 26.03.2022 Passed By The Income Tax Department/National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi U/S 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13)/144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act”) For Assessment Year 2017-18 Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S 144C(5) Of The Act Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That The Orders Of The Learned Lower Tax Authorities Is/Are Contrary To The Law & Facts Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jadhav, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234ASection 270A

…to the declared book profit of Rs.93,55,782/-. In this regard, he submitted that the abovesaid adjustment in the determination of book profit is not in accordance with law and contrary to the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Limited 255 ITR 273 and further submitted that in the decision of ITAT, Delhi in ITA No.64/Del/2015 in Cash Edge India Private Ltd., the similar issue was considered and adjudicated that Assessing Officer erred in adding back the transfer pricing adjustment of the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act. He submitted that exactly similar issue was considered by the coordin…

Shyam Metalics Amd Energy Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1074/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Sept 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2014-15 Shyam Metalics & Engery Ltd…...………..............................……….……Appellant 83, Trinity Tower, 7Th Floor, Topsia, Kol-700046, [Pan: Aahcs5842A] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata…………………………...……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Praveen Kishore, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 23, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 15, 2025 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 08.04.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 22, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”].

Section 250Section 68

…as held as under:- 18 Shyam Metalics And Engery Ltd “45. Now coming to the issue relating to treatment of these subsidies while computing book profit u/s 115JB, we note that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT [2002] 122 Taxman 562/255 ITR 273 held that the AO has the power to rework the book profit if the profits are computed not in accordance with Part II and Part III of Schedule VI to the Companies Act, 1956. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in their subsequent decision rendered in the case of Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. v. CIT [2011] 9 taxmann.com 25/196 Taxman 539/330 ITR 363 further h…

Om Lamcoat Pvt Ltd, Morbi vs. The ACIT, Centra Circle-1, Rajkot

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 287/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot11 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No. 286 & 287/Rjt/2022 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17 & 2019-20) (Hybrid Hearing) बनाम M/S. Om Lamcoat Pvt. Ltd. The Acit, 8-A, Kandla National Highway, Vs. Central Circle -1, Opp. Dadashri Nagar, At. Morbi – Aayakar Bhavan, Amruta 363642 Estate, M. G. Road, Rajkot – 360001 "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan No. : Aabco8163G (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) .. (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (Dr) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 16/06/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/09/2025

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 132Section 139Section 153CSection 250

…sessing officer that the revenue cannot modify the book profit, which has already been accepted and approved in the Annual General Meeting of shareholders relying on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC). In this regard it is to state that the hon'ble Supreme Court in the landmark judgment of Apollo Tyres Ltd Vs. CIT has held that the AO while computing the income under section 115J has only the power of examining whether the books of account are certified by the authorities under the Companies Act as having been properly maintained in accor…

Om Lamcoat Pvt Ltd, Morbi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Rajkot

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 286/RJT/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot11 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No. 286 & 287/Rjt/2022 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17 & 2019-20) (Hybrid Hearing) बनाम M/S. Om Lamcoat Pvt. Ltd. The Acit, 8-A, Kandla National Highway, Vs. Central Circle -1, Opp. Dadashri Nagar, At. Morbi – Aayakar Bhavan, Amruta 363642 Estate, M. G. Road, Rajkot – 360001 "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan No. : Aabco8163G (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) .. (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (Dr) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 16/06/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/09/2025

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 132Section 139Section 153CSection 250

…sessing officer that the revenue cannot modify the book profit, which has already been accepted and approved in the Annual General Meeting of shareholders relying on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC). In this regard it is to state that the hon'ble Supreme Court in the landmark judgment of Apollo Tyres Ltd Vs. CIT has held that the AO while computing the income under section 115J has only the power of examining whether the books of account are certified by the authorities under the Companies Act as having been properly maintained in accor…

Shakuntala Sadanand Shet Legal Heir of Late Sadanand Sheshgiri Shet, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 22 3 6 Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse bearing ITA No

ITA 3616/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Account Member & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi & Pranav ZanwarFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary – Sr AR
Section 10Section 10(2)(a)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234CSection 250Section 263

…the regular provisions of Income-tax Act. Such a view is also supported by the decision of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Moser Baer India Ltd (supra) wherein relying on the fallowing decisions such preposition was laid down. (i) Apollo Tyers Ltd v. CIT (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC) (ii) GTN Textiles Lad a case (pa) (iii) Govind Rubber(P) Licant(mpa) (iv) Starchik Specialtier Lady cane (s) (v) Smruthi Organics Lada (pa) (vi) Tushako Pump Ltd v. Asst. CIT (2005) 2 SOT 556 (Bom), and (vii) Asst. CIT vs. Varinder Agro Chemicals Ltd. [2007] 161 Taxman 134 (Chd.)(Mag.) 14. In view of the above submission, we find no merit in…

Birla Group Holdings Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax (ACIT), Circle 2(1), Ujjain

In the result, the appeal of the assesse bearing ITA No

ITA 2494/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Account Member & Shri Anikesh Banerjeethe Birla Group Holding Vs Acit, Circle 2(1), Ujjain Private Limited, (As A Aaykar Bhavan, 127, Dewas Road, Successor To Turquoise Bharatpuri, Ujjain, Madhya Investments & Finance Pvt Pradesh, 456010. Ltd) Industry House, 1St Floor, 159, Churchgate Reclamation, Marine Lines, Mumbai-400 020 Pan: Aaacr2250C Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi & Pranav ZanwarFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary – Sr AR
Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234CSection 250Section 263

…he regular provisions of Income-tax Act. Such a view is also supported by the decision of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Moser Baer India Ltd (supra) wherein relying on the fallowing decisions such preposition was laid down. (i) Apollo Tyers Ltd v. CIT (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC) (ii) GTN Textiles Lad a case (pa) (iii) Govind Rubber(P) Licant(mpa) (iv) Starchik Specialtier Lady cane (s) (v) Smruthi Organics Lada (pa) (vi) Tushako Pump Ltd v. Asst. CIT (2005) 2 S0T 556 (Bom), and (vii) Asst. CIT vs. Varinder Agro Chemicals Ltd. [2007] 161 Taxman 134 (Chd.)(Mag.) 14. In view of the above submission, we find no me…

M/S. Vjil Consulting Ltd vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(2), Hyderabad

ITTA/53/2009HC Telangana31 Jul 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,S.CHALAPATHI RAO

Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT (255 ITR 273) — Cited in 657 Judgments | BharatTax