How many judgments cite Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT?

657 judgments on BharatTax cite Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT (255 ITR 273), spanning 2008 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 115JB, Section 14A, Section 143(3), Section 37(1), Section 147, Section 8D.

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 367,725 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 115JB Section 14A Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 147 Section 8D Section 92CA(3)Section 195

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 115jb(2)section 115ja book profits section 115j section 115jb section 35 disallowance u/s 14a disallowance under section 14a section 115 section 80ia section 32 section 14a

Judgments citing Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT

The Dy. CIT., Circle-4, Ahmedabad vs. Hazira Port Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 1196/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: The Cit(A). It Was

Section 143(3)

…ITA No.: 1196/Ahd/14 Assessment year: 2009-10 Page 1 of 5 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD D BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Justice P P Bhatt, President and Pramod Kumar Vice President] ITA No.: 1196/Ahd/14 Assessment year: 2009-10 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 4, Ahmedabad ……………...………..Appellant Vs Hazira Port Pvt Ltd …………….……….Respondent 101-103, Abhijeet II, Mithakali Cirle, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad 380 006 [PAN: AAACH9142D] Appearances by Subhash Bains for the appellant S N Soparkar alongwith Parin Shah for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : December 5, 2018 Date of pronoun…

DCIT/ACIT, Circle - 6(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Emami Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2026/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. J.Sudhakar Reddy & Sh.S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “A”, KOLKATA BEFORE SH. J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SH.S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2025 & 2026/KOL/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2009-10 & 2011-12) DCIT/ACIT, vs M/s. Emami Limited, Circle-6(2), Kolkata. 687, Emami Tower, Anandpur, E.M.Bypass, Kolkata-700107. PAN-AAACH7412G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Sankar Halder, JCIT, Sr.DR Respondent by Sh.S.K.Agarwal, FCA Date of Hearing 22.11.2018 Date of Pronouncement 08.02.2019 ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Both these appeals filed by the Revenue against the order date…

DCIT/ACIT, Circle - 6(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Emami Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2025/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. J.Sudhakar Reddy & Sh.S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 80I

Aroma Organics Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO, WD- 14-(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 3037/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodiaassessment Year : 2008-09 M/S. Aroma Organics Limited, 106-110, Krishna Bhavan Annex, Income Tax Officer-14(1)(2), 22/B.S.D. Marg, Govandi, Mumbai Mumbai Vs. [Pan : Aaaca5370J] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sekhar Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Soni, DR

Section 115Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/s. Aroma Organics Limited, 106-110, Krishna Bhavan Annex, Income Tax Officer-14(1)(2), 22/B.S.D. Marg, Govandi, MUMBAI MUMBAI Vs. [PAN : AAACA5370J] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Sekhar Gupta, AR Respondent By : Shri Vijay Kumar Soni, DR Date of Hearing : 28-01-2019 Date of Pronouncement : 01-02-2019 O R D E R This appeal is filed by the assessee and the same is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-22, Mumbai, dated 23-01-2018…

Xl India Business Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 2145/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Xl India Business Vs. Addl. Cit, Services Pvt. Ltd., Special Range-9, New Delhi Ff-101, Building No. G-11, Sarines Sonia Sadan, Community Centre, Vikas Puri, New Delhi Pan :Aaacx0309A (Appellant) (Respondent) & S.A. No.16/Del/2019 [Arising Out Of Ita No.2145/Del/2017] Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Xl India Business Vs. Addl. Cit, Services Pvt. Ltd., Special Range-9, New Delhi Ff-101, Building No. G-11, Sarines Sonia Sadan, Community Centre, Vikas Puri, New Delhi Pan :Aaacx0309A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10ASection 10A(1)Section 10A(4)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(c)

…s per Companies Act 1956 & certified by the statutory auditors, then there is no adjustment that can be made for the purpose of Income Tax Act, u/s 115JB, except save the changes enumerated therein. 2 Appollo Tyres Ltd Vs CIT r20021 122 Taxman 562 (SC)/[2002] 255 ITR 273 (SC)/[2002] 174 CTR 521 (SC) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Supreme Court held that once accounts have been prepared as per Companies Act 1956 & certified by the statutory auditors, then there is no adjustment that can be made for the purpose of Income Tax Act u/s 115JB, except save the changes enumerated therein. 3 Whirlpool of India Ltd. and ano…

M/S. Andhra Trade Development - Corporation, Pvt.Ltd., Guntur vs. The ACIT, Guntur

ITA 233/VIZ/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Dec 2018AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.233/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2013-2014) M/S Andhra Trade Development The Assistant Commissioner Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Of Income-Tax, Circle-1(1) Guntur Guntur [Pan : Aabca8777C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR

Section 115Section 115JSection 33ASection 74

…isit the Profit & Loss account to make the adjustment to the Profit & Loss account for the purpose of book profit u/s 115JB of the Act. For this proposition, the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. Vs. CIT 255 ITR 273 and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT, Mumbai Vs. Forever Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai and requested not to make any adjustment to the book profit for the purpose of MAT. 4 I.T.A. No.233/Viz/2017 Andhra Trade Development Corporation, Guntur 3. The AO considered the explanation offered by the assessee and observed that as per Clause…

M/S Harman Connected Services Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. Pr. CIT - 3, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2010-11 is allowed

ITA 1101/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Harman Connected Services Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Corporation India Private Limited, Income-Tax, [Formerly Known As Symphony Bangalore - 3. Teleca Corporation India Private Limited) No.3 & 3A, Eoiz Industrial Area, Survey No. 85 & 86, Sadarmangla Village, Krishnarajapuram Hobli, Bangalore – 560 066. Pan : Aabcg 5658 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, Advocate : Revenue By Shri. C. H. Sundar Rao, Cit-I Date Of Hearing : 04.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : .12.2018 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, Advocate

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 195Section 263Section 40

…), therefore, the CIT(A) has rightly deleted this addition from the book profit. “ 5.4.4 The learned AR also submitted that the CIT was factually incorrect in stating that the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd., V. CIT (2202) 255 ITR 273 (SC) has been referred to a larger bench and therefore this decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court still holds the ground. Page 9 of 14 5.5 Provision for doubtful debts 5.5.1 The learned AR submitted that though no specific grounds have been raised on this issue in the grounds of appeal, the action of the CIT in resorting to section 263 of the Act t…

DCIT, Chandigarh vs. M/S Ajay Sangari & Co., Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 860/CHANDI/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Nov 2018AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri. S.K. MukhiFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234DSection 30Section 40Section 57

…e case of Md. Serajuddian and bros. Vs. CIT reported as (2012) 82 CCH 0098 KolHC/(2012) 80 DTR 0046/(2012) 210 Taxman 0084. Reliance was also placed upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. vs. CIT, reported in [2002] 255 ITR 273 (SC). 7. The Ld. CIT(A) considered the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Md. Serajuddian and bros. Vs. CIT wherein it was held as under "the said chapter nowhere provided that method of accounting for the purposes of ascertaining net profit should be the only income from business alone and not from other sources. S. 29 provi…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Railtel Corporation of India Ltd., Delhi

ITA 2743/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goel, CIT (DR)

Section 115Section 143(3)Section 145(1)Section 80I

…mpany as at the end of the financial year. The deviation in accounting is nothing but a device deployed for avoidance of taxes. ii) Rather, the authorized representative had gone ahead by relying on the decision of Supreme court in ApolloTyres limited vs CIT (255 ITR 273). The assessee is taking refuge under the decision of the Supreme court which in turn had never allowed the taxpayers to adopt accounting practices which are not in line with the norms so as to reduce their MAT liability. iii) Further, the constitution bench decision of the Supreme Court in McDowell and Co. Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer (154 ITR…

The ACIT-3(1), Indore vs. M/S. Nmi Industries Pvt. Ltd., Indore

ITA 529/IND/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11 M/S. Nmi Industries Pvt. Ito-4(1) Ltd, Vs. Indore 314 Bhagirathpura, Indore (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan No.Aabcn9571B Assessment Year 2010-2011

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…NMI Industries Pvt. Ltd ITA No.453/Ind/2016 & 529/Ind/2016 आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year 2010-11 M/s. NMI Industries Pvt. ITO-4(1) Ltd, Vs. Indore 314 Bhagirathpura, Indore (Appellant) (Respondent ) PAN No.AABCN9571B Assessment Year 2010-2011 ACIT 3(1), M/s. NMI Industries Pvt. Indore Vs. Ltd, 314 Bhagirathpura, Indore (Appellant) (Respondent ) PAN No. AABCN9571B Revenue by Shri K.G. Goyal, Sr.DR Assessee by Shri C.P. Rawka, ,CA Date of Hearing 01…

M/S Nmi Industries Pvt. Ltd., Indore vs. The ITO-4(1), Indore

ITA 453/IND/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)

M/S. Simran Wind Project Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 669/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. M.Balaganesh & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 115J

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “B”, KOLKATA BEFORE SH. M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 669 & 1123/KOL/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2012-13 & 2013-14) M/s. Simran Wind Project Ltd., vs DCIT, P-46A, Radha Bazar Lane, Circle-5(1), P-7, Kolkata-700001. Chowringhee Square, PAN-AAJCS4400J Kolkata-700069. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh.A.K.Tulsyan, FCA Respondent by Sh. S.Dasgupta, Addl.CIT.DR Date of Hearing 09.08.2018 Date of Pronouncement 31.10.2018 ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER These two appeals by the assessee against…

M/S. Simran Wind Project Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1123/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. M.Balaganesh & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 115J

DCIT, Cir-10(2), Kolkata vs. M/S V2 Retail Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the Cross Objection of the assessee both are dismissed

ITA 1517/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 115J

…vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -I, (Mumbai) (supra) - (order passed on 23-01-2013) it has been held as follows: "The issue raised has already been considered and decided by the Supreme Court In the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. v CIT [2002] 255 ITR 273/122 Taxman 562 the Supreme Court observed that section 115J provisions of which were similar to those of section 115JB, was introduced in the Income tax Act with a deeming provision which made companies liable to pay tax at least at 30 per cent of book profit shown in its own accounts. For the said purpose, section 115J made income reflected in t…

ITO 9(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Kitec Industries (Ind) Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 4535/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. G. S. Pannu, Vp & Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4535/Mum/2013 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri Ashish KumarFor Respondent: Shri Hitesh M. Shah

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 195Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40a

…powers conferred under section 211 and is therefore in accordance with Part 11 and 111 of Schedule VI of theCompanies Act, 1956. In my considered opinion and also as per theratio of judgment by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Apollo Tyre Ltd v CIT (2002) 255 ITR 273, the Profit and Lc Account cannot he disturbed unless and until it is not made in accordance with Part. II and III of Schedule VI of the Companies Act, 1956. Whereas as per the finding given above the Profit and Loss Account drawn by the Company is in accordance with Part II and 111 of Schedule VI of the Companies Act, 1956, and hence adjustments…

ACIT 3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Gran Electronics P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 3518/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.3518/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12) बिाम/ Acit 3(1)(2) M/S. Gran Electronics R.No 607, 6Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, C-171, Mittal Court, V. Mumbai-400020 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaach0383A (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri. Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh Assessee By : Shri. Mayank Chauhan & Shri. Bhupendra Karkhanis सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement :22.10.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Revenue, Being Ita No. 3518/Mum/2017, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 27.01.2017 Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”), For Assessment Year 2011-12, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From Assessment Order Dated 10.03.2014 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Ay 2011-12. I.T.A. No.3518/Mum/2017

For Appellant: Shri. Mayank Chauhan &For Respondent: Shri. Chaudhary Arun Kumar

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)

…of the Explanation I to section 115JB(2) or any other clause to that section. Hence, the same cannot be added for computing the book profit and tax payable u/s 115JB. We also rely upon the decisions of Supreme Court in the cases of Apollo Tyres Ltd., V. CIT, 255 ITR 273 & Malayala Manorama Co Ltd. 300 ITR 251 affirming it , as per which no adjustment other than those specifically given in section can be made while working out "book profit" Under the above circumstances, it is submitted that provision for warranty can not be added while computing book profit under section 1153B of the Act also........” 4. The AO…

Landis+Gyr Limited, South 24 Parganas vs. DCIT, Circle-1(A), Kolkata

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

ITA 524/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A No. 524/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Sawhney, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR

Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…ravel beyond what is defined therein and we cannot impute any other words or provisions therein unless otherwise specified by the statute . Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd reported in 255 ITR 273 (SC). Admittedly the interest payable to suppliers under MSMED Act, 2006 is not one of the item contemplated for addition to net profit for the purpose of computing book profits u/s 115JB of the Act. It is well settled that provisions of section 115JB of the Act creates a deeming fiction and there cannot be deeming fiction on an existing deeming…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Harsha Engineers Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1853/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1853/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dcit,Cir.2(1)(1) M/S.Harsha Engineers Ltd. Ahmedabad. Vs Sarkhej Bhavla Road Changodar, Ahmedabad 382 213 Pan : Aaaach 4828 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri S.K. Dev, Sr.Dr Assessee By : Shri Tushar H. Hemani, Ar

For Appellant: Shri Tushar H. Hemani, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Sr.DR

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ - अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD – BENCH ‘A’ BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1853/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 DCIT,Cir.2(1)(1) M/s.Harsha Engineers Ltd. Ahmedabad. Vs Sarkhej Bhavla Road Changodar, Ahmedabad 382 213 PAN : AAAACH 4828 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri S.K. Dev, Sr.DR Assessee by : Shri Tushar H. Hemani, AR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 11/10/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement : 12/10/2018 O R D…

Sheba Properties Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - 2(3)(2), Mumbai

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 5289/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5289/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Sheba Properties Limited Deputy Commissioner Of Income बनाम/ 3Rd Floor, Nanavati Mahalaya Tax-2(3)(2) 18, Homi Mody Street 5Thfloor, Aaykar Bhavan Vs. Hutatma Chowk, Mumbai-400 001 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-0591-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Rajan R. Vora, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Chaudhary Arun kumar, Ld. DR

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…ratio of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in CIT Vs. Vegetable Products Limited [1973 88 ITR 192]. The decision in PCIT Vs. Bhushan Steel Ltd., in turn, placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in Apollo Tyres Ltd. Vs. CIT [255 ITR 273] which held that the Assessing Officer did not have the jurisdiction to go behind the net profit shown in the Profit & Loss Account except to the extent provided in Explanation to Section 115J. Similar view has been expressed by our jurisdictional Bombay High Court rendered in CIT Vs. JSW Energy Limited [2015 60 Taxmann.com 303], CIT v. Essar Tel…

Asst CIT Cir 6(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Ask Investment Managers P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical

ITA 534/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year 2012-13 Acit M/S Ask Investment Circle-6(1)(2), Managers Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ R. No.536, 5Th Floor, 1St Floor Bandbox House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Dr. Ab Road, Worli, M. K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400030 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aafca2302P Shri Nitin Waghmode-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri J.D. Mistri Sr. Advocate

Section 115JSection 14A

…(supra) and also on CIT v. Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd. 327ITR 543 (Delhi) iii. Section 115JB of the Act does not authorize the AO to go beyond the audited financial statement of the assessee. He, inter-alia, relied on the decision in the case of Apollo Tyres 255 ITR 273(SC) 4.3. He, accordingly, submitted that there could not be any room for making adjustment in accordance with any other provision of the Act, except to the extent specified under Explanation 1 to that section. ITA. No.534/Mum/2017 12 M/s Ask Investment Managers Pvt. Ltd. 4.4. Ld. counsel submitted that tax liability u/s 115JB of the Act is to be…