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 367,541 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

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

In the result this appeal by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 3430/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari
Section 115Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234D

…under section 154 of the Act. In support of this claim assessee relied on the decisions, including the decision of the Honorable High Court in the case of Forever Diamonds Private Limited and the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd, 255 ITR 273. 5. Considering the above learned CIT(A) has held under: “I have carefully considered the submissions of the learned AR in the light of the facts of the case. As seen from the facts of the case the book profits under section 115 JB had to be worked out as per the provisions of Part-ll and Part-Ill of Schedule-VI of Companies 3 Bhupati Investment…

D.C.I.T Circle - 5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Shubh Shanti Services Ltd, Kolkata

ITA 1750/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1750/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Dcit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Subh Shanti Services Ltd. [Pan: Aagcs 9381 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…ny power to tinker with the same except in respect of items provided in explanation 1 to 115JB of the Act. The assessee in support of this contention placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 255 ITR 273. The assessee also placed reliance on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. Dune Leasing & Finance Ltd. reported in 126 ITD 255 in support of the aforesaid contentions. The Ld. AO however did not agree to the contentions of the assessee and without giving any reason proceeded to make an addition of Rs. 1,…

Scrabble Entertianment Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 11(1), Mumbai

ITA 1742/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 194CSection 40Section 41(1)Section 68

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI Before Shri Saktijit Dey (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND Shri G Manjunatha (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A Nos.1742/Mum/2016 (Assessment year: 2011-12) Scrabble Entertainment Ltd vs ACIT-11(1), Mumbai 3rd Floor, Valuable Techno Park, Plot No.53/1, Road No.7, MIDC, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 093 PAN : AALCS6153Q APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT I.T.A No. 2808/Mum/2016 (Assessment year: 2011-12) ACIT-11(1), Mumbai vs Scrabble Entertainment Ltd 3rd Floor, Valuable Techno Park, Plot No.53/1, Road No.7, MIDC, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 093 PAN : AALCS6153Q APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Asse…

Everest Industires Ltd, New Delhi vs. JCIT RG 1, Mumbai

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

ITA 3804/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Ramlal Negi (Jm)

…d to Profit and Loss account. Accordingly he submitted that no adjustment other than the ones mentioned in sec. 115JB is permissible. In this regard, the Ld D.R placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd (255 ITR 273). 74. We have heard rival contentions on this issue and perused the record. In the earlier paragraphs, we have restored the issue relating to both Sales tax incentive and Excise incentive to the file of the AO with the direction to examine the relevant Schemes and then decide about their nature, i.e., whether they are capital in nature or revenu…

DCIT 2(2), Mumbai vs. Larsen & Toubro Finance Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4459/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3980, 3981 & 3982/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08) L & T Finance Limited Deputy Commissioner Of Income बनाम/ Taxation Department, L&T House, Tax-Circle 2(2) R.No.545,5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate Vs. Mumbai-400 001 M.K.Marg,Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaacl-8668-G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4459/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income L & T Finance Limited बनाम/ Tax-Circle 2(2) Taxation Department, L&T House, R.No.545,5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate Vs. M.K.Marg,Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaacl-8668-G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: M.M.Golvala & Akram Khan, Ld.AR’sFor Respondent: S.C.Tiwari CIT (DR) & Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 88E

…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…

L & T Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3982/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3980, 3981 & 3982/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08) L & T Finance Limited Deputy Commissioner Of Income बनाम/ Taxation Department, L&T House, Tax-Circle 2(2) R.No.545,5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate Vs. Mumbai-400 001 M.K.Marg,Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaacl-8668-G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4459/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income L & T Finance Limited बनाम/ Tax-Circle 2(2) Taxation Department, L&T House, R.No.545,5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate Vs. M.K.Marg,Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaacl-8668-G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: M.M.Golvala & Akram Khan, Ld.AR’sFor Respondent: S.C.Tiwari CIT (DR) & Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 88E

…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…

L & T Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3981/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3980, 3981 & 3982/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08) L & T Finance Limited Deputy Commissioner Of Income बनाम/ Taxation Department, L&T House, Tax-Circle 2(2) R.No.545,5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate Vs. Mumbai-400 001 M.K.Marg,Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaacl-8668-G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4459/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income L & T Finance Limited बनाम/ Tax-Circle 2(2) Taxation Department, L&T House, R.No.545,5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate Vs. M.K.Marg,Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaacl-8668-G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: M.M.Golvala & Akram Khan, Ld.AR’sFor Respondent: S.C.Tiwari CIT (DR) & Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 88E

…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…

L & T Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3980/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3980, 3981 & 3982/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08) L & T Finance Limited Deputy Commissioner Of Income बनाम/ Taxation Department, L&T House, Tax-Circle 2(2) R.No.545,5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate Vs. Mumbai-400 001 M.K.Marg,Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaacl-8668-G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4459/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income L & T Finance Limited बनाम/ Tax-Circle 2(2) Taxation Department, L&T House, R.No.545,5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate Vs. M.K.Marg,Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaacl-8668-G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: M.M.Golvala & Akram Khan, Ld.AR’sFor Respondent: S.C.Tiwari CIT (DR) & Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 88E

…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…

ACIT, Trichy vs. Jennys Hotel Pvt. Ltd., Trichy

In the result the appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year 2003-04 is allowed and the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1348/CHNY/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Jan 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: 06.12.2017For Respondent: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCA
Section 115JSection 250Section 43B

…e of the P&L account thereby consequently increasing the book profit to that extent for the purpose of determining tax U/s.115JB of the Act. Before the Ld.CIT(A) the Ld.AR had argued citing the decision in the case Apollo Tyres Limited vs. CIT reported in 255 ITR 273 by stating that the Ld.AO has no right to recomputed the book profit. The Ld.AR had further submitted before the Ld.CIT(A) that the assessee company on its own had disallowed the interest payable to M/s. Tourism Finance Corporation by virtue of Section 43(B) of the Act because the assessee had not paid the interest during the earlier relevant…

ACIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. Indusind Media & Communicaton Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 772/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.772/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax- Indusind Media & Communication Ltd. बनाम/ 16(1) In Centre, 49/50,Midc,12Th Road Room No.439, Aaykar Bhavvan, M.K.Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 093 Vs. Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaaci-1198-L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1167/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Indusind Media & Communication Ltd. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax- बनाम/ In Centre, 49/50,Midc,12Th Road 16(1) Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 093 Room No.439, Aaykar Bhavvan, M.K.Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaaci-1198-L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Mihir Nanavdekar,Ld.ARFor Respondent: Saurabh Kumar Rai, Ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 32(2)

…n’ble Supreme Court rendered in CIT Vs. Assessment Year 2011-12 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…

Indusind Media & Communications Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 16(1), Mumbai

ITA 1167/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.772/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax- Indusind Media & Communication Ltd. बनाम/ 16(1) In Centre, 49/50,Midc,12Th Road Room No.439, Aaykar Bhavvan, M.K.Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 093 Vs. Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaaci-1198-L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1167/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Indusind Media & Communication Ltd. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax- बनाम/ In Centre, 49/50,Midc,12Th Road 16(1) Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 093 Room No.439, Aaykar Bhavvan, M.K.Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.Aaaci-1198-L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Mihir Nanavdekar,Ld.ARFor Respondent: Saurabh Kumar Rai, Ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 32(2)

…n’ble Supreme Court rendered in CIT Vs. Assessment Year 2011-12 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…

DCIT, Circle-4(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Vishnu Tea & Industries Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1829/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble Am & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble Jm] I.T.A. No. 1749/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2008-09 C.O. No. 64/Kol/2016 A/O. I.T.A. No. 1749/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2008-09

…gar Works Ltd. vs. DCIT, ITA No. 1024/Kol/2007, order dt. 28/09/2007. In our view this decision does not hold the field any longer and in view of the subsequent decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC) as well as the decision of ITAT Kolkata in the case of Bhatkawa Tea Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, Circle-4, Kolkata in ITA No. 813/Kol/2010, for the Assessment Year 2005-06, wherein it was held as follows:- “10.1 We are of the considered opinion that section 115JB of the Act is attracted in the case of the appellant. The appellant has not…

DCIT, Circle-4(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Vishnu Tea & Industries Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1750/KOL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble Am & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble Jm] I.T.A. No. 1749/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2008-09 C.O. No. 64/Kol/2016 A/O. I.T.A. No. 1749/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2008-09

…gar Works Ltd. vs. DCIT, ITA No. 1024/Kol/2007, order dt. 28/09/2007. In our view this decision does not hold the field any longer and in view of the subsequent decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC) as well as the decision of ITAT Kolkata in the case of Bhatkawa Tea Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, Circle-4, Kolkata in ITA No. 813/Kol/2010, for the Assessment Year 2005-06, wherein it was held as follows:- “10.1 We are of the considered opinion that section 115JB of the Act is attracted in the case of the appellant. The appellant has not…

DCIT, Circle-4(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Vishnu Tea & Industries Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1749/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble Am & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble Jm] I.T.A. No. 1749/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2008-09 C.O. No. 64/Kol/2016 A/O. I.T.A. No. 1749/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2008-09

…gar Works Ltd. vs. DCIT, ITA No. 1024/Kol/2007, order dt. 28/09/2007. In our view this decision does not hold the field any longer and in view of the subsequent decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC) as well as the decision of ITAT Kolkata in the case of Bhatkawa Tea Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, Circle-4, Kolkata in ITA No. 813/Kol/2010, for the Assessment Year 2005-06, wherein it was held as follows:- “10.1 We are of the considered opinion that section 115JB of the Act is attracted in the case of the appellant. The appellant has not…

The ACIT, Vapi Circle, Vapi vs. M/S. Cs Specialty Chemicals Pvt.Ltd., Vapi

In the result, both the appeals and cross objections filed by the department and assessee are dismissed

ITA 2128/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Appellant: Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 10BSection 80H

…unts does not arise. The details of such export sales transaction were submitted alongwith other details as per submissions dated December 5, 2012. Further, as pronounced by the Honourable Supreme Court in Apollo Tyres Ltd Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC). While assessing a company for income tax under section 115] of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the correctness of the Profit and Loss account prepared by the company and certified by the Statutory Auditors of the company as having been prepared in accordance with the requirements of Parts I! and III of Schedule VI of the Companies Act cannot be e…

Powerica Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT(Ltu), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3747/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Powerica Limited Cit (Ltu), 9Th Floor, Bakhtawar, 29Th Floor, World Trade Centre I, Nariman Point, Vs. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400005. Pan: Aaacp3812E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri H.N. Singh (CIT-DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 253Section 254(1)Section 263Section 43A

…rroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The order passed by Commissioner under section 263 is liable to be set-aside. In support of his submission the learned AR of the assessee relied upon the following decisions; (1) Apollo Tyres Ltd Vs CIT (255 ITR 273 SC) (2) CIT Vs Adbhut Trading Company Private limited(33 ITR 94 Bom) (3) Pr CIT Vs Bhagwan Industries Ltd (ITA No.436of 2015 dated18.07.2017) (4) Bharat Serums & Vaccines Ltd Vs ACIT ( ITA 3091/M/2012) 4 Powerica Ltd (5) Malabar Industrial Co Ltd versus CIT (243 ITR 83 SC) (6) CIT versus Max India (203 ITR 108 Bom) (7) CIT versus Gabriel India…

M/S. Soex in vs. T & Fin. Pvt.Ltd.(Now Known As Sopariwala Exports P.Ltd.), Mumbai

Accordingly, the cross objection raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6415/MUM/2008[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2003-04

For Appellant: Mr. Pankaj R. Toprani, ARFor Respondent: Mr. V. Justin, DR
Section 119Section 143(3)Section 73Section 73(4)

…are same. We refer here to para 13 to 16 hereinbefore. In view of the above, we follow our decision for the AY 2003-04 mentioned at para 17. 24. In the cross objection, the assessee has referred to the decision in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. vs. CIT (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC) and Malayalam Manorama vs. CIT (2008) 300 ITR 251 (SC) stating that the Assessing Officer while computing the income u/s 115J has only the power of examining whether the books of accounts are certified by the authorities under the Companies Act as having been properly maintained in accordance with the Companies Act. The Assessing Officer the…

The DCIT(OSD) Circle-8, Ahmedabad vs. Voltamp Transformers Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the department is dismissed

ITA 2084/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Respondent: Shri Ashwin Shah, C.A
Section 115JSection 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…ITA Nos.578&738/Ahd/07 (A.Y.2003- 04) and ITA Nos.346 & 390/Ahd/2008 (A.Y. 2004-05) order dated 04/09/2009. Respectfully following the aforementioned orders as also the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. vs. CIT reported at [2002] 255 ITR 273(SC) duly referred in the cited precedents, we hereby direct the Assessing Officer not to make any adjustment in respect of disallowance made u/s.14A of the I.T. Act while computing the book profit u/s.115JB of the I.T. Act. We order accordingly and the substantial ground is hereby allowed.” 7.5 In our considered opinion, this case is covered by…

ACIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Ppn Power Generating Co. Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result , the assessee’s appeal is dismissed and the Revenue’s

ITA 3067/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Aug 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 2721/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2009-10 Ppn Power Generating Company Private Commissioner Of Income Tax Limited, Vs. (Appeals) - Iii, Jhaver Plaza, Iii Floor, No. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, 1A, Nungambakkam High Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aabcp 8131D]

For Respondent: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate
Section 115J

…le passing the order u/s 143(3), the AO had considered certain receipts cited supra for the purpose of book profits u/s 115JB. 10.2.1 Before me, the Id. AR has placed reliance on the ratio of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. Vs. CIT 255 ITR 273 SC (E-3). I have perused the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and noticed that the ratio is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case. Hon'ble Apex Court has held that if books of accounts are prepared as per Part-Il & Part-Ill of Schedule-S of the" Companies Act, 1956, and approved by the Annual General Body of…

Ppn Power Generating Co. Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result , the assessee’s appeal is dismissed and the Revenue’s

ITA 2721/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Aug 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 2721/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2009-10 Ppn Power Generating Company Private Commissioner Of Income Tax Limited, Vs. (Appeals) - Iii, Jhaver Plaza, Iii Floor, No. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, 1A, Nungambakkam High Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aabcp 8131D]

For Respondent: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate
Section 115J

…le passing the order u/s 143(3), the AO had considered certain receipts cited supra for the purpose of book profits u/s 115JB. 10.2.1 Before me, the Id. AR has placed reliance on the ratio of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. Vs. CIT 255 ITR 273 SC (E-3). I have perused the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and noticed that the ratio is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case. Hon'ble Apex Court has held that if books of accounts are prepared as per Part-Il & Part-Ill of Schedule-S of the" Companies Act, 1956, and approved by the Annual General Body of…