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 367,518 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 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

Addl CIT 2(1), Mumbai vs. Gtl Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 5419/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 10BSection 143(1)

…ssee contended that the assessee has not claimed any deduction, therefore, the conclusion arrived at in the impugned order was defended. Reliance was placed upon the decision from Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in 251 ITR 15(Bom.) and Hon'ble Apex Court in 255 ITR 273 (SC). 4.2. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts, in brief are that the assessee company made investment in the shares of M/s Indian Agri Business System Pvt. Ltd. and the same were shown as at cost. The assessee follows valuing the investment at cost in its accounting policy less provis…

DCIT, CC-Xvi, Kolkata vs. South Asian Petrochem Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, appeals of Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 1222/KOL/2014[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2017AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2006-07

Section 143(3)

…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 in ITA No.1222-1224/Kol/2014 A.Y. 06-07 to 07-08 & 09-10 DCIT,CC-XVI Kol. Vs. SAP Ltd. Page 8 ITA No.144/Kol/2013 A.Y 2009-10 vide order dated 02-03-2016 has allowed the issue in favour of assessee as detailed under : The issue in the above case was raised as…

DCIT, Udupi vs. M/S Icds Ltd., Manipal

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are allowed

ITA 1025/BANG/2016[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 May 2017AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri R.N.Siddappaji, Addl.CITFor Respondent: Mrs.Sheetal Borker, Advocate

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 260A

…Court u/s 260A of the Act. The Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 17/12/2013 in ITA 580/2007 set aside the matter to the file of the AO for de novo assessment in the light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. Vs. CIT (255 ITR 273). ITA Nos.1025 to 1027/Bang/2016 Page 3 of 7 4. Pursuant to the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, the AO passed assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 260A of the Act, vide order dated 11/02/2015. Following the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Weizmann Homes Ltd. (357 ITR 74) and the co-ordinate bench d…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Nalwa Steel and Power Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 238/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 238/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Acit, Vs M/S Nalwa Steel & Power Ltd., Circle-13(1), 1213, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi Delhi-110015 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcn3209L Assessee By : Sh. V. K. Tulsiyan, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Rachna Singh, Cit Dr & Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.04.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 12.10.2012 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xvi, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. V. K. Tulsiyan, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT DR &

Section 115J

…which is disputed on merits in the preceding grounds (1) to (2) above. At the same time the AO made an addition of identical sum of Rs.1,48,71,962/- to the net profit declared by the appellant company. The Apex Court in the case of Apollo Tyres v. CIT [2002] 255 ITR 273 held that the Assessing Officer has the limited power of making increases and reductions as provided for in the Explanation to section 115J. The Assessing Officer does not have the jurisdiction to go beyond the net profit shown in the profit and loss account except to the limited extent provided in the Explanation. In our respectful submission th…

Gateway Terminals India P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3595/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3595/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Gateway Terminals India Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of बनाम/ Ltd., Income Tax, 5(1), V. Gti House, Jawaharlal Nehru Aaykar Bhavan, Port, M.K. Road, Sheva, District Uran, Mumbai. Navi Mumbai – 400 707. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaccg1899E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kiran NisarFor Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist, DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “H” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3595/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Gateway Terminals India Pvt. Dy. Commissioner of बनाम/ Ltd., Income Tax, 5(1), v. GTI House, Jawaharlal Nehru Aaykar Bhavan, Port, M.K. Road, Sheva, District Uran, Mumbai. Navi Mumbai – 400 707. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : AACCG1899E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Kiran Nisar Revenue by : Shri B.S. Bist, DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date…

Dewanchand Ramsaran Industries P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2654/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am Dewanchand Ramsaran Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Industries P. Ltd. Mumbai, 7/8 B Trade World, Kamla City, Circle 6(2) Vs. Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Mumbai Parel, Mumbai- 400 013 Pan No. Aabcd7193H .. Appellant Respondent Assessee By .. Miss Arti Sathe, Ar .. Shri B. S. Bist, Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing .. 05-04-2017 .. Date Of Pronouncement 05-04-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

Section 115Section 115JSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 154

…f depreciation actually debited in the profit and loss account was certified by the auditors, it was not permissible for the Assessing Officer to make any book adjustments in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Limited v. CIT 255 ITR 273 . Besides above, we find that there are decisions of the Tribunal holding the similar view, namely, Calcutta Bench of the Tribunal in the case of JCT Limited v. DCIT 253 ITR 61, Cochin Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Apollo Tyres Limited v. DCIT 43 ITD 464 , Bombay Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Modern Woollens, Ltd. v. DCIT 47 ITD 154…

Shloka Traders P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 13, Mumbai

ITA 4004/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 10Section 115J

…al gains earned by the partnership firm as income of the assessee while computing the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act. 4. Before Ld CIT(A), the assessee placed reliance on the decisions rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Apollo Tyres Ltd (255 ITR 273) and the decision rendered in the case of Malayala Manorama Ltd (300 ITR 251) to contend that the accounts adopted in the Annual General Meeting should not be disturbed by the AO. However, the Ld CIT(A) held that Hon’ble Supreme Court has expressed the view in the case of Dynamic Orthopaedic (190 Taxman 288)(SC) that the decision taken in the cas…

Sicpa India Private Limited (Formerly Known As Sicpa India Ltd.), Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle -8, Kolkata

In the result appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose while appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 885/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 885/Kol/2012 Assessment Year : 2007-08 Sicpa India Private Limited -Vs.- D.C.I.T., Circle-8, (Formerly Known As Kolkata Sicpa India Ltd. ), Kolkata [Pan : Aadcs 6121 L] (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A No. 933/Kol/2012 Assessment Year : 2007-08 D.C.I.T., Circle-8, Sicpa India Private Limited Kolkata (Formerly Known As Sicpa India Ltd. ), Kolkata [Pan : Aadcs 6121 L] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Assessee : Shri Prashant Jaiswal, Ar For The Department : Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, Jcit.Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.03.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2017. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Prashant Jaiswal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT.Sr.DR

Section 10(35)Section 14ASection 43B

…Rs. 12,65,75,000/-, being a capital receipt, would be liable for taxation u/s 115JB. The tribunal after referring to several decisions on the issue viz., the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd vs CIT 330 ITR 336 (SC), Apollo Tyres Ltd. 255 ITR 273 (SC), Special Bench ITAT in the case of Rain Commodities Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2010) 131 TTJ (Hyd)(SB) 514, ITAT Luknow Bench in the case of ACIT vs. L.H.Sugar Factory Ltd and vice versa in ITA Nos. 417 , 418 & 339/LKW/2013 dated 9.2.2016 and decision of Mumbai ITAT in the case of Shivalik Venture (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2015) 173 TTJ (Mumbai) 238 dated 19.8…

Krishi Rasayan Exports Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, RG-12, Kolkata

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed and appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 883/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am]

For Appellant: Shri S.D.Verma, Advocate and Shri Sanjeev Kadel, FCAFor Respondent: None

Section 139(5)

…/s 115JB. The ITA Nos.883 & 1018/Kol/2014-Krishi Rasayan Exports Pvt.Ltd A.Y.2010-11 16 tribunal after referring to several decisions on the issue viz., the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd vs CIT 330 ITR 336 (SC), Apollo Tyres Ltd. 255 ITR 273 (SC), Special Bench ITAT in the case of Rain Commodities Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2010) 131 TTJ (Hyd)(SB) 514, ITAT Luknow Bench in the case of ACIT vs. L.H.Sugar Factory Ltd and vice versa in ITA Nos. 417 , 418 & 339/LKW/2013 dated 9.2.2016 and decision of Mumbai ITAT in the case of Shivalik Venture (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2015) 173 TTJ (Mumbai) 238 dated 19.8…

M/S Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-12(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 471/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.471/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-2009) M/S Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd Vs. Ito, Ward-12(4), 8Th Floor, R.No.818, P-7, Chowringhee Square, 4, Synagogue Street, Aayakar Bhawan, Kolkata-700001 Kolkata-700069 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcm 8139 Q .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashish Rustogi, Aca Revenue By : Shri Saurav Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 01/03/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 08/03/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To Assessment Year 2008-09, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Cit(A)-Xii, Kolkata, In Appeal No.490/Xii/12(4)/10-11, Dated 11.11.2013, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 28.12.2010. 2. The Said Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Time Barred By Four Days. The Assessee Filed The Petition For Condonation Of Delay & Expressed The Reasons Of Delay. After Verification Of Petition We Found That There Was A Reasonable Cause For Four Days Delay In Filing The Appeal. Even Ld Dr Did Not Object To Condone The Delay. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Hearing. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Company Filed Its Return Of Income On 30.09.2008. Subsequently The 2 M/S Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd. Assessee Company Filed Its Revised Return Of Income On 9-12-2008

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Rustogi, ACAFor Respondent: Shri Saurav Kumar, JCIT

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)

…efore, this case law does not assist the assessee`s case under consideration because facts of this case is totally different from assessee`s case. Therefore, in the assessee`s case under consideration, we rely of the Supreme Court Judgment in Appollo Tyres ,255 ITR 273 (SC), Gilt Pach Ltd.209 CTR 405 (MP) and Krishna Oil Extraction Ltd. (MP) 232 ITR 928 (MP). All these judgments clearly say that an assessee cannot make an 20 M/s Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd. adjustment on account of “Change in method of providing depreciation” for the purpose of Explanation 1 of Sub-section (2) of Section 115JB of the I.T. Ac…

DCIT, Cir-12, Kolkata vs. M/S Krishi Rasayan Exports Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed and appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1018/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am]

For Appellant: Shri S.D.Verma, Advocate and Shri Sanjeev Kadel, FCAFor Respondent: None

Section 139(5)

DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata vs. M/S Mcnally Bharati Engineering Co.Ltd., Kolkata

In the result the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 532/KOL/2012[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2017AY 2007-2008

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No.100/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Soumen Adak, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Vijayendra Kumar, JCIT

Section 115JSection 43B

…the nature of income and, therefore, such amounts cannot form part of the profit reflecting real working results. While rendering the above decisions, the Hon'ble Tribunal has referred to the decision of Apex Court in the case of Apollo Tyres -vs.- CIT (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC) and held that the above decision does not debar the assessee to make the above adjustment in computing Book Profit u/s 115JA/JB. 31. The CIT(A) agreed with the contentions put forth by the assessee. On the admission of the additional ground, the CIT(A) was of the view that the facts to decide the additional ground were already available on…

DCIT, Circle - 1, Kolkata vs. M/S. Gloster Jute Mills Limited, Kolkata

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 95/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No.95/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sital Chandra Das, JCIT

…ile taxing, the book profits under s. 115JA, it will make the provision of s. 50 of the 27 28 M/s. Gloster Jute Mills Ltd. A.Yr.2007-08 Act as redundant. This interpretation is not justified. The ratio of Apollo Tyres vs. CIT (2002) 174 CTR (SC) 521 : (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC) is distinguishable because the same has been rendered in the context of provisions of s. 115J which is independent code, while s. 115JA is not an independent code and the Legislature in their wisdom has brought sub-s. (4) of s. 115JA on the statute to make s. 115JA also a part of the Act. Regarding relevance of the decision relied on by the…

Growmore Research & Assets Mgt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cei Cir 31 Now DCIT CC 4(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1785/MUM/2015[1990-91]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2017AY 1990-91

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 1990-91 Growmore Research & Dcit Assets Mgt. Ltd., Central Circle 31, बनाम/ 32 Madhuli Dr A.B. Rd 4Th Floor, Aayakar Vs. Worli Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400020 (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaacg4936C Appellant By Shri Dharmesh Shahl & Dhaval Shah (Ar) Revenue By Dr. P. Daniel, (Dr) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing: 14/02/2017 28/02/2017 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order: आदेश / O R D E R Per Ashwani Taneja, Am: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai-52 (In Short ‘Cit(A)’}, Dated 30.01.2015 Passed Order Against U/S 143(3) R.W. Section 150(1) & 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Assessment Order Dated 30.03.1999 For Assessment Year 1990-91 On The Following Grounds: “1.The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Ought To Have Appreciated That As Per The Decision Of Hon'Ble Special Court Dated 30.04.2010 In Mp No. 41 Of 1999, The Assets Under Consideration & The Consequential

Section 143(3)Section 150(1)Section 234ASection 234B

…g delivery. 3.4. Per contra, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue submitted that money market units are transacted on non- speculative basis. Further he placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT 255 ITR 274 wherein it was held that buying and selling of units by the assessee company could not be treated as speculative business. He requested for upholding the orders of the lower authorities. 3.5. In rejoinder, Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Limited (supra) was not applicable on…

Luxmi Tea Co. Ltd., Kolkata vs. PCIT, Cen-2, Kolkata

ITA 731/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 731/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Luxmi Co. Ltd. -Vs.- C.I.T., Central-2 Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaact 8466 A] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Soumitra Chowdhury, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri Niraj Kumar, Cit Date Of Hearing : 25.01.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 03.02.2017. Order

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Chowdhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Niraj Kumar, CIT

Section 10(30)Section 10(34)Section 14Section 263Section 43BSection 80Section 80I

…site income should be taken as book profits for the purpose of section 115JB of the Act and the action of AO in this regard was proper. The assessee in this regard placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres vs CIT 255 ITR 273 (SC) wherein it was held that the AO while arriving at the book profits has limited power of making adjustments only to the extent specified in Explanation to section 115JB (2) of the Act. The assessee also pointed out that similar method has been adopted by the assessee in the past and accepted by the department. The CIT however rejected the ple…

M/S. Orion Travels Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC 31, Mumbai

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

ITA 939/MUM/2009[1991-1992]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2017AY 1991-1992

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Manoj Kumar Agarwal () Assessment Year: 1991-92 M/S Orion Travels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Acit, Cc-31 32, Madhuli, Dr. A.B. Road, Mumbai Worli, Mumbai - 400018 Pan No. Aaaco1591K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Dharmesh Shah, Ar Respondent By : Dr. P. Daniel, Standing Counsel

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Dr. P. Daniel, Standing Counsel

Section 144Section 43(5)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND MANOJ KUMAR AGARWAL (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 1991-92 M/s Orion Travels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The ACIT, CC-31 32, Madhuli, Dr. A.B. Road, Mumbai Worli, Mumbai - 400018 PAN No. AAACO1591K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Dharmesh Shah, AR Respondent By : Dr. P. Daniel, Standing Counsel Date of Hearing : 21/10/2016 Date of pronouncement : 20/01/2017 O R D ER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of CIT (A) Central IV, Mumbai in Appeal No. CIT (…

Asst CIT Cir 11(5) vs. Jsw Steel Ltd

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed whereas revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 930/BANG/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05

For Appellant: S/Shri Kanchan Kaushal & Hirali Desai, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alok Johri, CIT D.R

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 244A

…o the profit & loss account, then neither the Assessing Officer nor the assessee can tinker with such profit & loss account. In support of it, he strongly relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tires Ltd. vs. ACIT, reported in 255 ITR 273. The assessee is required to prepare its Profit &Loss account as per part II & III of VIth Schedule of the Companies Act and here in this case assessee did prepared its Profit &Loss account as per the requirement of the Companies Act and therefore, said Profit &Loss account cannot be disturbed while computing the book profit under section 115JB w…

Jsw Steel Ltd vs. Asst CIT Cir 11(5)

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed whereas revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 923/BANG/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05

For Appellant: S/Shri Kanchan Kaushal & Hirali Desai, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alok Johri, CIT D.R

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 244A

Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT Ltu, Mumbai

ITA 3880/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2017AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh-CIT-DR

Section 115Section 143Section 154Section 254(1)Section 263

…’ble jurisdiction High Court has admitted substantial question of law in case of the assessee against the quantum order passed by the tribunal, that the issue was debatable. He relied upon the cases of Malayala Manorama Co.Ltd. (300 ITR 251) Apollo Tyres Ltd (255 ITR 273),Nico Extrusion Ltd. (ITA/3662/Mum/2015 AY. 2009-10, dated 08/07/2016). The Departmental Representative(DR) supported the order of the CIT and heavily relied upon the judgement of 3880/M/14-NTPC the honorable Delhi High Court delivered in the case of Ashok Logani (ITA No. 553 of 2010, dated 11/05/2011). 4.We have heard the rival submissions and…

DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 615/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Piyush Jain, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 92D

…planation 115JB not specifically mentioning Section 14A of the Act, the addition of Rs.89,00,000 was not justified. The view taken by the ITAT cannot be faulted with. It is consistent with the decision in Apollo Tyres Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC) which held that “the Assessing Officer does not have the jurisdiction to go behind the net profit shown in the profit and loss account except to the extent provided in the Explanation to Section 115J.”The Court declines to frame a question on the above issue.” 40. We, therefore, by keeping in view the ratio laid down in the aforesaid referre…