B.S. C. Footwear Ltd. v. Ridguary (Inspector of Taxes

77 ITR 857Reported decision1970#7229 most cited
16

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2014 to 2025.

Issues it is cited on

section 17(2)(iiia)section 17(2)section 17mercantile system of accountingprofits and gains of business or professionfair market valuesection 43bsection 56revenue expenditurecapital expendituresection 43section 37(1)

Judgments citing B.S. C. Footwear Ltd. v. Ridguary (Inspector of Taxes

DCIT-2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. INDUSIND BANK LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 3675/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 35DSection 36(1)(via)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…principles of law and not in accordance with\naccountancy practice. Accounting practice canned override section 56 or any\nother provision of the Act. As was pointed out by Lord Russell in the case of RS\nC. Footwear Ltd v Ridguary (Inspector of Taxes [1970] 77 ITR 857 (CA), the\nincome-tax law does not march step by step in the footprints of the accountancy\nprofession.'\n11.2.6 The same view has been adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in\nGodlira Electricity Co. Ltd (supra), by holding that: \"Income-tax is a levy on\nincome. No doubt, the Income-tax Act takes into account two points of time at\nwhich the li…

INDUSIND BANK LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT-2(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the Income Tax Appeal is\ndismissed

ITA 1842/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2019-20
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 35DSection 36(1)(via)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…principles of law and not in accordance with\naccountancy practice. Accounting practice canned override section 56 or any\nother provision of the Act. As was pointed out by Lord Russell in the case of RS\nC. Footwear Lid v Ridguary (Inspector of Taxes [1970] 77 ITR 857 (CA), the\nincome-tax law does not march step by step in the footprints of the accountancy\nprofession.'\n\n11.2.6 The same view has been adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in\nGodlira Electricity Co. Lid (supra), by holding that: \"Income-tax is a levy on\nincome. No doubt, the Income-tax Act takes into account two points of time at\nwhich the…

IDEA CELLULAR LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 3(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2285/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2008-09
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

…principles of law and not in accordance with accountancy practice. Accounting practice cannot override section 56 or any other provision of the Act. As was pointed out by Lord Russell in the case of B.S. C. Footwear Ltd. v. Ridguary (Inspector of Taxes [1970] 77 ITR 857 (CA), the income-tax law does not march step by step in the footprints of the accountancy profession.' 11.2.6 The same view has been adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. (supra), by holding that : 'Income-tax is a levy on income. No doubt, the Income-tax Act takes into account two points of time at which the liabilit…

DCIT 3(2), MUMBAI vs. IDEA CELLULAR LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2273/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2008-09
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

…principles of law and not in accordance with accountancy practice. Accounting practice cannot override section 56 or any other provision of the Act. As was pointed out by Lord Russell in the case of B.S. C. Footwear Ltd. v. Ridguary (Inspector of Taxes [1970] 77 ITR 857 (CA), the income-tax law does not march step by step in the footprints of the accountancy profession.' 11.2.6 The same view has been adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. (supra), by holding that : 'Income-tax is a levy on income. No doubt, the Income-tax Act takes into account two points of time at which the liabilit…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CITI FINANCIAL COSUMER FINANCE INDIA LTD.,, NEW DELHI

ITA 2638/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singhito, Ward 6 (2), Vs. M/S. Citi Financial Consumer Finance New Delhi. India Ltd., 3, Local Shopping Centre, Pushpa Bhawan, Pushp Vihar, New Delhi – 110 062. (Pan : Aabca3223B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri C.S. Agarwal, Senior Advocate Shri Shailesh Gupta, Advocate Revenue By : Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.05.2019 Date Of Order : 23.05.2019

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Agarwal, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 92C

…to be decided according to the principles of law and not in accordance with accountancy practice. Accounting practice cannot override section 56 or any other provision of the Act as was pointed out by Lord Russell in the case of B. S. C. Footwear Ltd. [1970] 77 ITR 857, 860 (CA), the income tax law does not march step by step in the footprints of the accountancy profession." 25.6. In a later decision in CIT vs Secure Meters Ltd., (2009 TIOL 93)(SC),Hon'ble Apex court taking note of their earlier decision in India Cements Ltd.(supra) held that expenditure on loan was allowable as revenue expenditure. The Revenue…

COSMOS INDUSTRIES LTD.,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3730/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2010-11 Cosmos Industries Ltd., Vs. Dcit, C/O Garg R. Kumar & Associates, Cas, Circle-3(1), 7, Advocate Chambers, New Delhi. Raj Nagar District Centre, Above Dominos Pizza, Ghaziabad. Pan: Aaacc6682R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Anil Katoch, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.12.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.12.2018 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18Th March, 2015 Of The Cit(A)-14, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company & Is Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Trading Of Sugar. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 31St March, 2011 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.3,36,93,430/- & Income U/S 115Jb At Rs.4,01,70,500/-. This Case Was Selected For Scrutiny By Issue Of Statutory Notices. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anil Katoch, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 2(14)Section 37

…be decided according to the principles of law and not in accordance with accountancy practice. Accounting practice cannot override section 56 or any other provision of the Act. As was pointed out by Lord Russell in the case of B . S. C. Footwear Ltd. ( 1970 ) 77 ITR 857, 860 ( CA ), the income-tax law does not march step by step in the footprints of the accountancy profession. ” 5.4. In view of the above binding precedents, it is evident that the disclosure by itself cannot be a ground to regard the nature of loss claimed as capital loss. However, what is necessary and essential for determination of loss is that…

SOHANLAL M JAIN,MUMBAI vs. ITO 2(1), THANE

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 5776/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Vimal PunamiyaFor Respondent: Shri. V. Justin (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…wing the project completion method of accounting the assessee is not presenting the correct , true and fair picture of its taxable profit. The AO relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of British Paints P. Ltd. 188 ITR 44 , BSR Footwear 77 ITR 857 and also decision in the case of Champion Construction 5 ITD 495, Bhagya Nagar Construction 46 ITD 236 , the AO applied percentage completion method. The AO also observed that the assessee has only incurred expenditure of Rs. 2,46,733/- towards purchases during the year under consideration and no other expenditure was incurred towards the cost of…

TITAN LABORATORIES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 10(2)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 156/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Titan Laboratories Pvt. Ito-10(2)(4) Ltd.102, Titan House, M.P. Room No. 431, Aaykar Vs. Vaidya Marg, Ghatkopar (E) Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai-400077. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aacct0509Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Jimit R. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ram Tiwari, Dr Date Of Hearing : 11/07/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 27/09/2017

For Appellant: Shri Jimit R. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari, DR
Section 143(3)Section 211Section 28Section 43A

…principles of law and not in accordance with accountancy practice. Accounting practice cannot override section 56 or any other provision of the Act. As was pointed out by Lord Russell in the case of B.S.C. Footwear Ltd. v. Ridgway (Inspector of Taxes) [1970] 77 ITR 857 (CA), the Income-tax law does not march step by step in the footprints of the accountancy profession.” At this juncture let us refer to the relevant decisions. In Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that question whether the loss suffered by the assessee was a trading loss or a capital loss cannot be answered unle…

M/S. RELIGARE FINVEST LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2284/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. Acit, Circle-15(1), New Delhi Religare Finvest Ltd., D-3, P3B, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi Pan : Aafcs6801H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Rohit Garg, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Ca Respondent By Sh. F.R. Meena, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 28.03.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 28.04.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xviii, New Delhi, Dated 28.02.2013, Raising The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 28Section 36Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)(b)

…law and not in accordance with accountancy practice. Accounting practice cannot override section 56 or any other provision of the Act. As was Page 23 of 25 pointed out by Lord Russell in the case of B.S. C. Footwear Ltd. v. Ridguary (Inspector of Taxes [1970] 77 ITR 857 (CA), the incometax law does not march step by step in the footprints of the accountancy profession.' 11.2.6 The same view has been adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. (supra), by holding that : 'Income-tax is a levy on income. No doubt, the Income-tax Act takes into account two points of time at which the liability…

M/S. RELIGARE COMMODITIES LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result the disallowance made by the Ld

ITA 2283/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishireligare Commodities Ltd, Acit, D3, P3B, District Centre, Saket, Circle-15(1), Vs. New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacf8356R (Appellant) (Respondent) Religare Commodities Ltd, Dcit, D3, P3B, District Centre, Saket, Circle-15(1), Vs. New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacf8356R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. FR Meena, Sr. DR
Section 28Section 36(1)(ii)Section 37(1)

…law and not in accordance with accountancy practice. Accounting practice cannot override section 56 or any other provision of the Act. As was Page 23 of 25 pointed out by Lord Russell in the case of B.S. C. Footwear Ltd. v. Ridguary (Inspector of Taxes [1970] 77 ITR 857 (CA), the income- tax law does not march step by step in the footprints of the accountancy profession.' 11.2.6 The same view has been adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. (supra), by holding that : 'Income-tax is a levy on income. No doubt, the Income-tax Act takes into account two points of time at which the liabili…

RELIGARE TECHNOVA GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIR 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 245/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri N. K. Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna & Shri RaviFor Respondent: Shri Prakash R. Mane,DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…principles of law and not in accordance with accountancy practice. Accounting practice cannot override section 56 or any other provision of the Act. As was pointed out by Lord Russell in the case of B.S.C. Footwear Ltd. v. Ridgway (Inspector of Taxes) [1970] 77 ITR 857 (CA), the Income-tax law does not march step by step in the footprints of the accountancy profession.' 15 3.7.8 In CIT. v Eli Lily & Co. (2009) 312 ITR 225 (SC), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that “Consequently, it cannot be said that the TDS provisions which are in the nature of machinery provisions to enable collection and recovery of tax…

ASST CIT 4(3), MUMBAI vs. PEOPLE INTERACTIVE (I) P.LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 6990/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. R. S.SamariaFor Respondent: Shri B S Bisht
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 37

…principles of law and not in accordance with accountancy practice. Accounting practice cannot override section 56 or any other provision of the Act. As was pointed out by Lord Russell in the case of B.S. C. Footwear Ltd. v. Ridguary (Inspector of Taxes [1970] 77 ITR 857 (CA), the income-tax law does not march step by step in the footprints of the accountancy profession.' 11.2.6 The same view has been adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. (supra), by holding that : 'Income-tax is a levy on income. No doubt, the Income-tax Act takes into account two points of time at which the liabilit…

ASST CIT 4(3), MUMBAI vs. PEOPLE INERACTIVE (I) P.LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 6986/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. R. S.SamariaFor Respondent: Shri B S Bisht
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 37

…principles of law and not in accordance with accountancy practice. Accounting practice cannot override section 56 or any other provision of the Act. As was pointed out by Lord Russell in the case of B.S. C. Footwear Ltd. v. Ridguary (Inspector of Taxes [1970] 77 ITR 857 (CA), the income-tax law does not march step by step in the footprints of the accountancy profession.' 11.2.6 The same view has been adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. (supra), by holding that : 'Income-tax is a levy on income. No doubt, the Income-tax Act takes into account two points of time at which the liabilit…

PEOPLE INTERACTIVE (I) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 4(3), MUMBAI

ITA 4979/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. R. S.SamariaFor Respondent: Shri B S Bisht
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 37

…principles of law and not in accordance with accountancy practice. Accounting practice cannot override section 56 or any other provision of the Act. As was pointed out by Lord Russell in the case of B.S. C. Footwear Ltd. v. Ridguary (Inspector of Taxes [1970] 77 ITR 857 (CA), the income-tax law does not march step by step in the footprints of the accountancy profession.' 11.2.6 The same view has been adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. (supra), by holding that : 'Income-tax is a levy on income. No doubt, the Income-tax Act takes into account two points of time at which the liabilit…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S VODAFONE ESSAR SOUTH LTD.

ITA/594/2014HC Delhi29 Oct 2014

…e decided according to the principles of law and not in accordance with accountancy practice. Accounting practice cannot override Section 56 or any other provision of the Act. As was pointed out by Lord Russell in the case of B.S.C. Footwear Ltd. [(1970) 77 ITR 857, 860], the Income Tax law does not march step by step in the footprints of the accountancy profession.” It was held by the Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax versus Bhor Industries Limited (2003) 264 ITR 180, “… If (sic, It) is well settled that, ordinarily, revenue expenditure, which is incurred wholly and exclusively for th…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. SBI CARDS & PAYMENT SERVICES PVT. LTD

ITA/603/2014HC Delhi29 Sept 2014

Bench: The Tribunal, Relating To The Said Assessment Year. 2. For The Sake Of Convenience, We First Take Up Ita No.603/2014. The 2014:Dhc:5128-Db

Section 260ASection 271(1)

…be decided according to the principles of law and not in accordance with accountancy practice. Accounting practice cannot override Section 56 or any other provision of the Act. As was pointed out by Lord Russell in the case of B.S.C. Footwear Ltd. [(1970) 77 ITR 857, 860], the Income Tax law does not march step by step in the footprints of the accountancy profession.” It was held by the Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax versus Bhor Industries Limited (2003) 264 ITR 180, “… If (sic, It) is well settled that, ordinarily, revenue expenditure, which is incurred wholly and exclusively for the…