Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT

245 ITR 428Supreme Court of India2000#52 most cited

What is Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT authority for?

A business liability that has definitely arisen in an accounting year is deductible even if it needs to be quantified and discharged later, as long as its incurring is certain and can be reasonably estimated.

901

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2006 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Bharat Earth Movers v CIT · 245 ITR 428 · ascertainable liability · unascertainable liability · accrued liability · provision for expenses · deduction · accounting year · future discharge

Also reported as

112 Taxmann 616 SCC 645162 CTR 325

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 115JBSection 14ASection 40(a)(ia)Section 195Section 148Section 1961
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 35dmercantile system of accountingenduring benefitintangible assetssection 40(a)(i)section 35revenue expenditurebook profitssection 37(1)section 115jbamalgamationsection 37

Judgments citing Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT

M/S Karnataka State Beverages Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 971/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri. S. V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)

…ontention of the learned Counsel for the assessee before the Tribunal was that the liability in question was not a contingent liability and in this regard, placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT 245 ITR 428 (SC). In the aforesaid decision, the question for consideration was whether provision for liability on ITA Nos.971, 972/Bang/2018 and 1925/Bang/2017 Page 4 of 14 account of leave encashment of employees could be disallowed as being a contingent liability. The Hon’ble Supreme Court laid down that if a business liability has definitely arisen in th…

M/S. Karnataka State Bevereges Corporation Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1925/BANG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri. S. V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)

…ontention of the learned Counsel for the assessee before the Tribunal was that the liability in question was not a contingent liability and in this regard, placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT 245 ITR 428 (SC). In the aforesaid decision, the question for consideration was whether provision for liability on ITA Nos.971, 972/Bang/2018 and 1925/Bang/2017 Page 4 of 14 account of leave encashment of employees could be disallowed as being a contingent liability. The Hon’ble Supreme Court laid down that if a business liability has definitely arisen in th…

Apeejay Education Trust, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T.(Exemption), Circle-1, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2075/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P. M. Jagtap & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(d)

…was brought to the notice of the Ld. AR vide order sheet noting dated 20-02-2015. 4.1. The AO acknowledges that in its reply the Ld. AR of the assessee supporting the claim relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bharat Earth Movers vs. CIT [2000] 112 Taxmann 61, which according to AO, was related to a company, i.e. for assessment procedure related to business and profession, and not with any trust or charitable activity i.e. exempted entities u/s.12A/12AA or 10(23C) of the Act. However, the AO noted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nachimuthu Industrial Association vs CIT reported in 235…

Technologies Ltd) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

ITA/214/2020HC Delhi05 Jul 2021
For Appellant: -.................................................................... 8For Respondent: - .................................................................. 10
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 254Section 35D

…benture holder to receive the payment upfront, liability of the assessee to make the payment in that very year, on exercising of this option, has arisen and this liability was to pay the interest @ Rs. 55 per debenture. In Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT [2000] 245 ITR 428/112 Taxman 61 (SC), this Court had categorically held that if a business liability has arisen in the accounting year, the deduction should be allowed even if such a liability may have to be quantified and discharged at a future date. Following passage from the aforesaid judgment is worth a quote: "The law is settled: if a business liability h…

Technologies Ltd) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

ITA/215/2020HC Delhi05 Jul 2021
For Appellant: -.................................................................... 8For Respondent: - .................................................................. 10
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 254Section 35D

…benture holder to receive the payment upfront, liability of the assessee to make the payment in that very year, on exercising of this option, has arisen and this liability was to pay the interest @ Rs. 55 per debenture. In Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT [2000] 245 ITR 428/112 Taxman 61 (SC), this Court had categorically held that if a business liability has arisen in the accounting year, the deduction should be allowed even if such a liability may have to be quantified and discharged at a future date. Following passage from the aforesaid judgment is worth a quote: "The law is settled: if a business liability h…

Technologies Ltd) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

ITA/213/2020HC Delhi05 Jul 2021
For Appellant: -.................................................................... 8For Respondent: - .................................................................. 10
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 254Section 35D

…benture holder to receive the payment upfront, liability of the assessee to make the payment in that very year, on exercising of this option, has arisen and this liability was to pay the interest @ Rs. 55 per debenture. In Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT [2000] 245 ITR 428/112 Taxman 61 (SC), this Court had categorically held that if a business liability has arisen in the accounting year, the deduction should be allowed even if such a liability may have to be quantified and discharged at a future date. Following passage from the aforesaid judgment is worth a quote: "The law is settled: if a business liability h…

Dy CIT CC 6 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Kerla Enviro Infrastructure Ltd., Coachin

Appeal are allowed

ITA 7333/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Dy.Cit, Central Circle- M/S Kerla Enviro 6(3), Room No. 1905, Vs. Infrastructure Ltd., 19Th Floor, Inside Fact Cochin, Air India Building, Divisi Ambalamugal, Nariman Point, Cochin, Mumbai – 400021 Kerala- 692303

For Appellant: Shri Kirit Kamdar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gurbinder Singh, D.R
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…ITA No. 7333/Mum/2019 A.Y.2015-16 1 Dy.CIT, CC-6(3) Vs. M/s Kerla Enviro Infrastructure IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Dy.CIT, Central Circle- M/s Kerla Enviro 6(3), Room No. 1905, Vs. Infrastructure Ltd., 19th Floor, Inside Fact Cochin, Air India Building, Divisi Ambalamugal, Nariman Point, Cochin, Mumbai – 400021 Kerala- 692303 PAN No. AACCK6979P (Revenue) (Assessee) Assessee by : Shri Kirit Kamdar, A.R Revenue by : Shri Gurbinder Singh, D.R Date of Hearing : 16/06/2021 Date of pronouncement…

DCIT - 4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Gbtl Ltd. (Formerly Known As M/S. Grasim Bhiwani Textiles Ltd.), Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2668/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Amarjit Singh, Jm Dcit-4(2)(2) M/S. Gbtl Ltd. Room No.640, 6Th Floor (Formerly Known As M/S. Grasim Aaykar Bhawan, Bhiwani Textiles Ltd.) Vs. M.K.Road 409, Cotton Exchange Building Mumbai-400 020 Kalbadevi Road, Mumbai-400 002 Pan/Gir No. Aaccg9347F (Appellant) : (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri T.S.Khalsa-DRFor Respondent: Dr. K.Shivaram-AR
Section 43B

…ns or retired from the services. We also find that the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Excide Industries Ltd. (supra) has struck down Sec. 43B(f) being arbitrary, unconscionable and de hors the Apex Court decision in the case of Bharat Earth Movers 245 ITR 428. It is relevant to state that the Tribunal in the case of CIT v. Universal Medicare in ITA No. 6191/M/08, has followed the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers and directed the AO to allow the amounts so claimed. Respectfully following the afore discussed decisions, we direct the AO to allow the claim of provisions for…

Bsc C&C Kurali Toll Road Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1593/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(3)

…e of the expenditure has been duly documented in the Schedule - 5 “MMR” of the Rupee Term Loan Agreement in which the consortium of banks have provided that the company will build up a Major Maintenance Reserve. 2. In the case of Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT [245 ITR 428 (SC)], Hon’ble Supreme Court had referred to principles were laid down in the case of Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. Vs. their Workmen [73 ITR 53 (SC)]. Hon’ble Court had extracted and reproduced some relevant principles as under: (I) “For an assessee maintaining his accounts on mercantile system, a liability already accrued, though to be discharg…

Bsc C&C Kurali Toll Road Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1592/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(3)

…e of the expenditure has been duly documented in the Schedule - 5 “MMR” of the Rupee Term Loan Agreement in which the consortium of banks have provided that the company will build up a Major Maintenance Reserve. 2. In the case of Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT [245 ITR 428 (SC)], Hon’ble Supreme Court had referred to principles were laid down in the case of Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. Vs. their Workmen [73 ITR 53 (SC)]. Hon’ble Court had extracted and reproduced some relevant principles as under: (I) “For an assessee maintaining his accounts on mercantile system, a liability already accrued, though to be discharg…

Ad-Age Outdoor Advertising P Ltd., Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioneer of Income Tax, Hyderabad

ITTA/54/2009HC Telangana22 Apr 2021

Bench: T.VINOD KUMAR,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

Section 260Section 37Section 37(1)

…37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 d deductible from gross profit? iii) Whether leave encashment is a current or present liability or a contingent liability in view of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers 245 ITR 428 (SC) and thus accordingly allowable as an expense deductible from gross profit? iv) Whether the provision for leave encashment is a defined benefit entitled to be allowed as an expense during the -3- year in which such provision is made in books of accounts in view of Accounting Standard 15 issued by ICAI? (v) Whether the…

DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Emami Biotech Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 2564/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 115J

…eceipt. There are various judicial pronouncements wherein guidelines or criteria have been laid down to determine the character of such amounts received as incentives/subsidies. As observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.C.P. Limited –vs.- CIT [245 ITR 431], it is not the name given by the assesese or even by the revenue or anyone else that matters, but it is true character of the receipt that determines its taxability and being regarded as falling within the capital field or out of it. As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ponny Sugar & Chemicals Limited (supra), the nature of the re…

DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Emami Biotech Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 2563/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 115J

…eceipt. There are various judicial pronouncements wherein guidelines or criteria have been laid down to determine the character of such amounts received as incentives/subsidies. As observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.C.P. Limited –vs.- CIT [245 ITR 431], it is not the name given by the assesese or even by the revenue or anyone else that matters, but it is true character of the receipt that determines its taxability and being regarded as falling within the capital field or out of it. As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ponny Sugar & Chemicals Limited (supra), the nature of the re…

DCIT, Circle - 8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Tm International Logistics Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2567/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 37Section 80I

…the Revenue is dismissed.” 14. 7. The Revenue before us could not point out any change in facts and law therefore, respectfully following this order in the assessee’s own case and also relying on Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Bharat Earth Movers in 245 ITR 428 (SC) wherein it was held “if a business liability has definitely arisen in the accounting year, the deduction should be allowed although the liability may have to be quantified and discharged at a future date. What should be certain is the incurring of the liability. It should also be capable of being estimated with reasonable certainty though th…

Hindustan Everest Tools Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 11(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 7012/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 7012/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Hindustan Everest Tools Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, 403, Dohil Chambers, 46, Nehru Ward-11(3), Place, New Delhi-110019 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaach2937C Assessee By : Sh. S. Krishnan, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Bhopal Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.03.2021

For Appellant: Sh. S. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Bhopal Singh, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Kul Bharat, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member (Through Video Conferencing) ITA No. 7012/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Hindustan Everest Tools Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, 403, Dohil Chambers, 46, Nehru Ward-11(3), Place, New Delhi-110019 New Delhi-110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACH2937C Assessee by : Sh. S. Krishnan, CA Revenue by : Sh. Bhopal Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing: 17.03.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 22.03.2021 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been filed b…

Pawan Hans Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 19(2), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 7388/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2014-15
Section 115J

…ed, ITA No.235/Ran/2016 (v) Housing And Urban Development Corporation Ltd. vs. Add. CIT, ITA 541/2019, (Delhi HC) (vi) PCIT vs. NHPC Ltd., ITA 356, 2015, P&H High Court (v) DCIT vs. Inox Leisure Ltd., 351 ITR 314, Gujarat HC (vi) Bharat Earth Movers vs. CIT, 245 ITR 428 (SC), (vii) CIT v. Echjay Forgings (P) Ltd., 251 ITR 15, Bombay HC (viii) M/s. Rotork Controls India (P.) Ltd. v. CIT, 314 ITR 62 (SC) (ix) Ircon International Limited, v. Add. CIT, ITA Nos. 1825/Del/2005, ITAT DELHI (x) Asahi India Glass Limited v. DCIT, ITA No.1637/Del/2014, ITAT DELHI (xi) M/s. Hil Lifecare Limited vs. ACIT in ITA No.ITA No…

Kallam Spinning Limited, Guntur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Guntur

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

ITA 152/VIZ/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam01 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K.Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.152/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2013-14) M/S Kallam Textiles Ltd Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of (Earlier Known As Income Tax M/S Kallam Spinning Ltd.) Circle-(1) Chowdavaram Guntur Guntur [Pan : Aaack9363M] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri C.Subrahmanyam, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 03.03.2021 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.03.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per D.S.Sunder Singh: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Pr.Cit), Guntur Dated 22.03.2018 For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2013-14. 2

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT, DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 80I

…. Therefore, submitted that there is no error in the order of the AO, hence requested to quash the 263 order and restore the assessment order. The assessee relied on the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. Vs. CIT (2000) 245 ITR 428 (SC) and the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Oriental Bank of Commerce Vs.Addl.Commissioner of Income Tax (2018) 254 Taxman 0197 (Delhi). 4. Per contra, the Ld.DR argued that the amount reduced from the P& L account from the profit before tax is a provision and as per explanation I to 6 I.T.A. No.152/Viz/2018, A.Y.2013-14 M/s…

DCIT, Faridabad vs. M/S. Nhpc Ltd., Faridabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5211/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dy. Cit, Vs. M/S. Nhpc Ltd., Circle-Ii, Faridabad. Nhpc Comples, Sector-33, Faridabad. Pan No. Aaacn 0149 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sr. Manager(Fin)- Tax, Vs. Acit Nhpc Ltd., Circle – Ii, Nhpc Office Comples, Faridabad 4Th Floor, Finance Division Sector – 33, Faridabad-121003 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Pramita M. Biswas, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri Ved Jain, Adv. Shri Ashish Goel, C.A. Date Of Hearing: 08/02/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 17/02/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 80

…he manner in which it fixes the tariff are the same. The Division Bench of the Delhi High Court held:— "21. There is authority, in the form of Supreme Court judgments in Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1985] 156 ITR 585, Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. v. CIT [2000] 245 ITR 428 and Metal Box Company of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen, (1969) 73 ITR 53, that a provision made on a reasonable basis, it would be in the nature of an ascertained liability and that in a mercantile system of accounting, provision for liability ascertained during the course of the relevant accounting period, which is payable at a future is permissib…

Sr. Manager(Fin)--Tax, Nhpc Ltd., Faridabad vs. ACIT, Faridabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5106/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dy. Cit, Vs. M/S. Nhpc Ltd., Circle-Ii, Faridabad. Nhpc Comples, Sector-33, Faridabad. Pan No. Aaacn 0149 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sr. Manager(Fin)- Tax, Vs. Acit Nhpc Ltd., Circle – Ii, Nhpc Office Comples, Faridabad 4Th Floor, Finance Division Sector – 33, Faridabad-121003 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Pramita M. Biswas, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri Ved Jain, Adv. Shri Ashish Goel, C.A. Date Of Hearing: 08/02/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 17/02/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 80

…he manner in which it fixes the tariff are the same. The Division Bench of the Delhi High Court held:— "21. There is authority, in the form of Supreme Court judgments in Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1985] 156 ITR 585, Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. v. CIT [2000] 245 ITR 428 and Metal Box Company of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen, (1969) 73 ITR 53, that a provision made on a reasonable basis, it would be in the nature of an ascertained liability and that in a mercantile system of accounting, provision for liability ascertained during the course of the relevant accounting period, which is payable at a future is permissib…

Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/S. Telco Construction

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

ITA/336/2014HC Karnataka16 Feb 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 260Section 40

…found that no new asset has come into existence and the study was conducted only for improving the sales and profitability of the assessee. In support of aforesaid submissions, reliance has been placed on decisions in BHARAT EARTH MOVERS VS. CIT, (2000) 245 ITR 428 (SC), PARASHURAM POTTERY WORKS CO. LTD. VS. ITO, (1977) 106 ITR 1 (SC), LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION VS. CIT, (1996) 219 ITR 410 (SC), TAPARIA TOOLS LTD. VS. JCIT, 372 ITR 605, STEAM NAVIGATION CO, (1953) (P) LTD. VS. CIT, (1965) 56 ITR 52 and EMPIRE JUTE CO. VS. CIT, (1980) 124 ITR 1 (SC). 11 8. We have considered the submissions…