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.

How many judgments cite Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT?

901 judgments on BharatTax cite Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT (245 ITR 428), spanning 2006 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 37(1), Section 143(3), Section 115JB, Section 14A, Section 40(a)(ia), Section 195.

Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT (245 ITR 428)

The Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ADIT (It) RG-3(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3996/MUM/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Adit (It) 3(1) Vs. The Hongkong & Scindia House, Shanghai Banking R.No.132, 1St Floor Corporation Ltd N.M.Road, 52/60, Mahatma Gandhi Mumbai – 38 Road Mumbai – 400 001 Pan/Gir No. Aaact2786P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & The Hongkong & Vs. Adit (It) 3(1) Shanghai Banking Scindia House, R.No.132, 1St Floor Corporation Ltd 52/60, Mahatma Gandhi N.M.Road, Road Mumbai – 38 Mumbai – 400 001 Pan/Gir No. Aaact2786P (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 37Section 44C

…and Sanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. bank and hence, provided for and claimed as deduction in the return of income. The assessee has also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 245 ITR 428 to drive home the point that the said provision is not made on account of any contingent liability. The ld. AO without giving any finding simply dismissed the claim of the assessee and disallowed the sum of Rs.3,91,61,437/- in the assessment. The assessee submitted before the ld. CIT(A) as under:- “34. During the appellate hearing, it has been s…

Andhra Pradesh Gas Power Corporation Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 2094/HYD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Nov 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Sri V. SivakumarFor Respondent: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 148Section 37

…ITA Nos 2092 2093 and 2094 of 2018 AP Gas Power Corporation Ltd Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member AND Shri S.Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member ITA Nos.2092, 2093 and 2094/ Hyd/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2015-16 A.P. Gas Power Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Corporation Ltd, Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:AABCA9105C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri V. Sivakumar Revenue by: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT-DR Date of hearing: 22/08/2019 Date of pronouncement: 19/11/2019 ORDER Per Smt. P. Madhav…

Andhra Pradesh Gas Power Corporation Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 2093/HYD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Sri V. SivakumarFor Respondent: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 148Section 37

…ITA Nos 2092 2093 and 2094 of 2018 AP Gas Power Corporation Ltd Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member AND Shri S.Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member ITA Nos.2092, 2093 and 2094/ Hyd/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2015-16 A.P. Gas Power Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Corporation Ltd, Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:AABCA9105C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri V. Sivakumar Revenue by: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT-DR Date of hearing: 22/08/2019 Date of pronouncement: 19/11/2019 ORDER Per Smt. P. Madhav…

Andhra Pradesh Gas Power Corporation Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 2092/HYD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Sri V. SivakumarFor Respondent: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 148Section 37

…ITA Nos 2092 2093 and 2094 of 2018 AP Gas Power Corporation Ltd Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member AND Shri S.Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member ITA Nos.2092, 2093 and 2094/ Hyd/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2015-16 A.P. Gas Power Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Corporation Ltd, Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:AABCA9105C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri V. Sivakumar Revenue by: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT-DR Date of hearing: 22/08/2019 Date of pronouncement: 19/11/2019 ORDER Per Smt. P. Madhav…

Vikram Developers & Promoters, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2796/PUN/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2795 & 2796/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Vikram Developers & Promoters, 19, Shrikrishna Heights, Ganeshkhind Road, Shivaji Nagar, Pune-411005. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aagfv4298R बनाम / V/S. Dcit, Central Circle-2(1), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Assessee By : Shri Kishor Phadke Revenue By : Shri Milind Chahure सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17.10.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 14.11.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: There Are Two Appeals Under Consideration Filed By The Assessee Against The Common Orders Of The Cit(A)-12, Pune Dated 08.09.2016 For The Assessment Years 2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively. Preliminary Issue - Condonation Of Delay – Both Appeals 2. Before Us, At The Outset, Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That The Both The Appeals Could Not Be Filed In Time & The Said Appeals Were Filed With The Delay Of 01 Day. In This Regard, Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That The Delay Is Unintentional & Prayed For Condoning The Same. 3. After Hearing Both The Sides & Considering The Smallness Of Delay In Filing Of Both The Appeals, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Adjudicate The Appeals Of The Assessee In The Following Paragraphs. 4. The Facts & Grounds Are Common In Both The Appeals, Therefore, Both The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Composite Order. Accordingly, The Appeal-Wise Adjudication Is Taken Up In The Following Paragraphs.

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chahure

Section 132Section 68Section 80I

…is granted, then, entire sales consideration will get taxed. Such gross taxation is against first principles of tax-law. Appellant relies on the following decisions in this regard: i. Calcutta Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT - 37 ITR 1 (SC) ii. Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT - 245 ITR 428 (SC).” 21. From the above submission by the AR, it is the submission of the assessee that ‘due to project completion method’ adopted by the assessee, the net profit becomes taxable in assessment year 2014-15. Alternatively, the claim of expenditure needs to be preponed among the 3 assessment years. Assessee relied on set matching principle. Ld. D…

M/S. Vikram Developers & Promoters, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2795/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2795 & 2796/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Vikram Developers & Promoters, 19, Shrikrishna Heights, Ganeshkhind Road, Shivaji Nagar, Pune-411005. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aagfv4298R बनाम / V/S. Dcit, Central Circle-2(1), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Assessee By : Shri Kishor Phadke Revenue By : Shri Milind Chahure सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17.10.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 14.11.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: There Are Two Appeals Under Consideration Filed By The Assessee Against The Common Orders Of The Cit(A)-12, Pune Dated 08.09.2016 For The Assessment Years 2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively. Preliminary Issue - Condonation Of Delay – Both Appeals 2. Before Us, At The Outset, Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That The Both The Appeals Could Not Be Filed In Time & The Said Appeals Were Filed With The Delay Of 01 Day. In This Regard, Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That The Delay Is Unintentional & Prayed For Condoning The Same. 3. After Hearing Both The Sides & Considering The Smallness Of Delay In Filing Of Both The Appeals, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Adjudicate The Appeals Of The Assessee In The Following Paragraphs. 4. The Facts & Grounds Are Common In Both The Appeals, Therefore, Both The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Composite Order. Accordingly, The Appeal-Wise Adjudication Is Taken Up In The Following Paragraphs.

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chahure

Section 132Section 68Section 80I

…is granted, then, entire sales consideration will get taxed. Such gross taxation is against first principles of tax-law. Appellant relies on the following decisions in this regard: i. Calcutta Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT - 37 ITR 1 (SC) ii. Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT - 245 ITR 428 (SC).” 21. From the above submission by the AR, it is the submission of the assessee that ‘due to project completion method’ adopted by the assessee, the net profit becomes taxable in assessment year 2014-15. Alternatively, the claim of expenditure needs to be preponed among the 3 assessment years. Assessee relied on set matching principle. Ld. D…

M/S. Motorola Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5797/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble, [Assessment Year: 2008-09]

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘I-1’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER, [Assessment Year: 2008-09] M/s Motorola Solutions India Pvt. DCIT, Circle-2, 4th Flooor, Vanijya Kunj, Ltd.(Formerly known as Motorola India Pvt. Ltd.), HSIIDC Building, Udyog Vihar, 415/2, Mehrauli Gurgaon Road, Phase –V, Nr. Shankar Chowk, Gurgaon-122001 N.H.-8 Gurgaon PAN-AAACM9343D Appellant Respondent Appellant by Shri Himanshu S. Sinha, Ms. Vrinda Tulshan, Shri Yash Varmani, Shri Manoneet Dalal, Shri Yogesh Arora, Ms. Shradha Gupta Shri Vipin Sharma R…

Sika India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-12(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 911/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Oct 2019AY 2011-2012

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sika India Pvt. Ltd………………………….……........................................................……………….…......Appellant Commercial Complex-Ii 620, Diamond Harbour Road Kolkata – 700 034 [Pan : Aaecs 1119 F] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-11(2), Kolkata……..................……….…....Respondent Appearances By: Shri Himanshu Sinha, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Dr. P.K. Srihari, Cit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 31St, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 30Th, 2019 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 143(3)

…asis of actuarial calculations. It, therefore, cannot , therefore, cannot be said that the provision for gratuity is not be said that the provision for gratuity is not ascertained liability. 18. In case of Bharat Earth Movers Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT [2000] 245 ITR 428/112 Taxman 61 the [2000] 245 ITR 428/112 Taxman 61 the Apex Court held that the amounts set apart by an assessee to meet its liability on Apex Court held that the amounts set apart by an assessee to meet its liability on Apex Court held that the amounts set apart by an assessee to meet its liability on account of leave encashm account of leave en…

Hewlwtt Packward India Software Operation Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 2175/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 40

…shment was regarded as a contingent liability and therefore cannot be allowed as a deduction under the mercantile system of accounting, as the liability cannot be said to have been accrued. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharath Earth Movers v. CIT, 245 ITR 428 (SC) took the view that even though liability on account of leave encashment is claimed by way of a provision, the same should be allowed as a deduction, if the liability of the assessee for payment of leave encashment is certain and quantification of the such liability is reasonable. Section 43B(f) was introduced by the Finance Act, 2001 w.e.f.…

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 1(1), Mumbai

In the result we affirm the order of ld CIT(A) id affirmed and

ITA 5378/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya () & Shri Pawan Singh () Hindustan Petroleum The Addl.Cit, Range-1(1), Corporation Ltd., Mumbai 17, Jamashedji Tata Road, V/S Mumbai-400 020 Pan: Aaach1118B Appellant Respondent

Section 14ASection 37Section 37(1)

…rt of the contracts and the liability gets attached, the moment a service contract is signed; inducting a new employee. The argument of Senior Counsel is, therefore, well founded. We shall also, refer to the case of Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. vs CIT reported in 245 ITR 428, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that leave encashment is not a contingent liability. Taking the same cue, that post retirement medical benefit is also a liability which gets attached to the company the moment, the service contract is signed, we hold that the revenue authorities erred in disallowing the provision under this head. Havin…

Vedanta Ltd (Earlier Known As Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd.), Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle- 26(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1454/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishivedanta Ltd. Vs. Acit, (Earlier Known As Sterlite Circle-26(1), Industries (India) Ltd,) New Delhi Core-6, 3Rd Floor, Scope Complex, 7, Lodhi Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaccs7101B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR

Section 234BSection 263Section 271

…wed by the assessee. The provision for unpaid expenses is not in the nature of contingent expenditure. It is a provision made against actual expenditure. Therefore, the decision of the Hon'ble supreme Court rendered in the case of Bharat Earth Movers vs. CIT, 245 ITR 428, squarely applies here. 15 This part of the reply of the assessee was considered. It is important to note here that the assessee is making provision on the date of closing of the year. It is unascertainable for the assessee whether the same amount is payable or a different amount is payable. The judgment cited by the assessee clearly demarcates t…