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)

Indo Russian Aviation Ltd., Nashik vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 171/PUN/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Oct 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.171/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Indo Russian Aviation Ltd., C/O Hal Administrative Block, Ojhar Township, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Nashik – 422207 …. Pan: Aaaci5908C Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 1, Nashik

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Dr Vivek Aggarwal and Shri M.K. Verma

Section 143(3)

…documents in this regard are placed at pages 98 to 100 of Paper Book. Further documents were separately filed showing methodology of calculation of warranty claim. He placed reliance on the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT (2000) 245 ITR 428 (SC). 8. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue on the other hand, referred to the agreement between the parties and questioned whether it was the liability of assessee especially where the assessee while writing letters to the Counterpart claimed it was not its liability. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue…

JCIT, Rang-2, Kota vs. Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited, Kota

In the result, respective grounds of appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 575/JPR/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)

Section 14A

…eceive 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. Commissioner of Income Tax (2000) 6 SCC 645, 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 has definitely arisen in…

Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited, Kota vs. JCIT, Kota

In the result, respective grounds of appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 461/JPR/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)

Section 14A

…eceive 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. Commissioner of Income Tax (2000) 6 SCC 645, 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 has definitely arisen in…

Landis+Gyr Limited, South 24 Parganas vs. DCIT, Circle-1(A), Kolkata

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

ITA 524/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A No. 524/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Sawhney, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR

Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…ate but what should be definite is incurring of liability. It is not in dispute that the assessee is following mercantile system of accounting. This principle has been endorsed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers vs CIT reported in 245 ITR 428 (SC). Hence we hold that this liability of Rs 12,79,000/- is an ascertained liability in the year under appeal based on the systematic historical data of the past wherein warranty liabilities had occurred to the assessee. Reliance in this regard is again placed on yet another finding of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls Ind…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 467/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 467/Del/2014 (A.Y 2009-10)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

…deduction even though its actual quantification and discharge is deferred to a future date: a) Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd.: 37 ITR 1 (SC) b) Metal Box (P) Limited (1969): 73 ITR 53 (SC) c) United Commercial Bank v. CIT 240 ITR 355 (SC) d) Bharat Earth Movers: 245 ITR 428 (SC) e) Kelvinator of India Ltd. reported in 256 ITR 1 confirmed by SC in 320 ITR 561 f) CIT v Vinitec Corpn. (P) Ltd.: 278 ITR 337 (Delhi) g) National Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. v. JCIT : 98 ITD 278 (Hyd. ITAT) The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd. 312 ITR 254 has held that:- “21. In conclu…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Pune vs. Eaton Fluid Power Ltd., Pune

In the result, the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2011-12 is dismissed being devoid of any merit

ITA 515/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Vishal KalraFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar

Section 143(3)

…supported the findings of DRP and further substantiate its submissions by placing reliance on the following decisions: i. Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, 314 ITR 62 (SC); ii. Calcutta Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT, 37 ITR 1 (SC); iii. Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT, 245 ITR 428 (SC). 4. On the other hand Shri Rajeev Kumar representing the Department submitted that from the details furnished by the assessee relating to corporate cost allocation as head wise expenses and allocation policy the Assessing Officer observed that the cost allocation does not relate itself to any scientific method or to some specific cause but i…

Eaton Fluid Power Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2011-12 is dismissed being devoid of any merit

ITA 476/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Vishal KalraFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar

Section 143(3)

…supported the findings of DRP and further substantiate its submissions by placing reliance on the following decisions: i. Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, 314 ITR 62 (SC); ii. Calcutta Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT, 37 ITR 1 (SC); iii. Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT, 245 ITR 428 (SC). 4. On the other hand Shri Rajeev Kumar representing the Department submitted that from the details furnished by the assessee relating to corporate cost allocation as head wise expenses and allocation policy the Assessing Officer observed that the cost allocation does not relate itself to any scientific method or to some specific cause but i…

Eaton Fluid Power Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2011-12 is dismissed being devoid of any merit

ITA 506/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Vishal KalraFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar

Section 143(3)

…supported the findings of DRP and further substantiate its submissions by placing reliance on the following decisions: i. Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, 314 ITR 62 (SC); ii. Calcutta Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT, 37 ITR 1 (SC); iii. Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT, 245 ITR 428 (SC). 4. On the other hand Shri Rajeev Kumar representing the Department submitted that from the details furnished by the assessee relating to corporate cost allocation as head wise expenses and allocation policy the Assessing Officer observed that the cost allocation does not relate itself to any scientific method or to some specific cause but i…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Eaton Fluid Power Ltd., Pune

In the result, the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2011-12 is dismissed being devoid of any merit

ITA 493/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Vishal KalraFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar

Section 143(3)

…supported the findings of DRP and further substantiate its submissions by placing reliance on the following decisions: i. Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, 314 ITR 62 (SC); ii. Calcutta Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT, 37 ITR 1 (SC); iii. Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT, 245 ITR 428 (SC). 4. On the other hand Shri Rajeev Kumar representing the Department submitted that from the details furnished by the assessee relating to corporate cost allocation as head wise expenses and allocation policy the Assessing Officer observed that the cost allocation does not relate itself to any scientific method or to some specific cause but i…

DCIT (OSD) Cir 2(2), Mumbai vs. Nhava Sheva International Container Terminal P. Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 2935/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Girish DaveFor Respondent: Shri Kiran Unavekar

Section 115J

…unting system as per past practice. The accounts were duly certified by the auditors. In such scenario, ratio of M/s. NhavaSheva International Container Terminal Pvt. Ltd. Hon’ble Apex Court decision in the case of Bharat Earth Movers Limited vs. CIT [2000] 245 ITR 428 (SC) supports the case of the assessee. In this case, it was held as under: “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…

De La Rue Cash Processing Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

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

ITA 1606/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[A.Y 2009-10] & [A.Y 2010-11] De La Rue Cash Processing Vs. The A.C.I.T Solutions India Pvt. Ltd Circle – 1(1) 1404, 14Th Floor, Signature Tower Gurgaon South City – I, Gurgaon Pan : Aaacd 6217 H [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Tiwari, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anchal Khandelwal, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 92A(2)Section 92C

…n is not a contingent liability and it is quite certain that the expenses would be incurred in meeting the warrantee obligation linked to the sales of the current year in the following year. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT 245 ITR 428 has laid down that if a business liability has arisen in an accounting year, the deduction should be allowed although the liability may have to be quantified and discharged on a future date. A similar issue was considered by the coordinate bench in ITA No. 5017/DEL/2017 vide Ground No. 1 of that appeal. Relevant finding of the order reads as und…

M/S. De La Rue Cash Processing Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Gurgaon

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

ITA 1113/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[A.Y 2009-10] & [A.Y 2010-11] De La Rue Cash Processing Vs. The A.C.I.T Solutions India Pvt. Ltd Circle – 1(1) 1404, 14Th Floor, Signature Tower Gurgaon South City – I, Gurgaon Pan : Aaacd 6217 H [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Tiwari, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anchal Khandelwal, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 92A(2)Section 92C

…n is not a contingent liability and it is quite certain that the expenses would be incurred in meeting the warrantee obligation linked to the sales of the current year in the following year. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT 245 ITR 428 has laid down that if a business liability has arisen in an accounting year, the deduction should be allowed although the liability may have to be quantified and discharged on a future date. A similar issue was considered by the coordinate bench in ITA No. 5017/DEL/2017 vide Ground No. 1 of that appeal. Relevant finding of the order reads as und…

DCIT 1(3), Mumbai vs. Tata Motors Finance Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal for A

ITA 3476/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E ”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM ITA No.4353/Mum/2013 (Assessment Year :2007-08) DCIT 1(3) Vs. M/s. Tata Motor Finance Ltd., R.No.540, 5th Floor 3rd Floor, Nanavati Mahalaya, Aayakar Bhavan 18, Homi Mody Street, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 001 Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No. AACCT4644A Appellant) .. Respondent) ITA No.4860/Mum/2013 (Assessment Year :2007-08) M/s. Tata Motor Finance Ltd., Vs. Addl. CIT 1(3) / DCIT 1(3) 3rd Floor, Nanavati Mahalaya, Mumbai – 400 020 18, Homi Mody Street, Mumbai – 400 001 PAN/GIR No. AACCT4644A Appellant) .. Respon…

DCIT 3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7241/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mangalore Refinery & Addl. Cit-3(2), Mumbai Petrochemicals Ltd. 15Th Vs. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. Pan No. Aaacm5132A Respondent Appellant Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit-3(2) Room No. Mangalore Refinery & 674, 6Th Floor, Petrochemicals Ltd. 15Th Vs. Aayakarbhavan, M. K. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Road, Mumbai-400020. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. Pan No. Aaacm5132A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. J.D.J. Mistri, Senior Advocate & Mr. Madhur Agrawal, Advocate Revenue By : Mr.Samuel Darse, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 12/06/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/09/2018

For Appellant: Mr. J.D.J. Mistri, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Samuel Darse, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 44B

…T(A) agreed with the reasons given by the AO and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 39. Before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee relies on the decision in Metal Box Company of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen (73 ITR 53) (SC), Bharat Earth Moves v. CIT (245 ITR 428) (SC), CIT v. Nagri Mills Co. Ltd. (33 ITR 681) (Bom). Also reliance is placed by him on the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2004-05. Mangalore Refinery On the other hand, the Ld. DR relies on the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 40. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. Similar issue arose…

Magnalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 3(2)

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7133/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mangalore Refinery & Addl. Cit-3(2), Mumbai Petrochemicals Ltd. 15Th Vs. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. Pan No. Aaacm5132A Respondent Appellant Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit-3(2) Room No. Mangalore Refinery & 674, 6Th Floor, Petrochemicals Ltd. 15Th Vs. Aayakarbhavan, M. K. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Road, Mumbai-400020. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. Pan No. Aaacm5132A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. J.D.J. Mistri, Senior Advocate & Mr. Madhur Agrawal, Advocate Revenue By : Mr.Samuel Darse, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 12/06/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/09/2018

For Appellant: Mr. J.D.J. Mistri, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Samuel Darse, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 44B

…T(A) agreed with the reasons given by the AO and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 39. Before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee relies on the decision in Metal Box Company of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen (73 ITR 53) (SC), Bharat Earth Moves v. CIT (245 ITR 428) (SC), CIT v. Nagri Mills Co. Ltd. (33 ITR 681) (Bom). Also reliance is placed by him on the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2004-05. Mangalore Refinery On the other hand, the Ld. DR relies on the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 40. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. Similar issue arose…

Asst CIT 19(1), Mumbai vs. Dharamchand Paraschand Exports, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6743/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Dharamchand Paraschand Income Tax- 19(1) Exports, Room No.203, 2Nd Floor Ce/3011-3012, Bharat Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road Diamond Bourse, Bkc Mumbai – 400 007 Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaafd1078M Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…at is of Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait and the present appellant, foreign currency positions were hedged by entering into Forward contracts, and had incurred year-end forward contract conversion losses. Further reliance is placed on Bharat Earth Moversv. O7~[2000] 245 ITR 428/ 112 Taxman 61. 6.3.7 In the case of BHARAT EARTH MOVERS LTD (supra), the court has differentiated between what is accrued liability and contingent liability. The relevant portion of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble court is reproduced as under:  For an assesses maintaining his account on the mercantile system, a liability already accrued…

ACIT, Gurgaon vs. M/S. Motorola India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4581/DEL/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishimotorola India Pvt Ltd, Vs. Acit, Motorola Excellence Centre, Gurgaon Circle, 415/2, Sector-14, Mg Road, Gurgaon Gurgaon, Haryana Pan: Aaacm9343D (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Motorola India Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon Circle, Motorola Excellence Centre, Gurgaon 415/2, Sector-14, Mg Road, Gurgaon, Haryana Pan: Aaacm9343D (Appellant) (Respondent) Motorola Solutions India (P) Ltd, Vs. Acit, 415/2, Motorola Excellence Gurgaon Circle, Centre, Mg Road, Haryana Gurgaon Pan: Aaacm9343D (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Motorola Solutions India (P) Gurgaon Circle, Ltd, Gurgaon 415/2, Motorola Excellence Centre, Mg Road, Haryana Pan: Aaacm9343D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri G.C. Srivastava, Adv Shri Suvinay K. Dash, Adv Revenue By: Shri Sanjay I Bara, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 28/05/2018 Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2018

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I Bara, CIT DR

Section 37Section 43BSection 80HSection 92C

…yable to any employees who are working with the company. The assessee claimed that the liability created would keep getting accumulated and not payable until the employee leaves the company. The ld AR heavily relied upon the decision of the Bharat Earthmovers 245 ITR 428. We have carefully considered the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court however, the issue before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was that whether the provision for meeting the liability on earned leave by an employee is an admissible deduction. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the above liability is a provision made by the assessee for meeting…

M/S Enexio Power Cooling Solutions India Pvt Ltd (Formerly Known As M/S Gea Cooling Tower Technologies (India) P Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT (OSD) Corp Range 2, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 509/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकरअपीलसं/.I.T.A. No. 509/Chny/2018 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Saroj Kumar Parida, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Ruby George, CIT

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण ,’बी’ "यायपीठ,चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन. आर. एस .गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"यके सम# BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं/.I.T.A. No. 509/Chny/2018 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/s. Enexio Power Cooling Solutions India The Assistant Commissioner of Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Income Tax (OSD), (Formerly known as M/s. Gea Cooling Corporate Range -2, Tower Technologies (India) P. Ltd., Chennai 600 034. No. 443, Anna Salai, Guna Building Teynampet, Chennai – 600 018. [PAN: AAACG 7891G…

Xl India Business Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1477/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Adv & Ms. AnanyaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr. D.R

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 40(2)(b)

…ed on a scientific basis with a reasonable degree of estimation. Variation in estimate cannot convert it into a contingent or unascertained figure.” He also strongly relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers vs. CIT, 245 ITR 428 (SC). He further submitted that the liabilities were ascertained in the case of assessee, because in the month of March itself based on the grade of the employees’ bonus was determined and provision was made. 60. On the other hand, learned Department Representative has strongly relied upon the order of the ld. CIT(A). 61. After considering the…

Tata Motors Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Ltu 2, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3151/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm M/S. Tata Motors Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Bombay House, 24 Income Tax Homi Mody Street Ltu-2, 29Th Floor, Centre-1 Hutama Chowk Mumbai – 400 001 World Trade Centre Cuffe Parade Mumbai – 400 005 Pan/Gir No.Aaact2727Q Appellant) Respondent) ..

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM M/s. Tata Motors Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Bombay House, 24 Income Tax Homi Mody Street LTU-2, 29th Floor, Centre-1 Hutama Chowk Mumbai – 400 001 World Trade Centre Cuffe Parade Mumbai – 400 005 PAN/GIR No.AAACT2727Q Appellant) Respondent) .. Assessee by Shri Rajan Vora & Shri Nikhil Tiwari Revenue by Shri K.S.Rajendra Kumar Date of Hearing 19/04/2018 Date of Pronouncement 17/07/2018 आदेश / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M): This is an appeal filed by assessee against the order of CIT(A)-I, Mumba…

Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT

What is Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT

Indo Russian Aviation Ltd., Nashik vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

JCIT, Rang-2, Kota vs. Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited, Kota

Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited, Kota vs. JCIT, Kota

Landis+Gyr Limited, South 24 Parganas vs. DCIT, Circle-1(A), Kolkata

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Pune vs. Eaton Fluid Power Ltd., Pune

Eaton Fluid Power Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

Eaton Fluid Power Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Eaton Fluid Power Ltd., Pune

DCIT (OSD) Cir 2(2), Mumbai vs. Nhava Sheva International Container Terminal P. Ltd, Mumbai

De La Rue Cash Processing Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

M/S. De La Rue Cash Processing Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Gurgaon

DCIT 1(3), Mumbai vs. Tata Motors Finance Ltd, Mumbai

DCIT 3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd, Mumbai

Magnalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 3(2)

Asst CIT 19(1), Mumbai vs. Dharamchand Paraschand Exports, Mumbai

ACIT, Gurgaon vs. M/S. Motorola India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

M/S Enexio Power Cooling Solutions India Pvt Ltd (Formerly Known As M/S Gea Cooling Tower Technologies (India) P Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT (OSD) Corp Range 2, Chennai

Xl India Business Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Tata Motors Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Ltu 2, Mumbai