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 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 367,154 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 115JB Section 14A Section 40(a)(ia)Section 195 Section 148 Section 1961

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 35d mercantile system of accounting enduring benefit intangible assets section 40(a)(i)section 35 revenue expenditure book profits section 37(1)section 115jb amalgamation section 37

Judgments citing Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT

ACIT 8(1), Mumbai vs. Apatech Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1227/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.946 & 723/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 & 2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri S C Tiwari and Rutuja N

Section 14ASection 40

…he claim of the assessee by allowing the relief to the extent of Rs.21,17,905/- being actual payment of leave encashment by rejecting the submissions of the assessee that the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers reported in 245 ITR 428 by observing that the said judgment covers the case of the assessee; that the amount provided by the assessee in respect of future liability would be allowable ITA No . 946 -723 -200 03-1 227- 1271-1 228- AP TEC H 25 subject to the fulfillment of certain conditions which the assessee has not satisfied and therefore the provisions were sustained…

Asst CIT 16(3), Mumbai vs. K.P. Sanghvi & Sons, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4588/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S K P Sanghvi & Sons, Income Tax -16(3), Matru 1301, Prasad Chambers, Mandir, Tardeo Road, Operahouse,Mumbai-4 Mumbai-400007 Pan:Aaafk8390F .. Appellant Respondent Appellant By .. Sri R P Meena Respondent By .. Sri K Shivram Date Of Hearing .. 29-09-2016 Date Of Pronouncement .. 29 -09- 2016 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Cit (Appeals)-27, Mumbai In Appeal No.Cit(A)-27/Ac-16(3)/135/13-14 Dated 22.4.2014. Assessment Was Framed By The Acit- Circle 16(3), Mumbai For The Assessment Year 2009-10 Vide His Order Dated 28.3.2013 U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”).

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAMIT KOCHAR, AM The Asst. Commissioner of Vs. M/s K P Sanghvi and Sons, Income Tax -16(3), Matru 1301, Prasad Chambers, Mandir, Tardeo Road, OperaHouse,Mumbai-4 Mumbai-400007 PAN:AAAFK8390F .. Appellant Respondent Appellant by .. Sri R P Meena Respondent by .. Sri K Shivram Date of hearing .. 29-09-2016 Date of pronouncement .. 29 -09- 2016 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: This appeal by the Revenue is arising out of the order of the CIT (Appeals)-27, Mumbai in appeal No.CIT(A)-27/AC-16(3)/135/13-14 dated 22.4.2014. Asse…

ACIT 10(1), Mumbai vs. Shivshahi Punarvasan Prakalp Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 8458/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

For Respondent: Shri P. R. Ghosh

…ICAI, New Delhi) being applicable in its case. Reliance was placed on the decisions in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 (SC); Metal Box Company of India Ltd. vs. Their Workmen [1969] 73 ITR 53 (SC); and Bharat Earth Movers vs. CIT [2000] 245 ITR 428 (SC). We reproduce the relevant part of the tribunal’s order as under: ‘2.11.1 to 2.11.2 …………. 2.11.3 A careful perusal of the Accounting Standards AS-1 & AS-2 notified above shows that these are only regarding disclosure of accounting policies and disclosure of prior period expenses and extraordinary items and changes in accounting policies. Th…

SHI vs. Hahi Punarvasan Prakalp Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 8251/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

For Respondent: Shri P. R. Ghosh

Beckman Colter India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO RG 8(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6083/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Saktijit Deyआयकर अऩीऱ सं. / Ita No. 6083/Mum./2012 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Beckman Coulter India Pvt. Ltd. Solitaire Corporate Park …….………. अऩीऱधथी / 3Rd Floor, Building No.Ii Andheri Ghatkopar Link Road Appellant Chakala, Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 093 Pan – Aaccb7266L V/S Income Tax Officer ..…….………. प्रत्यथी / Ward-8(1)(4), Aayakar Bhawan Respondent 101, M.K. Road, Mumbai 400 020 आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / Ita No. 847/Mum./2013 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Beckman Coulter India Pvt. Ltd. Solitaire Corporate Park …….………. अऩीऱधथी / 3Rd Floor, Building No.Ii Andheri Ghatkopar Link Road Appellant Chakala, Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 093 Pan – Aaccb7266L V/S Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) ..…….………. प्रत्यथी / Range-8(1), Aayakar Bhawan Respondent 101, M.K. Road, Mumbai 400 020 ननधधाररती की ओर से / Assessee By : Ms. Karishma Phatarphekar A/W Shri Paras Savla. Shri Keerthiya Sharma & Shri Pratik Poddar रधजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri Sanjeev Jain सुनवधई की तधरीख / आदेश घोषणध की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing – 28.09.2016 Date Of Order – 16.12.2016

For Appellant: Ms. Karishma Phatarphekar a/wFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Jain

…Act. She, therefore, submitted, no disallowance should be made in the impugned assessment year also. In support of this contention, the learned Authorised Representative relied upon to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bharat Earth Movers v/s CIT, 245 ITR 428 (SC). 21. The learned Departmental Representative relying upon the observations of the Assessing Officer and the learned Commissioner (Appeals) submitted, impugned assessment year being the first year of operation, it is for the assessee to demonstrate how it has ascertained the liability on account of leave encashment. 22. We have heard the ri…

The Burdwan Central Co - Operative Bank Limited, Burdwan vs. A.C.I.T Cir - 2, Burdwan

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1243/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Pratap Kanti Ghosh, , FCAFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl.CIT

Section 143(3)

…er of AO. Hence Gr.No.B by the Assessee before the Tribunal. 12. We have heard the rival submissions. The allowability with regard to claiming deduction on account of provision has been laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers 245 ITR 428. In the aforesaid decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court it has been held that if a business liability has definitely arisen in the accounting year, deduction is allowable although the liability may have to quantified and discharged at a future date. The Court held that what should be certain is the incurring of the liability and its quantificatio…

Welspun Syntex Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 4(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 8689/MUM/2011[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2016AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 1998-99

Section 37Section 43BSection 68

…and evidences on objective basis and unless anything wrong is found in details or documentary evidences, the claim of the assessee should be allowed in view of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat 13 Welspun Syntex Ltd. Earth Movers vs CIT 245 ITR 428. Thus, this ground may be treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 6.3. As a result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Now, we shall take up revenue’s appeal in ITA No.6653/Mum/2005 for A.Y. 2000-01. 7. It was bought to our notice that in this appeal tax effect is less than 10,00,000/- and therefore, appeal of the revenue is not main…

Welspun Syntex Ltd, Mumbai vs. JCIT Sp RG 25, Mumbai

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

ITA 8688/MUM/2011[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2016AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 1998-99

Section 37Section 43BSection 68

First Flight Couriers Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 3436/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Jason P. Boaz, Am & Sri Sandeep Gosain, Jm M/S. First Flight Couriers Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., 505, Cotton Exchange Income Tax -4(2), Mumbai Building, Kalbadi, Mumbai-2 Pan: Aaacf 0841 R Appellant .. Respondent

Section 115JSection 143Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 36(1)

…enforcing the decree by way of execution for want of consent of the BIFR as required under section 22 of SICA, it would not mean that the liability had not accrued when assessee was following mercantile system of accounting”. (iii) Bharat Earth Movers Vs CIT 162 CTR 325 (2000) 112:- The appellant company has created a fund by making a provision for meeting its liability arising on account of the accumulated earned/vacation leave – In the assessment year 1978-79 an amount of Rs.62,25,483 was set apart in a separate account as provision for encashment of accrued leave and it was claimed as a 9 deduction – In the…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Nalwa Steel & Power Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4559/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadi N. Mishraa.Y. : 2006-07 Dcit, Circle 13(1), M/S Nalwa Steel & Power New Delhi Vs. Limited, Room No. 406, Cr Building, 28, Najafgarh Road, Ip Estate, New Delhi New Delhi

For Appellant: Sh. V.K. Tulsiyan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. UC Dubey, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…e facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CTI(A) erred in relying upon the case laws of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd., 2 Berger Paints India Ltd. vs CIT 266 ITR 99, 8harat Earth Movers vs CIT 245 ITR 428 and CIT vs Starlight Silk Mills P. Ltd. 280 ITR 257 wherein it was held that the electrical installations formed integral part of assessee's plant, therefore, depreciation was allowable at the rate applicable to Plant & Machinery. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the fact that as per IT Rule…

M/S S.R. Batliboi & Assocuates LLP, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T.-Cir-54, Kolkata

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 36/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Aug 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Debobrata Ghosh, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT

Section 43B

…'ble Kolkata High Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India (292 ITR 470) wherein the High Court has stuck down the section 43B(f) as being arbitrary and unconscionable and de hors the apex court decision in the case of Bharat Earth Movers 245 ITR 428 (SC). 5. On appeal by the Assessee on the disallowance made by the AO, the CIT(A) made a reference to a decision of the Kolkata ITAT in the case of M/s. Ernst & Young Pvt. Ltd., in ITA No. 1787/Ko1/2008 and another decision of Bangalore ITAT , held that order of the AO has to be upheld. In the decision of the Bangalore Bench of the ITAT referred…

Concorde Motors (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5811/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri F.V.IraniFor Respondent: Ms. Bharti Singh

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 43B

…High Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd 292 ITR 470 wherein the Hon'b!e Court struck down the provisions of Section 43B(f), holding the same as arbitrary in nature, unconscionable and de hors the Apex Court's decision 'n the case of Bharat Earth Movers 245 ITR 428. It was not a mistake apparent from record and further the issue in dispute is still pending for adjudication before the Hon'ble Apex Court and hence it is not a case falling within the purview of Section 154 of the Act, in view of various judicial pronouncements. It is well settled proposition subjected to rectification u/s.154 of the Act. 5. Si…

The Karnataka State Co-Operative Apex Bank Limited vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

ITA/576/2015HC Karnataka21 Jul 2016

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260Section 260A

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD I.T.A. NO.576 OF 2016 BETWEEN: BHARAT FRITZ WERNER LTD., OFF TUMKUR ROAD YESHWANTHPUR P.O. BANGALORE-560022 REP. HEREIN BY ITS CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER MR. SUJOY DASGUPTA. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. T. SURYANARAYANA, ADV.,) AND: 1. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (OSD) CIRCLE-11(2) BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560095. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME…

DCIT Cir 3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Ald Automotive P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3173/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit, Circle 3(1)(1) M/S. Ald Automotive P. Ltd. Room No. 607, 6Th Floor 13Th Floor, Maker Chamber-Iv बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan Nariman Point Vs. Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aafca0924K

Section 2(3)Section 32

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ए,मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2009-10 DCIT, Circle 3(1)(1) M/s. ALD Automotive P. Ltd. Room No. 607, 6th Floor 13th Floor, Maker Chamber-IV बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan Nariman Point Vs. Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) PAN. No. AAFCA0924K Shri Kailash Kanojiya राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by None 18/07/2016 सुनव…

M/S Dell International Services India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. JCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 3/BANG/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Chandrashekar, CIT (D.R)

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH ‘B’ BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT. (T.P) A. No.3/Bang/2013 (Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/s. Dell International Services India Pvt. Ltd., 12/A, 12/12A, 13/1A, Divyasree Greens, Challaghatta Village, Varthur, Hobli, Bangalore-570 071. .... Appellant. PAN AAACH 1925Q Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, LTU, Bangalore. ..... Respondent. Appellant By : Shri Sharath Rao, C.A. Respondent By: Shri P. Chandrashekar, CIT (D.R) Date of Hearing : 07.06.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 20.7.2016. ORDER Per S…

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

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5720/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs. Additional Cit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Range-6, Vasant Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacm0829Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Neeraj Jain, Rohit Jain, Adv. Romit Katyal & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Cas Department By:Shri Amrendra Kumar, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. NeerajFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT(DR)

…discharge is deferred to a future date: a) Assessee’s own case decided in favour by CIT (A) for AY 2003-04 b) Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. 37 ITR 1 (SC) c) Metal Box (1969) 73 ITR 53 (SC) d) United Commercial Bank v. CIT 240 ITR 355 (SC) e) Bharat Earth Movers 245 ITR 428 (SC). f) Kelvinator of India Ltd. reported in 256 ITR 1 confirmed by SC in 320 ITR 561 g) CIT v. Vinitec Corpn. (P) Ltd. : 278 ITR 337 (Del.) h) National Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. v. JCIT : 98 ITD 278 (Hyd. ITAT) 26.3.9 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd. 312 ITR 254 has held that:- “21. In…

Mema Engineers & Contractors P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir. 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee company in ITA N0

ITA 654/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.654/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07) Mema Engineers & A.C.I.T. Circle – 6(3), बनाम/ Contractors Private Limited, Aayakar Bhavan, V. Unit No. G-6, Navbharat M.K. Road, Estate, Mumbai – 20. Zakaria Bunder, Mumbai – 400 015. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaach 1383 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “G” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.654/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07) Mema Engineers & A.C.I.T. Circle – 6(3), बनाम/ Contractors Private Limited, Aayakar Bhavan, v. Unit No. G-6, Navbharat M.K. Road, Estate, Mumbai – 20. Zakaria Bunder, Mumbai – 400 015. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : AAACH 1383 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee by Shri Nishit Gandhi Revenue by : Shri S. Senthil Kumaran सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date of He…

Ge Capital Services India vs. Addl CIT Range 2

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and Revenue are partly allowed for

ITA 2898/DEL/2007[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2016AY 2000-2001

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.L.P.Sahu

Section 14ASection 234DSection 45J

…2007] 165 Taxman 599 (Delhi); (b) Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. vs Their Workmen [1969] 73 ITR 53 (SC); (c )Asstt. CIT vs Shree Synthetics Ltd. [2008] 303 ITR 106 (MP); (d) E.D.Sassoon & Co. Ltd. v CIT [1954] 26 ITR 27; and (e) Bharat Earth Movers v CIT [2000] 245 ITR 428 relied upon Page 33 of 40 I.T.A .No.-2808 & 2898/Del/2007 these accepting the arguments advanced on behalf of the assessee namely that the Revenue has not appreciated the nature of the agreements entered into by the assessee which were for raising foreign currency borrowings and forward contracts entered into with the banks as a safeguard aga…

DCIT Circle 12 (1) vs. G.E. Capital Services India

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and Revenue are partly allowed for

ITA 2808/DEL/2007[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2016AY 2001-2002

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.L.P.Sahu

Section 14ASection 234DSection 45J

Asst CIT 16(3), Mumbai vs. Gem Star Company, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6667/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2009-10 Acit Cit 16(3), Gem Star Company, 2Nd Floor, Matru Mandir, 108 Mehta Bhavan बनाम/ Tardeo Rd. 311, Rmm Roy Rd, Vs. Mumbai-400007 Opera House, Mumbai (Revenue) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aaafg1178M Revenue By Shri A. Ramachandran (Dr) Respondent By Shri B.B. Jokhakar (Ar)

Section 143(3)Section 37

…assessee. It is further noted by us that similar view has been taken in various other judgments which have been discussed in detail and relied upon by the Ld. CIT(A) in its order viz: i. DCIT vs. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait 41 SOT 290 ii. Bharat Earth Movers Ltd.245 ITR 428(SC) iii. ONGC vs. CIT, Dehradun 322 ITR 180(SC) iv. Rusabh Diamonds v. ACIT 34 taxmann.com 160 (Mumbai-Trib.) 3.6. It is further noted by us that after discussing the facts of the case and entire law, the Ld. CIT(A) has given detailed reasoning to decide this issue in favour of the assessee, the relevant observations of his order are reproduced…