Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT

Addl CIT 3(2), Mumbai vs. Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd ( Formerly Known As Indian Rayon & Industries Ltd), Mumbai

…igns 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 dehors 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 Vs Universal Medicare in ITA No. 6191/M/08, has followed the decision of the Hon’ble 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 provis…

The ADIT (I.T)3(1) vs. M/S. Honkong & Shanghani Banking Corpn. Ltd

In the result, ITA Nos.2519 and 2520/Mum/2004 by revenue stand dismissed, ITA No

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2519 & 2520/Mum/2004 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:1999-2000 & 2000-01) M/S Hongkong & Shanghani Asstt.Direrctor Of Income Tax बनाम/ Banking Corporation Ltd., (International Taxation)-3(1), Vs. 52/60, M G Road, 136, Scindia House, Mumbai-400001 N M Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400038 .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

…pport of this contentions he placed reliance on the following decisions : a) ACIT V/s M/s Shoppers Stop Ltd –ITA No.1835/Mum/2010 (AY- 2003-04) dated 25.1.2012; b) Syndicate bank V/s DCIT (Bang ITAT) –(2013) 38 taxmann.com 25); c) Bharat Earth Movers V/s CIT -245 ITR 428 (SC); d) Calcutta Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 1 (SC); e) Rotork India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 314 ITR 63 (SC); f) Taparia Tools Ltd v Joint CIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (Bom),; g) Vinitee Corporation (P) Ltd. (2005) 146 Taxman 313 (Delhi); and h) CIT v. Beema Manufacturers P. Ltd. (2003) 130 Taxman 400 (Mad) 24 and other six appeals 87. We fi…

Asst.C.I.T. 2(1), Mumbai vs. Bank of Baroda, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is treated as allowed in the same lines

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Bank Of Baroda, Addl. Cit, Range – 2(1), C-26, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Aayakar Bhavan, Queens Road, Complex, Vs. Mumbai - 400020 Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400 051 Pan: Aaacb 1534F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Acit 2(1), M/S. Bank Of Baroda, Aayakar Bhavan, C-26, G-Block, Baroda R.No.561, 5Th Floor, Corporate Centre, Vs. M.K. Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai - 400020 Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400 051 Pan: Aaacb 1534F (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ant is not the date of signing the agreement nor the date of approval granted by the DRE, what is important is the effective date of commencement. The Tribunal, while relying upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “Bharat Earth vs. CIT” 245 ITR 428, held that in such a case the incurring of liability was certain and the same could also be estimated with reasonable certainty, although, the actual quantification may not be possible. In the case in hand also as per the agreement and the policy, the wage revision was certain and it could have been reasonably estimated also. Hence, the provision…

Bank of Baroda, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is treated as allowed in the same lines

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Bank Of Baroda, Addl. Cit, Range – 2(1), C-26, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Aayakar Bhavan, Queens Road, Complex, Vs. Mumbai - 400020 Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400 051 Pan: Aaacb 1534F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Acit 2(1), M/S. Bank Of Baroda, Aayakar Bhavan, C-26, G-Block, Baroda R.No.561, 5Th Floor, Corporate Centre, Vs. M.K. Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai - 400020 Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400 051 Pan: Aaacb 1534F (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ant is not the date of signing the agreement nor the date of approval granted by the DRE, what is important is the effective date of commencement. The Tribunal, while relying upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “Bharat Earth vs. CIT” 245 ITR 428, held that in such a case the incurring of liability was certain and the same could also be estimated with reasonable certainty, although, the actual quantification may not be possible. In the case in hand also as per the agreement and the policy, the wage revision was certain and it could have been reasonably estimated also. Hence, the provision…

Asst CIT 4(3), Mumbai vs. People Interactive (I) P.Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kochar

…nd is definite liability and an allowable expenditure. f) The liability under the an ESOP is easily comparable with provision made for leave encashment and the assessee company relied upon Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT (2000) 245 ITR 428(SC) where by it has been held by Apex Court that provision made for leave encashment is an allowable expenditure. g) The assessee company also relied upon the decision of SSI Ltd. V. DCIT (2004) 85 TTJ 1049(Chen. Trib.) where the Chennai Tribunal allowed the claim of the tax payer under the similar facts. h) The assessee company submitted tha…

Asst CIT 4(3), Mumbai vs. People Ineractive (I) P.Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kochar

…nd is definite liability and an allowable expenditure. f) The liability under the an ESOP is easily comparable with provision made for leave encashment and the assessee company relied upon Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT (2000) 245 ITR 428(SC) where by it has been held by Apex Court that provision made for leave encashment is an allowable expenditure. g) The assessee company also relied upon the decision of SSI Ltd. V. DCIT (2004) 85 TTJ 1049(Chen. Trib.) where the Chennai Tribunal allowed the claim of the tax payer under the similar facts. h) The assessee company submitted tha…

Inventurus Knowledge Services P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO 5(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee company is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: - 2009-10 Inventurus Knowledge Services V. Income Tax Officer Pvt. Ltd. 5(2)(1), C/O. Seren Properties Pvt. Ltd. 525, Aaykar Bhavan, (Sez), Unit No. 204, Build No. 5, M.K. Road, Mindspace Airoli Camp, Plot No. Mumbai - 400 020. 3, Gat No. 95, Kalwa Trans, Thane Creek, Midc Industrial Area, Thane Belapur Road, Airoli, Navi Mumbai – 400 708. Pan/Gir No. Aabck4601P

…le with reasonable accuracy, being in the nature of expenditure/accrued liability, have to be taken into account while preparing financial statements. In this regard we may refer to the observations of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers, 245 ITR 428 (SC): "'.. The law is settled; 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 thou…

People Interactive (I) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 4(3), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kochar

…nd is definite liability and an allowable expenditure. f) The liability under the an ESOP is easily comparable with provision made for leave encashment and the assessee company relied upon Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT (2000) 245 ITR 428(SC) where by it has been held by Apex Court that provision made for leave encashment is an allowable expenditure. g) The assessee company also relied upon the decision of SSI Ltd. V. DCIT (2004) 85 TTJ 1049(Chen. Trib.) where the Chennai Tribunal allowed the claim of the tax payer under the similar facts. h) The assessee company submitted tha…