Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT

37 ITR 1Supreme Court of India1959#224 most cited

What is Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

When following the mercantile system of accounting, provisions for liabilities made on a scientific and rational basis are allowable as deductions, even if their actual quantification and discharge are deferred to a future date.

341

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2000 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT · mercantile system of accounting · Section 37 · allowable deductions · provision for liabilities · unascertained liabilities · deferred payment

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 115JBSection 147Section 148Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

mercantile system of accountingsection 37section 37(1)section 36(1)section 36section 40salaryprevious yearindiacompanytransferbusiness

Judgments citing Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT

M/S Rm K V Silks Private Limited, Tirunelveli vs. ACIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 613/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

…e the corresponding revenue receipt is recognized. In the present case, there is no corresponding revenue to the expenditure on unredeemed bonus points. These principles were enunciated by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 and in the case of CIT v. Bilahari Investment Ltd. 299 ITR 1 (SC), which are extracted below vide para 12 & 13: “12. The argument of the Revenue that as per the agreements signed by the students, they were called upon and were required to pay the entire fee upfront for the entire course at the time of admission and, therefore, the assessee had ear…

DCIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. Rmkv Fashion Garments Pvt. Ltd., Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1626/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

…e the corresponding revenue receipt is recognized. In the present case, there is no corresponding revenue to the expenditure on unredeemed bonus points. These principles were enunciated by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 and in the case of CIT v. Bilahari Investment Ltd. 299 ITR 1 (SC), which are extracted below vide para 12 & 13: “12. The argument of the Revenue that as per the agreements signed by the students, they were called upon and were required to pay the entire fee upfront for the entire course at the time of admission and, therefore, the assessee had ear…

DCIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. Rmkv Fashion Garments Pvt. Ltd., Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1625/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

…e the corresponding revenue receipt is recognized. In the present case, there is no corresponding revenue to the expenditure on unredeemed bonus points. These principles were enunciated by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 and in the case of CIT v. Bilahari Investment Ltd. 299 ITR 1 (SC), which are extracted below vide para 12 & 13: “12. The argument of the Revenue that as per the agreements signed by the students, they were called upon and were required to pay the entire fee upfront for the entire course at the time of admission and, therefore, the assessee had ear…

DCIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. Rmkv Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1624/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

…e the corresponding revenue receipt is recognized. In the present case, there is no corresponding revenue to the expenditure on unredeemed bonus points. These principles were enunciated by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 and in the case of CIT v. Bilahari Investment Ltd. 299 ITR 1 (SC), which are extracted below vide para 12 & 13: “12. The argument of the Revenue that as per the agreements signed by the students, they were called upon and were required to pay the entire fee upfront for the entire course at the time of admission and, therefore, the assessee had ear…

DCIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. Rmkv Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1623/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

…e the corresponding revenue receipt is recognized. In the present case, there is no corresponding revenue to the expenditure on unredeemed bonus points. These principles were enunciated by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 and in the case of CIT v. Bilahari Investment Ltd. 299 ITR 1 (SC), which are extracted below vide para 12 & 13: “12. The argument of the Revenue that as per the agreements signed by the students, they were called upon and were required to pay the entire fee upfront for the entire course at the time of admission and, therefore, the assessee had ear…

DCIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1622/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

…e the corresponding revenue receipt is recognized. In the present case, there is no corresponding revenue to the expenditure on unredeemed bonus points. These principles were enunciated by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 and in the case of CIT v. Bilahari Investment Ltd. 299 ITR 1 (SC), which are extracted below vide para 12 & 13: “12. The argument of the Revenue that as per the agreements signed by the students, they were called upon and were required to pay the entire fee upfront for the entire course at the time of admission and, therefore, the assessee had ear…

DCIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1621/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

…e the corresponding revenue receipt is recognized. In the present case, there is no corresponding revenue to the expenditure on unredeemed bonus points. These principles were enunciated by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 and in the case of CIT v. Bilahari Investment Ltd. 299 ITR 1 (SC), which are extracted below vide para 12 & 13: “12. The argument of the Revenue that as per the agreements signed by the students, they were called upon and were required to pay the entire fee upfront for the entire course at the time of admission and, therefore, the assessee had ear…

Rm.K.V.Fabrics Private Limited, Tirunelveli vs. DCIT Circle 1(1), Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1594/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

…e the corresponding revenue receipt is recognized. In the present case, there is no corresponding revenue to the expenditure on unredeemed bonus points. These principles were enunciated by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 and in the case of CIT v. Bilahari Investment Ltd. 299 ITR 1 (SC), which are extracted below vide para 12 & 13: “12. The argument of the Revenue that as per the agreements signed by the students, they were called upon and were required to pay the entire fee upfront for the entire course at the time of admission and, therefore, the assessee had ear…

Rm.K.V.Silks Private Limited, Tirunelveli vs. DCIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1593/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

…e the corresponding revenue receipt is recognized. In the present case, there is no corresponding revenue to the expenditure on unredeemed bonus points. These principles were enunciated by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 and in the case of CIT v. Bilahari Investment Ltd. 299 ITR 1 (SC), which are extracted below vide para 12 & 13: “12. The argument of the Revenue that as per the agreements signed by the students, they were called upon and were required to pay the entire fee upfront for the entire course at the time of admission and, therefore, the assessee had ear…

M/S Karnataka Vidyuth Kharkane Ltd vs. DCIT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1581/BANG/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaassessment Year :2010-11

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B.R. Ramesh, JCIT (DR)
Section 234BSection 37

…actually made to his employees but also the present value of any payments in respect of their services Page 11 of 17 in that year to be made in a subsequent year if it can be satisfactorily estimated. So, is the view taken in Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 (SC) wherein this court has held that the liability on the assessee having been imported, the liability would be an accrued liability and would not con- vert into a conditional one merely because the liability was to be discharged at a future date. There may be some difficulty in the estimation thereof but that would not convert the accrued liabilit…

ITO 33(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Arun Damji Gada, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the Revenue is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 902/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Ito 33(1)(1), Vs. Shri Arun Damji Gada R.No.304, 3Rd Floor 403, God Gift, A Wing Bldg No.C-11, Adarsh Nagar Pratyakshakar Bhawan Adarsh Dugdhalya Lane Bkc, Bandra (E) Malad (E) Mumbai - 400051 Mumbai – 400 064 Pan/Gir No. Aabpg3923F Appellant) Respondent) ..

Section 143(3)Section 40

…18,00,000/- are the bogus or false and created with the intention of reducing the taxable income more particularly keeping in mind the undisputed fact of subsequent spending against these provisions. Hon. Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd, vs CIT (37 ITR 1) has held that a estimated liability arising out of the contract should be allowed as and when it arises and should not be postponed to a later date. Further Hon. ITAT Mumbai in the case of Jacobs Engineering India Pvt. Ltd vs DCIT in Appeal No. ITA No. 335 and 336/Mum/3Q7 has allowed the deduction of claim on account of foreseeable losses. The Hon.…

ACIT, Chennai vs. East Coast Construction & Industries Limited, Chennai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1433/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. D. PrabhuMukunthArun Kumar
Section 263bSection 80Section 801ASection 80I

…e average of previous year’s warranty settlement is allowable expenditure. Same view was taken by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kone Elevator India Pvt. Ltd vs ACIT, 340 ITR 46. Further, the Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd vs CIT, 37 ITR 1, held that where the assessee was following the mercantile system of accounting is entitled for deduction of the expenditure which is incidental to the business on accrual basis though it was not actually incurred during the relevant accounting year. The Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs Indian Transformers Ltd, 270 ITR 259, held that provisio…

ACIT, Chennai vs. East Coast Construction & Industries Limited, Chennai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1432/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Feb 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. D. PrabhuMukunthArun Kumar
Section 263bSection 80Section 801ASection 80I

…e average of previous year’s warranty settlement is allowable expenditure. Same view was taken by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kone Elevator India Pvt. Ltd vs ACIT, 340 ITR 46. Further, the Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd vs CIT, 37 ITR 1, held that where the assessee was following the mercantile system of accounting is entitled for deduction of the expenditure which is incidental to the business on accrual basis though it was not actually incurred during the relevant accounting year. The Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs Indian Transformers Ltd, 270 ITR 259, held that provisio…

ACIT, Chennai vs. East Coast Construction & Industries Limited, Chennai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1431/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. D. PrabhuMukunthArun Kumar
Section 263bSection 80Section 801ASection 80I

…e average of previous year’s warranty settlement is allowable expenditure. Same view was taken by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kone Elevator India Pvt. Ltd vs ACIT, 340 ITR 46. Further, the Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd vs CIT, 37 ITR 1, held that where the assessee was following the mercantile system of accounting is entitled for deduction of the expenditure which is incidental to the business on accrual basis though it was not actually incurred during the relevant accounting year. The Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs Indian Transformers Ltd, 270 ITR 259, held that provisio…

East Coast Constructions and Industries Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 864/CHNY/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Feb 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. D. PrabhuMukunthArun Kumar
Section 263bSection 80Section 801ASection 80I

…e average of previous year’s warranty settlement is allowable expenditure. Same view was taken by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kone Elevator India Pvt. Ltd vs ACIT, 340 ITR 46. Further, the Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd vs CIT, 37 ITR 1, held that where the assessee was following the mercantile system of accounting is entitled for deduction of the expenditure which is incidental to the business on accrual basis though it was not actually incurred during the relevant accounting year. The Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs Indian Transformers Ltd, 270 ITR 259, held that provisio…

Total Lubricants India Ltd ( Now Known As Total Oil India P. Ltd ), Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA o

ITA 7021/MUM/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…vision account. In this regard, the Ld.AR relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India Pvt Ltd vs CIT 314 ITR 62(SC ). The assessee also relied upon the decision of Calcutta Co Ltd 24 Total Lubricants vs CIT (1959) 37 ITR 1. 28. The Ld.DR, on the other hand, submitted that the Ld.AO was right in disallowing provision for schemes as the said liability is not accrued to the assessee which is evident from the fact that the assessee is creating provision and reversing the same in subsequent financial year. Though the assessee claims to have incurred expenditure against p…

Oriental Bank of Commerce vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/57/2018HC Delhi17 Jan 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

…conclusions on this aspect, remitted the matter to the AO. The assessee is therefore, aggrieved. 6. The assessee relies upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. Vs CIT, (2000) 245 ITR 428 (SC); Calcutta Co. Ltd. Vs CIT (1959) 37 ITR 1; and, Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd Vs Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax,(1971) 82 ITR 363. It is submitted that an identical question was urged and the assessee’s contention accepted by Page 5 of 13 ITA 57/2018 this court in Aggarwal and Modi Enterprise (Cinema Project) Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT, (2016) 381 ITR 469 (Del.). 7. Ms. Vibhooti Mal…

ITO, WD-12(1), Kolkata vs. M/S White Cliff Properties (P) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1511/KOL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Nov 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)Section 251

…are computed, a sense in which no commercial man would misunderstand, had been regarded as a principle of general application, and there is a catena of cases of this court which affirms that principle. Reference may be made to Calcutta Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 (SC), CIT vs. Bai Shirinbai Kooka [1962] 46 ITR 86 (SC), Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [1965] 57 ITR 521 (SC), CIT vs. Birla Gwalior (P) Ltd. [1973] 89 ITR 266 (SC) and Batna Textiles vs. ITO [1975] 98 ITR 1 (Ker).” 22. In this case, it cannot be said that the right to receive accrued, before the start of construction and before the happeni…

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

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

ITA 6021/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri K.N. Charry

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35DSection 43BSection 92C

…ary invoices being made in addition to the original invoices. 12.1. Placing reliance on the decision in assessee’s own case decided in favour by CIT (A) for AY 2003-04 and by ITAT for AY 2007-08, and also the decisions reported in Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd.: 37 ITR 1 (SC), Metal Box India (P) Limited (1969): 73 ITR 53 (SC) , United Commercial Bank v. CIT 240 ITR 355 (SC), Bharat Earth Movers: 245 ITR 428 (SC) , CIT v Vinitec Corpn. (P) Ltd.: 278 ITR 337 (Delhi), National Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. v JCIT: 98 ITD 278 (Hyd. ITAT), Ld. AR argued that that liability which has arisen in the relevant account…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ntpc- Sail Power Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5717/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri K.N. Chary

Section 115JSection 36(1)(iii)Section 43B

…urisdictional Delhi High Court in appellant’s own case of NTPC Sail Power Company (P) Ltd. vs. CIT in ITA No. 1238/2011 in decision dated 17/07/2012 for the AY 2007-08 on identical issue in respect of the addition of interest, and Calcutta Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 37 ITR 1, Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. vs. Their workmen 73 ITR 53 and Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. vs. CIT 245 ITR 428 in respect of the additions made in respect of the net provision of retirement benefits. 3. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the Revenue is before us in this appeal stating that the detailed observations of the AO were not properly considered…