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 366,470 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

Indian Synthetic Rubber Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-12(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3521/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

…e Tribunal. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that once the liability is ascertained, the provision based on estimate is an allowable deduction. In support, the Ld. AR relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Calcutta Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, West Bengal (1959) 37 ITR 1 (SC) and yet another decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bharat Earth Movers vs. CIT (2000) 245 ITR 428 (SC). The Ld. AR also submitted that the tax rate being the same in the AY under consideration and the next year, division of the amount of allowable 2 deduction is of no consequence. According to him, the impugned disallowance is not warran…

Sitaram Bhartia Institute of Science & Research, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T.(Exemption), Circle-11(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 202/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)

…the payments actually made to his employees but also the present value of any payments in respect of their services in that year to be made in a subsequent year if it can be satisfactorily estimated. 6. So is the view taken in Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1, wherein this Court has held that the liability on the assessee having been imported, the liability would be an accrued liability and would not convert 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 liability into…

Lifecell International Pvt Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3334/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jan 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3334/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Lifecell International Assistant Commissioner Of Private Ltd., V. Income Tax, No. 26, Vandalur Corporate Circle 4(1), Kelambakkam Main Road, Chennai. Keelakkottaiyur, Chennai. [Pan: Aaeca-7997-B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Ajith Kumar Choradia, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.01.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Ajith Kumar Choradia, CAFor Respondent: Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 3334/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/s. Lifecell International Assistant Commissioner of Private Ltd., v. Income Tax, No. 26, Vandalur Corporate Circle 4(1), Kelambakkam Main Road, Chennai. Keelakkottaiyur, Chennai. [PAN: AAECA-7997-B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri. Ajith Kumar Cho…

L and T Mhps Turbine Generatiors Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 4766/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm)

…n even if liabilities are required to be discharged at a future date if they can be estimated with reasonable certainty. This legal position has been declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in several cases such as in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 (SC); in case of Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen [1969] 73 ITR 53; and in case of Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT [2000] 245 ITR 428/112 Taxman 61 (SC). It has been made clear in these cases that for claiming deduction on account of any provision for liability, the incurring of liability during the year must be certain. In case of Calcutta C…

Corp Circle-1(2), Chennai vs. Cccl-Edac Energy Ltd, Chennai

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

ITA 3223/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 3223/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012 - 13 The Dcit, Cccl-Edac Energy Ltd., Corporate Circle 1(2), Vs. 88, Spic House, Mount Road, Chennai. Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. Pan: Aaecc 0167F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Tarun, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 14.12.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14.12.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Arising Out Of The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 1, Chennai In Ita No.264/Cit(A)-1/2014-15 Dated 24.08.2018. The Assessment Was Framed By The Acit. Corporate Circle 1(2), Chennai For The Assessment Year 2012-13 U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Order Dated 31.12.2014. 2. The Only Issue In This Appeal Of Revenue Is Against The Order Of Cit(A) Deleting The Addition Made By Ao On Retention Money Held By Contractee. For This, Revenue Has Raised The Following Two Effective Grounds:- “2. The Ld. Cit(A) Failed To Appreciate On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case That Retention Money Held By Contractees Of The Assessee Having Been Excluded From The Computation Of Total Income, The Claim Of Expenditure Retention Money Payable To Its Sub-Contractors Can Only Be Allowable On Payment & Not On Accrual.

For Appellant: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCITFor Respondent: Shri G. Tarun, Advocate
Section 143(3)

…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…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad vs. Ascend Telecom Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

ITA 556/HYD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 153A

…re was no finding by the AO to the contrary, the expenditure shall be allowed. 4.2.2. The learned CIT(A) also referred to the decision of Hon'ble SC in the case of CIT v. M/s. Bharat Earth Movers Ltd (2000) 112 Taxman 61 and M/s Calcutta Co. Ltd v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 (SC), are applicable to the facts of the case are in favour of the Appellant. Considering the above, the learned CIT(A) deleted the adjustment made by the learned AO. In connection with the ground raised by the Revenue, we wish to furnish our detailed submission as below: 4.2.3. The Appellant wishes to submit that the provision for site restoration…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad vs. Ascend Telecom Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

ITA 555/HYD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 153A

…re was no finding by the AO to the contrary, the expenditure shall be allowed. 4.2.2. The learned CIT(A) also referred to the decision of Hon'ble SC in the case of CIT v. M/s. Bharat Earth Movers Ltd (2000) 112 Taxman 61 and M/s Calcutta Co. Ltd v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 (SC), are applicable to the facts of the case are in favour of the Appellant. Considering the above, the learned CIT(A) deleted the adjustment made by the learned AO. In connection with the ground raised by the Revenue, we wish to furnish our detailed submission as below: 4.2.3. The Appellant wishes to submit that the provision for site restoration…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad vs. Ascend Telecom Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

ITA 554/HYD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 153A

…re was no finding by the AO to the contrary, the expenditure shall be allowed. 4.2.2. The learned CIT(A) also referred to the decision of Hon'ble SC in the case of CIT v. M/s. Bharat Earth Movers Ltd (2000) 112 Taxman 61 and M/s Calcutta Co. Ltd v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 (SC), are applicable to the facts of the case are in favour of the Appellant. Considering the above, the learned CIT(A) deleted the adjustment made by the learned AO. In connection with the ground raised by the Revenue, we wish to furnish our detailed submission as below: 4.2.3. The Appellant wishes to submit that the provision for site restoration…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad vs. Ascend Telecom Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

ITA 553/HYD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 153A

…re was no finding by the AO to the contrary, the expenditure shall be allowed. 4.2.2. The learned CIT(A) also referred to the decision of Hon'ble SC in the case of CIT v. M/s. Bharat Earth Movers Ltd (2000) 112 Taxman 61 and M/s Calcutta Co. Ltd v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 (SC), are applicable to the facts of the case are in favour of the Appellant. Considering the above, the learned CIT(A) deleted the adjustment made by the learned AO. In connection with the ground raised by the Revenue, we wish to furnish our detailed submission as below: 4.2.3. The Appellant wishes to submit that the provision for site restoration…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad vs. Ascend Telcom Infrastruture Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

ITA 510/HYD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 153A

…re was no finding by the AO to the contrary, the expenditure shall be allowed. 4.2.2. The learned CIT(A) also referred to the decision of Hon'ble SC in the case of CIT v. M/s. Bharat Earth Movers Ltd (2000) 112 Taxman 61 and M/s Calcutta Co. Ltd v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 (SC), are applicable to the facts of the case are in favour of the Appellant. Considering the above, the learned CIT(A) deleted the adjustment made by the learned AO. In connection with the ground raised by the Revenue, we wish to furnish our detailed submission as below: 4.2.3. The Appellant wishes to submit that the provision for site restoration…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad vs. Ascend Telcom Infrastruture Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

ITA 509/HYD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 153A

…re was no finding by the AO to the contrary, the expenditure shall be allowed. 4.2.2. The learned CIT(A) also referred to the decision of Hon'ble SC in the case of CIT v. M/s. Bharat Earth Movers Ltd (2000) 112 Taxman 61 and M/s Calcutta Co. Ltd v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 (SC), are applicable to the facts of the case are in favour of the Appellant. Considering the above, the learned CIT(A) deleted the adjustment made by the learned AO. In connection with the ground raised by the Revenue, we wish to furnish our detailed submission as below: 4.2.3. The Appellant wishes to submit that the provision for site restoration…

M/S Raj Auto Wheels P Ltd., Ajmer vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Ajmer

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

ITA 396/JPR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocawteFor Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena, C IT-DR

…will be discharged at a future date. It does not make any difference if the future date on which the liability shall have to be discharged is not certain.—Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. vs. Their Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53 (SC) and Calcutta Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 1 (SC) : TC 16R.197 applied.” 3.2 In the case of CIT vs. Indian Transformers Ltd. (2004) 192 CTR 0216/270 ITR 0259 (KerHC) Business expenditure—Allowability—Provision for warranty—Both the appellate authorities came to the conclusion that the provision created was towards a definite liability which had accrued at the time of supply of transformers by…

Rosebys Interiors India Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circel-5, Ahmedabad

In the result, this Ground of appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 204/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Mukund Bakshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-D.R
Section 234ASection 271Section 37

…of the Tribunal which had confirmed the order of the CIT(A) who had held that there is no concept for deferred revenue expenditure in the Income Tax Act, 1961. Also relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the cases of Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 (SC), CIT v. Associated Cement Companies Ltd. [1988] 172 ITR 257 (SC), Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT[1980] 124 ITR 1 (SC) and the I.T.A. Nos. 153 & 204/Ahd/2017 A.Y. 2010-11 Page No. 17 DCIT vs. M/s. Rosebys Interiors India Ltd. & Rosebys Interiors India Ltd. vs. ACIT judgment of this court in CIT v. Salora International Ltd. [2009] 308 ITR 199 (Delh…

The DCIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Rosebys Interiors India Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, this Ground of appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 153/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Mukund Bakshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-D.R
Section 234ASection 271Section 37

…of the Tribunal which had confirmed the order of the CIT(A) who had held that there is no concept for deferred revenue expenditure in the Income Tax Act, 1961. Also relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the cases of Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 (SC), CIT v. Associated Cement Companies Ltd. [1988] 172 ITR 257 (SC), Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT[1980] 124 ITR 1 (SC) and the I.T.A. Nos. 153 & 204/Ahd/2017 A.Y. 2010-11 Page No. 17 DCIT vs. M/s. Rosebys Interiors India Ltd. & Rosebys Interiors India Ltd. vs. ACIT judgment of this court in CIT v. Salora International Ltd. [2009] 308 ITR 199 (Delh…

The ACIT, Circle-5, Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Rosebys Interiors India Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 1047/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Mukund Bakshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-D.R
Section 271(1)(c)Section 37

…r of the Tribunal which had confirmed the order of the CIT(A) who had held that there is no concept for deferred revenue expenditure in the Income Tax Act,1961. Also relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the cases of Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 (SC), CIT v. Associated Cement Companies Ltd. [1988] 172 ITR 257 (SC), Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1980] 124 ITR 1 (SC) and the judgment of this court in CIT v. Salora International Ltd. [2009] 308 ITR 199 (Delhi). In the case of DCIT vs. Core Healthcare Ltd. 308 ITR 263 (Guf.) gujrat high court has discussed the issue in detail as under I.T.A. No…

DCIT, Circle-4(1), Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. the Orissa State Co-Operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd., Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 319/CTK/2017[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack20 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2009-10 Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle-4(1), Vs. The Orissa State Co The Orissa State Co-Op.Milk Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Producers Federation Ltd., Producers Federation Ltd., D-2, 2, Sahid Sahid Nagar, Nagar, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aabtt 3220 G (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B.K.Mahapatra, Ca B.K.Mahapatra, Ca Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 21 /9 9/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/9 9/2022 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar 2, Bhubaneswar Dated 31.5.2017 In Appeal No In Appeal No.0251/2015-16 For The Assessment Year For The Assessment Year 2009-2010. 2. Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue & Shri Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue & Shri Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue & Shri B.K.Mahapatra, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee. B.K.Mahapatra, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri B.K.Mahapatra, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT
Section 43B

…employees but also the present value of any payments in respect of their services 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. Vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, West Bengal (1959) 37 ITR 1 wherein this court has held that the liability on the assessee having been imported, the liability would be an accrued liability and would not convert 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 liability into…

PCIT, Delhi-7 vs. Ratnagiri Gas and Power Pvt. Ltd

ITA/264/2022HC Delhi29 Aug 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

…yees but also the present value of any payments in respect of their services 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. Vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, West Bengal (1959) 37 ITR 1 wherein this court This is a digitally signed Judgement. NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003617 ITA 264/2022 Page 9 of 11 has held that the liability on the assessee having been imported, the liability would be an accrued liability and would not convert into a conditional one merely because the liability was to be discharged a…

Lotus Labs P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Banglore (Present Incharge Mumbai)

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1820/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2022AY 2015-16
Section 142Section 143(3)Section 37

…the payments actually made to his employees but also the present value of any payments in respect of their services in that year to be made in a subsequent year if it can be satisfactorily estimated. 6. So is the view taken in Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1, wherein this Court has held that the liability on the assessee having been imported, the liability would be an accrued liability and would not convert 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 liability into…

Sweta Goenka, Jabalpur vs. Pr. Commissioner of Incomr Tax-1, Jabalpur

In the result, the assessee‟s appeal is dismissed

ITA 44/JAB/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur17 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Sapan Usrethe, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri U.B. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263

…terminate. Again, if the entire amount is, on the basis of the contract, accrued, the assessee shall surely be entitled to deduction for expenditure on the work yet to be completed on the basis of a reasonable estimate thereof (Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 (SC)). 4. For the reasons afore-stated, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order and, accordingly, decline to. The revision proceedings, in our clear view, stand rightly initiated and applied in the instant case. The AO shall decide considering all the relevant aspects of the case, including those highlighted by us, by issuing definit…

M/S Allen Career Institute, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2-1, Kota

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

ITA 617/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Aug 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 244ASection 37(1)

…will be discharged at a future date. It does not make any difference if the future date on which the liability shall have to be discharged is not certain.—Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. vs. Their Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53 (SC) and Calcutta Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 1 (SC) : TC 16R.197 applied.” 7.1.2 In the case of CIT vs. Indian Transformers Ltd. (2004) 192 CTR 0216/270 ITR 0259 (KerHC) (DPB 86-95) Business expenditure—Allowability—Provision for warranty—Both the appellate authorities came to the conclusion that the provision created was towards a definite liability which had accrued at the time of supply of tr…