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.

How many judgments cite Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT?

341 judgments on BharatTax cite Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT (37 ITR 1), spanning 2000 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 37(1), Section 143(3), Section 14A, Section 115JB, Section 147, Section 148.

Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT (37 ITR 1)

Allen Career Institute, Jaipur vs. JCIT, Kota

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

ITA 246/JPR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 244ASection 36(1)(iii)

…es of Bharat Earth Movers v/s CIT (2000) 162 CTR 325/245 ITR 428 (SC), CIT vs. Indian Transformers Ltd. (2004) 192 CTR 0216/270 ITR 0259 (KerHC), CIT vs. Vinitec Corporation (P) Ltd. (20005) 196 CTR 0369/ 278 ITR 0337 (DelHC), Calcutta Co. Ltd. v/s CIT (1959) 37 ITR 1 (SC), Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. v/s Their Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53 (SC)). 36 ITA246/JP/2015 M/S. ALLEN CAREER INSTITUTE VS JCIT, RANGE-2, KOTA 8. No disallowance made in past: 8.1 It is pertinent to note that although the appellant has been making similar claims in the past based on the similarly floated schemes for the encouragement of the stud…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Pace Power Systems Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

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

ITA 1963/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), BengaluruFor Respondent: Shri Naginchand Khincha, H., CA

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 40

…‘laid out or expended' along with the word 'expenditure' in Sec.37 of the Act, indicates that expenditure may either be an actual outgo of money irretrievably or a putting aside of money towards an existing liability. In Calcutta Company Limited v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that in computing the profits and gains of a business, both the expenditure actually incurred and the liability accrued in respect of such expenditure (but required to be discharged at some future date) is allowed be deducted Expenditure for the purposes of section 37. therefore, includes amounts which the assesse…

M/S. K.G.Agro Processor Pvt.Ltd, Dhule vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Dhule

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 663/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.662 & 663 /Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Dr. Vardhaman L. JainFor Respondent: Shri Subhakant Sahu

Section 143

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JM AND SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं. / ITA No.662 & 663 /PUN/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s. K.G. Agro Processor Pvt Ltd. Mansaram Dada Road, Near Vijay Stambh, Shirpur, Dist. Dhule- 425 405. .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant PAN : AAACK7390N बनधम / V/s. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent ACIT, Circle, Dhule Assessee by : Dr. Vardhaman L. Jain Revenue by : Shri Subhakant Sahu सपनवधई की तधरऩख / Date of Hearing : 19.04.2022 घोषणध की तधरऩख / Date of Pronouncement : 12.05.…

M/S. K.G.Agro Processor Pvt.Ltd, Dhule vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Dhule

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 662/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.662 & 663 /Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Dr. Vardhaman L. JainFor Respondent: Shri Subhakant Sahu

Section 143

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JM AND SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं. / ITA No.662 & 663 /PUN/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s. K.G. Agro Processor Pvt Ltd. Mansaram Dada Road, Near Vijay Stambh, Shirpur, Dist. Dhule- 425 405. .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant PAN : AAACK7390N बनधम / V/s. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent ACIT, Circle, Dhule Assessee by : Dr. Vardhaman L. Jain Revenue by : Shri Subhakant Sahu सपनवधई की तधरऩख / Date of Hearing : 19.04.2022 घोषणध की तधरऩख / Date of Pronouncement : 12.05.…

Wipro Finance Ltd vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed

C.A. No.-006677-006677 - 2008Supreme Court12 Apr 2022

Section 143(1)(a)Section 254Section 37Section 43A

…1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6677 OF 2008 WIPRO FINANCE LTD. …APPELLANT VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX …RESPONDENTS O R D E R 1. This appeal takes exception to the judgment and order dated 2.4.2008 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in I.T.A. No. 633/2004. 2. Briefly stated, the appellant company submitted returns of income on 29.11.1997 for the assessment year 19971998, mentioning loss of income, amongst others, owing to exchange fluctuation of Rs.1,10,53,909/. A…

Jt.CIT.(OSD), Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Axis Bank Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 956/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 852/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2015-2016 Axis Bank Limited, J.C.I.T., “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Vs. Circle-1(1)(1), Opp. Samtheshwar Mahadev, Ahmedabad. Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacu2414K

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT.D.R

Section 133Section 14ASection 43D

…knew the significance of the expression 'deposit' viz -a-viz 'due', though he committed the mistake in treating the said deposit as the fee due. On applying the principles of law laid down in E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. (supra) and Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 (SC), it would be apparent that the fee was not due at the time of the deposit. The services in respect of the financial year 1997-98, for which also the payment was taken in advance, were yet to be rendered. Therefore, applying the principle in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd. (supra), it could only be treated as advance, otherwise it would lead to an…

Axis Bank Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Jt.CIT., Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 852/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 852/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2015-2016 Axis Bank Limited, J.C.I.T., “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Vs. Circle-1(1)(1), Opp. Samtheshwar Mahadev, Ahmedabad. Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacu2414K

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT.D.R

Section 133Section 14ASection 43D

…knew the significance of the expression 'deposit' viz -a-viz 'due', though he committed the mistake in treating the said deposit as the fee due. On applying the principles of law laid down in E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. (supra) and Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 (SC), it would be apparent that the fee was not due at the time of the deposit. The services in respect of the financial year 1997-98, for which also the payment was taken in advance, were yet to be rendered. Therefore, applying the principle in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd. (supra), it could only be treated as advance, otherwise it would lead to an…

ACIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi vs. Benetton India P.Ltd, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1091/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandraita No. 1091/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Acit, Vs M/S Benetton India Pvt. Ltd., Circle-4(2), B-25, Infocity, Sector-43, New Delhi-110002 Gurgaon, Haryana-122002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacd1013F Assessee By : Sh. Atul Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. M. K. Das, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.03.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Atul Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. M. K. Das, Sr. DR

…se of business loss, it would certainly be allowable to be deducted under the provisions of Section 37 of the Act.” 13. We have also gone through the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of BadridasDaga vs. CIT (34 ITR 10) Calcutta Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (37 ITR 1) wherein it was held that “the profit to be assessed are the real profits and they must be ascertained on ordinary principles of commercial training and commercial accounting. The profit should be computed after deducting losses and expenditure incurred for the purposes of business unless such losses or expenditure are expressly, or by necessary imp…

Helti India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 4, New Delhi

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

ITA 502/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2013-14 Helti India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Addl. Cit, 6Th Floor, Building 8, Tower C, Special Range-4, Dlf Cyber City, Phase 3, New Delhi. Gurgaon. Pan: Aaach3583Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K. Aggarwal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.02.2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am:

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 37

…ployees 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. 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…

Trinity Cleantech Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Assistant Commissiner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above

ITA 471/HYD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyassessement Year : 2018-19 M/S. Trinity Cleantech Pvt. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Hyderabad. Income Tax, Pan: Aaect3792K Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sri P.Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. Revenue By Ms. P. Sumitha, Dr Date Of Hearing: 14/12/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 03/02/2022 O R D E R Per A. Mohan Alankamony, A.M:

Section 143(3)Section 43B

…bility 3 of encashment of earned leave by the employee is an admissible deduction ?” in favour of the assessee and against the revenue by observing as follows : “ 6. 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…

Tremco Roffing & Facility Services Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corp Cir-3(1), Chennai

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

ITA 3350/CHNY/2018[2012-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2012-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3350/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Tremco Roofing & Facility The Asst. Commissioner Of Services Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, No.60, B-1, First Floor, Vs. Corporate Circle-3(1), Ganesh Towers, First Avenue, Chennai. 100 Feet Road, Ashok Nagar, Chennai – 600 083. [Pan: Aadct 5389H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Farookh Irani, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri S. Bharath, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.10.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.12.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Chennai In I.T.A No.85/2016-17 Dated 26.09.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012- 13. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: “Based On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Tremco Roofing & Facility Services Private Limited (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Appellant') Craves Leave To Prefer An Appeal Against The Order Dated 26 September 2018

For Appellant: Shri Farookh Irani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Bharath, CIT

Section 250

…d (ITA 2991/Mum/2011) (Mumbai Tribunal); 8. ACIT vs Ashoka Buildcon Ltd (ITA 394/PN/2007) (Pune Tribunal); 9. Bharat Earth Movers vs CIT (2000) 112 Taxman 61 (SC); 10. CIT vs Metal Box India Ltd (192) 63 taxman 160 (Cal. HC); 11. Calcutta Co Ltd vs CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 (SC); 12. ITO vs Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Ltd (1991) 38 ITD 1 (Hyderabad Special Bench); 13. Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd vs CIT (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC); 14. Principal CIT vs Haryana warehousing Corporation (2017) 77 taxmann.com 43 (Punjab & Haryana HC). The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the provision made by the assessee is as per…

ITO -6(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Kamanwala Housing Construction Ltd., Mumba

In the result, appeal by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1678/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ravish Sood (Jm)

For Respondent: Shri Neeraj Kumar

Section 40ASection 40A(2)(b)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Ravish Sood (JM) ITA Nos.1678 & 1679/Mum/2020 (Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 14-15) ITO-6(3)(3) Kamanwala Housing Construction Room No.524, 5th Floor Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road 405, 406, New Udyog Mandir-2 Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mogul Lane, Mahim(W) Mumbai-400 016 PAN/GIR No. AAACK2434P (Assessee) (Revenue) : : Shri Anil Thakrar Assessee by Revenue by : Shri Neeraj Kumar Date of Hearing : 08.09.2021 : 23.11.2021 Date of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya(A.M.).: These appeals by the Revenue are directed against the…

Axis Bank Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1 Now Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 311/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedsl. Ita No(S) Asset. Appeal(S) By No(S) Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 311/Ahd/2016 2010-11 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Circle-1(1)(1) Opp. Samtheshwar Ahmedabad. Mahadev Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacu2414K 2. 2176/Ahd/2016 2011-12 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Circle-1(1)(1) Opp. Samtheshwar Ahmedabad. Mahadev Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacu2414K 3. 2173/Ahd/2016 2011-12 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 4. 165/Ahd/2017 2012-13 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., Ahmedabad. Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 5. 287/Ahd/2017 2012-13 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 6-7 520 & 2013-14 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., 521/Ahd/2018 & Ahmedabad. Circle-1(1)(1) 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 8-9 604 & 605/ 2013-14 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Ahd/2018 & Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Smt. Urvashi Shodhan, and Shri Parin Shah,For Respondent: Shri Anshu Prakash, CIT.DR

Section 14A

…knew the significance of the expression 'deposit' viz -a-viz 'due', though he committed the mistake in treating the said deposit as the fee due. On applying the principles of law laid down in E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. (supra) and Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 1 (SC), it would be apparent that the fee was not due at the time of the deposit. The services in respect of the financial year 1997-98, for which also the payment was taken in advance, were yet to be rendered. Therefore, applying the principle in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd. (supra), it could only be treated as advance, otherwise it ITA nos.311/Ahd/…

ACIT, Circle- 19(1), New Delhi vs. Oriental Bank of Commerce, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1811/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri O. P. Kant & Shri K. N. Charya.Y. 2013-14

For Appellant: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT DRFor Respondent: Sh. K. S. V. R. Krishna, CA

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 154

…make any"difference if the future date on which the liability shall have to be discharged is not certain. The above principle was also followed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. Vs Their workmen [73 ITR 53] and Calcutta Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT [37 ITR 1 ]. In view of the above factual and legal position as the liability determined as per RBI circular are definite and ascertained liability, therefore, allowable under the provisions of the Act. As such this ground is decided in favour of the appellant." The ground is exactly the same and the facts and circumstances are identical to the issue decide…

ACIT Corporate Circle 2, Coimbatore vs. Late Shri Naren Rajan, Rep.by L/H Smt. Padmini V.R, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 is partly allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue for assessment year 2012-13 is dismissed

ITA 1161/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, CIT

Section 2(22)(e)

…, it can be said that it is unascertained 35 I.T.A. Nos.1002 & 1161/Chny/2018 & 743/Chny/2015 liability. In this regard, he relied upon the following judicial precedents:- i. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Calcutta Company Limited vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 1 ii. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Bharat Earth Movers vs.CIT (2000) 245 ITR 428 iii. ITAT, Chennai in the case of F.F.E. Minerals India Private Limited vs. JCIT (2004) 84 TTJ Chennai 907 iv. ITAT, Vishakapatnam in the case of ACIT vs. KCP Limited in I.T.A.Nos.449/Viz/2016 and 244/Viz/2018 v. ITAT, Ahmedabad in the case of ACIT vs Gayathr…

Padmini Rajan, L/R of Late (Shri) Naren Rajan, Coimbatore vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 is partly allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue for assessment year 2012-13 is dismissed

ITA 1002/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, CIT

Section 2(22)(e)

…, it can be said that it is unascertained 35 I.T.A. Nos.1002 & 1161/Chny/2018 & 743/Chny/2015 liability. In this regard, he relied upon the following judicial precedents:- i. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Calcutta Company Limited vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 1 ii. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Bharat Earth Movers vs.CIT (2000) 245 ITR 428 iii. ITAT, Chennai in the case of F.F.E. Minerals India Private Limited vs. JCIT (2004) 84 TTJ Chennai 907 iv. ITAT, Vishakapatnam in the case of ACIT vs. KCP Limited in I.T.A.Nos.449/Viz/2016 and 244/Viz/2018 v. ITAT, Ahmedabad in the case of ACIT vs Gayathr…

Naren Rajan, Coimbatore vs. ACIT, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 is partly allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue for assessment year 2012-13 is dismissed

ITA 743/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, CIT

Section 2(22)(e)

…, it can be said that it is unascertained 35 I.T.A. Nos.1002 & 1161/Chny/2018 & 743/Chny/2015 liability. In this regard, he relied upon the following judicial precedents:- i. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Calcutta Company Limited vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 1 ii. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Bharat Earth Movers vs.CIT (2000) 245 ITR 428 iii. ITAT, Chennai in the case of F.F.E. Minerals India Private Limited vs. JCIT (2004) 84 TTJ Chennai 907 iv. ITAT, Vishakapatnam in the case of ACIT vs. KCP Limited in I.T.A.Nos.449/Viz/2016 and 244/Viz/2018 v. ITAT, Ahmedabad in the case of ACIT vs Gayathr…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed and appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2083/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: S/Shri Pradeep Dinodia & R.KFor Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…nted for and are legally allowable, following judgments are relied upon: a. Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers (2004) 245 ITR 428 (SC). b. Metal Box Company of India Ltd. V. Their Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53 (SC). c. Calcutta Co. Ltd. V. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 1 (SC). d. CIT V. Insilco Ltd. 179 Taxman 5 (Delhi) 18. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer required the assessee to explain the basis of computation of loss which was furnished. Similarly, other details as required by the AO in respect of total salable area, total area actually sold and agreed sales realization in respect of area sold, total unsold ar…

Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed and appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1704/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: S/Shri Pradeep Dinodia & R.KFor Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…nted for and are legally allowable, following judgments are relied upon: a. Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers (2004) 245 ITR 428 (SC). b. Metal Box Company of India Ltd. V. Their Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53 (SC). c. Calcutta Co. Ltd. V. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 1 (SC). d. CIT V. Insilco Ltd. 179 Taxman 5 (Delhi) 18. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer required the assessee to explain the basis of computation of loss which was furnished. Similarly, other details as required by the AO in respect of total salable area, total area actually sold and agreed sales realization in respect of area sold, total unsold ar…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed and appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5776/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: S/Shri Pradeep Dinodia & R.KFor Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…nted for and are legally allowable, following judgments are relied upon: a. Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers (2004) 245 ITR 428 (SC). b. Metal Box Company of India Ltd. V. Their Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53 (SC). c. Calcutta Co. Ltd. V. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 1 (SC). d. CIT V. Insilco Ltd. 179 Taxman 5 (Delhi) 18. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer required the assessee to explain the basis of computation of loss which was furnished. Similarly, other details as required by the AO in respect of total salable area, total area actually sold and agreed sales realization in respect of area sold, total unsold ar…

Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT

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

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT

Allen Career Institute, Jaipur vs. JCIT, Kota

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Pace Power Systems Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

M/S. K.G.Agro Processor Pvt.Ltd, Dhule vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Dhule

M/S. K.G.Agro Processor Pvt.Ltd, Dhule vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Dhule

Wipro Finance Ltd vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

Jt.CIT.(OSD), Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Axis Bank Limited, Ahmedabad

Axis Bank Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Jt.CIT., Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

ACIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi vs. Benetton India P.Ltd, Gurgaon

Helti India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 4, New Delhi

Trinity Cleantech Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Assistant Commissiner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad

Tremco Roffing & Facility Services Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corp Cir-3(1), Chennai

ITO -6(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Kamanwala Housing Construction Ltd., Mumba

Axis Bank Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1 Now Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

ACIT, Circle- 19(1), New Delhi vs. Oriental Bank of Commerce, Gurgaon

ACIT Corporate Circle 2, Coimbatore vs. Late Shri Naren Rajan, Rep.by L/H Smt. Padmini V.R, Coimbatore

Padmini Rajan, L/R of Late (Shri) Naren Rajan, Coimbatore vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2, Coimbatore

Naren Rajan, Coimbatore vs. ACIT, Coimbatore

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi