Chd) 97 ITD 267 3. Indian Express (Madurai) (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (ITAT,Mad)

246 ITR 170Reported decision#23933 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2021.

Judgments citing Chd) 97 ITD 267 3. Indian Express (Madurai) (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (ITAT,Mad)

M/S Sumeru Enterproses, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6-4, Jaipur

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

ITA 888/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Jan 2021AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agrarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT) a
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)

…following Judicial Pronouncements: 1. CIT Vs. Coates of India Ltd., (Cal.) 232 ITR 324 2. Industrial Cables (I) Ltd., Vs. ACIT (ITAT, Chd) 97 ITD 267 3. Indian Express (Madurai) (P) Ltd., Vs. DCIT (ITAT,Mad) 68 ITD 374 4. Rallis India Ltd., Vs. CIT (Cal) 246 ITR 170 5. City Financial Retail Services India Ltd., Vs. ACIT 2008- TIOL-05-ITAT-MAD In view of the above discussion, the amount of Rs.11,59,34,654/ -shown under the Head "Exceptional Items" and as claimed by the assessee U/s.36(1)(vii) of the I.T. Act, 1961 are disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee.” 32. We have heard the riva…

M/S Sumeru Enterproses, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6-4, Jaipur

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

ITA 887/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Jan 2021AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agrarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT) a
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)

…following Judicial Pronouncements: 1. CIT Vs. Coates of India Ltd., (Cal.) 232 ITR 324 2. Industrial Cables (I) Ltd., Vs. ACIT (ITAT, Chd) 97 ITD 267 3. Indian Express (Madurai) (P) Ltd., Vs. DCIT (ITAT,Mad) 68 ITD 374 4. Rallis India Ltd., Vs. CIT (Cal) 246 ITR 170 5. City Financial Retail Services India Ltd., Vs. ACIT 2008- TIOL-05-ITAT-MAD In view of the above discussion, the amount of Rs.11,59,34,654/ -shown under the Head "Exceptional Items" and as claimed by the assessee U/s.36(1)(vii) of the I.T. Act, 1961 are disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee.” 32. We have heard the riva…

M/S Sumeru Enterproses, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6-4, Jaipur

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

ITA 886/JPR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Jan 2021AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agrarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT) a
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)

…following Judicial Pronouncements: 1. CIT Vs. Coates of India Ltd., (Cal.) 232 ITR 324 2. Industrial Cables (I) Ltd., Vs. ACIT (ITAT, Chd) 97 ITD 267 3. Indian Express (Madurai) (P) Ltd., Vs. DCIT (ITAT,Mad) 68 ITD 374 4. Rallis India Ltd., Vs. CIT (Cal) 246 ITR 170 5. City Financial Retail Services India Ltd., Vs. ACIT 2008- TIOL-05-ITAT-MAD In view of the above discussion, the amount of Rs.11,59,34,654/ -shown under the Head "Exceptional Items" and as claimed by the assessee U/s.36(1)(vii) of the I.T. Act, 1961 are disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee.” 32. We have heard the riva…

Chd) 97 ITD 267 3. Indian Express (Madurai) (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (ITAT,Mad) (246 ITR 170) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax