What is Chief CIT v. Kesaria Tea Company Limited authority for?

For Section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act to apply, the mere expiry of the limitation period does not constitute cessation of liability; there must be an explicit act by the creditor, such as a release or admission of write-off, confirming that the liability has ceased without the possibility of revival.

How many judgments cite Chief CIT v. Kesaria Tea Company Limited?

59 judgments on BharatTax cite Chief CIT v. Kesaria Tea Company Limited (254 ITR 434), spanning 2011 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Chief CIT v. Kesaria Tea Company Limited come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 142(1), Section 41(1), Section 68, Section 69C, Section 133(6), Section 133A.

Chief CIT v. Kesaria Tea Company Limited (254 ITR 434)

JCIT(OSD), DELHI vs. AVON METERS PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNJAB

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

ITA 328/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 40A(7)Section 68

…it is on that reasoning that the ld. CIT (A) deleted the addition. We observe that the action of ld. CIT (A) in so doing is supported by the decisions of apex Court in the CIT vs. Sugauli Sugar Mills (1989) 236 ITR 518(SC), CIT vs. Kesaria Tea Co. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 434 and Polyflex India (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2002) 257 ITR 343 (SC). Further we observe that the common Ground in all the cited cases has been that limitation by itself cannot bring the amount under the purview of Sec. 41(1) of the Act, the amount in question has to be released or admission of write off in favour of the assessee by the creditor, then alo…

AVON METERS PVT LTD,MOHALI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1(1), DELHI

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

ITA 5794/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 40A(7)Section 68

…it is on that reasoning that the ld. CIT (A) deleted the addition. We observe that the action of ld. CIT (A) in so doing is supported by the decisions of apex Court in the CIT vs. Sugauli Sugar Mills (1989) 236 ITR 518(SC), CIT vs. Kesaria Tea Co. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 434 and Polyflex India (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2002) 257 ITR 343 (SC). Further we observe that the common Ground in all the cited cases has been that limitation by itself cannot bring the amount under the purview of Sec. 41(1) of the Act, the amount in question has to be released or admission of write off in favour of the assessee by the creditor, then alo…

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CC-2,, KANPUR vs. SHRI.MOHAMMAD ASFAND AKHTAR, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 144/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Cc-2 V. Shri Mohammad Asfand Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, Akhtar Allenganj, Kanpur-208001. Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar V. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68Section 69C

…ction. ITA. No.139/LKW/2022 Page 78 of 158 7.16 The aforesaid provision of the Act came up for further consideration before the Constitutional Bench of three learned Judges of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Chief CIT -vs.- Kesaria Tea Co. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 434 (SC) wherein in the context of the similar facts, it was held that section 41 (1) of the Act could arise only if the liability of the assessee has ceased without the possibility of reviving it and if there has been no cessation during the year then section 41(1) of the Act has no application. The Hon’ble Apex Court reiterated the views taken in t…

MOHD. ASFAND AKHTAR,KANPUR vs. DEPUTI COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CC-2, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 139/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Cc-2 V. Shri Mohammad Asfand Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, Akhtar Allenganj, Kanpur-208001. Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar V. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68Section 69C

…ction. ITA. No.139/LKW/2022 Page 78 of 158 7.16 The aforesaid provision of the Act came up for further consideration before the Constitutional Bench of three learned Judges of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Chief CIT -vs.- Kesaria Tea Co. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 434 (SC) wherein in the context of the similar facts, it was held that section 41 (1) of the Act could arise only if the liability of the assessee has ceased without the possibility of reviving it and if there has been no cessation during the year then section 41(1) of the Act has no application. The Hon’ble Apex Court reiterated the views taken in t…

DYNAMIC TRANSMISSION LTD.,ROHTAK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE , ROHTAK

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

ITA 328/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 40A(7)Section 68

…it is on that reasoning that the ld. CIT (A) deleted the addition. We observe that the action of ld. CIT (A) in so doing is supported by the decisions of apex Court in the CIT vs. Sugauli Sugar Mills (1989) 236 ITR 518(SC), CIT vs. Kesaria Tea Co. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 434 and Polyflex India (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2002) 257 ITR 343 (SC). Further we observe that the common Ground in all the cited cases has been that limitation by itself cannot bring the amount under the purview of Sec. 41(1) of the Act, the amount in question has to be released or admission of write off in favour of the assessee by the creditor, then alo…