Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P.) Ltd. v. CIT

87 ITR 542Supreme Court of India1973#635 most cited

What is Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P.) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Compulsory product registration fees essential for making sales constitute revenue expenditure and are allowable as a deduction under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, rather than capital expenditure.

155

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2000 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Chowringhee Sales Bureau · 87 ITR 542 · Section 37 · revenue expenditure · capital expenditure · allowability of expenditure · business expenditure · product registration fees · profits and gains of business or profession · deduction

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 43BSection 143(1)Section 115JBSection 37(1)Section 80HHCSection 234DSection 271(1)(c)

Issues it is cited on

section 80hhc(3)section 28(iv)section 145asection 80hhcsection 80hhsection 43bsection 80ibmercantile system of accountingsection 43section 92ca(3)profits and gains of business or professionsection 80i

Judgments citing Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P.) Ltd. v. CIT

SLO AUTOMOBILES PVT. LTD.,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 6509/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun14 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Slo Automobiles Private Dy. Cit, Limited, Circle-2, Dehradun. 108-Haridwar Road, Vs. Dehradun-248001. Pan-Aancs8160M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 43B

…and submitted that the said fact is admitted fact as affirmed at page No. 9 of the assessment order. The Ld. Counsel also submitted that reliance made on the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau Pvt. Ltd. reported in CIT 87 ITR 542 SLO Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (S.C). was completely misplaced as the Ld. CIT(A) has not taken into consideration that the VAT liability that arose on recasting of books of the Appellant was subsequently paid by the Assessee. The Ld. Counsel also submitted that VAT liability is not an income within the meaning of Section 2(24) of the Act as…

PLANEX PROJECTS AND CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,ERNAKULAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , KOZHIKODE

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

ITA 844/COCH/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Jun 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2019-20 Planex Projects & Constructions Pvt. Ltd. .......... Appellant No. Xxv/4, Kerala State Houseing Building Changampuzha Nagar,South Kalamassery 682 [Pan: Aagcp3634A] Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Ward-1(1) & Tps, Kozhikode Appellant By: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 21.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.06.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Surat [Cit(A)] Dated 10.07.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-20. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Execution Of Civil Contracts. The Return Of Income For Ay 2019-20 Was Filed On 30.10.2019 Declaring Nil Income. The Same Was Revised On 06.06.2020 At Nil Income. The 2 Planex Projects & Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Said Return Of Income Was Processed By The Cpc U/S. 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Vide Intimation Dated 22.09.2020 After Making Adjustment Of Unpaid Gst Of Rs. 67,54,054/-.

For Appellant: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 43B

…agree with the submission. Even the statutory dues collected during the course of business forms part of trading receipts which is liable to be taxed in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT 87 ITR 542. The appellant had not filed any evidence before us to show that the statutory dues were paid before the due date for filing the return of income. 4 Planex Projects and Constructions Pvt. Ltd. 9. On the other hand, the Tax Audit Report, as extracted by the learned CIT(A) in para 5.5 of his order clearly states that the GST liability of Rs. 67,54…

UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT CEN RG IX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 3878/MUM/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2003-04
Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 80

…hat the said\nexpenditure is allowable u/s 37 of the Act. Reliance has been placed on decisions of\nthe High Courts and also of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Shoorji\nVallabhdas & Co. 46 ITR 144, Kedarnath Jute 82 ITR 363; Chowringhee Sales\nBureau 87 ITR 542; Berger Paints 254 ITR 503. It is submitted that the registration\nof the product was compulsory to make sales in the respective countries. Without\nsuch registration, the appellant company could not have launched its product for sale\nin those countries. The expenditure was, therefore, of revenue nature. It is submitted\nthat similar expenditure…

ASST CIT CC 38, MUMBAI vs. UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 3534/MUM/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 80

…ded that the said expenditure is allowable u/s 37 of the Act. Reliance has been placed on decisions of the High Courts and also of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas& Co. 46 ITR 144, Kedarnath Jute 82 ITR 363; Chowringhee Sales Bureau 87 ITR 542; Berger Paints 254 ITR 503. It is submitted that the registration of the product was compulsory to make sales in the respective countries. Without such registration, the appellant company could not have launched its product for sale in those countries. The expenditure was, therefore, of revenue nature. It is submitted that similar expenditure was…

ADDL CIT CEN RG IX, MUMBAI vs. UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD ( FORMLERY KNOWN AS UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 6236/MUM/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 80

…ded that the said expenditure is allowable u/s 37 of the Act. Reliance has been placed on decisions of the High Courts and also of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas& Co. 46 ITR 144, Kedarnath Jute 82 ITR 363; Chowringhee Sales Bureau 87 ITR 542; Berger Paints 254 ITR 503. It is submitted that the registration of the product was compulsory to make sales in the respective countries. Without such registration, the appellant company could not have launched its product for sale in those countries. The expenditure was, therefore, of revenue nature. It is submitted that similar expenditure was…

UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT CEN RG IX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 6224/MUM/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 80

…ded that the said expenditure is allowable u/s 37 of the Act. Reliance has been placed on decisions of the High Courts and also of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas& Co. 46 ITR 144, Kedarnath Jute 82 ITR 363; Chowringhee Sales Bureau 87 ITR 542; Berger Paints 254 ITR 503. It is submitted that the registration of the product was compulsory to make sales in the respective countries. Without such registration, the appellant company could not have launched its product for sale in those countries. The expenditure was, therefore, of revenue nature. It is submitted that similar expenditure was…

THE ACIT CC-38, MUMBAI vs. M/S. UNITED PHOSPHOROUS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1822/MUM/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2002-2003

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 80

…ded that the said expenditure is allowable u/s 37 of the Act. Reliance has been placed on decisions of the High Courts and also of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas& Co. 46 ITR 144, Kedarnath Jute 82 ITR 363; Chowringhee Sales Bureau 87 ITR 542; Berger Paints 254 ITR 503. It is submitted that the registration of the product was compulsory to make sales in the respective countries. Without such registration, the appellant company could not have launched its product for sale in those countries. The expenditure was, therefore, of revenue nature. It is submitted that similar expenditure was…

M/S. UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD(NOW KNOWN AS UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD),MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT CEN CIR-38, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1787/MUM/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2002-2003

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 80

…ded that the said expenditure is allowable u/s 37 of the Act. Reliance has been placed on decisions of the High Courts and also of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas& Co. 46 ITR 144, Kedarnath Jute 82 ITR 363; Chowringhee Sales Bureau 87 ITR 542; Berger Paints 254 ITR 503. It is submitted that the registration of the product was compulsory to make sales in the respective countries. Without such registration, the appellant company could not have launched its product for sale in those countries. The expenditure was, therefore, of revenue nature. It is submitted that similar expenditure was…

SHRI VEERSHAIV CO. OP. BANK LTD.,KOLHAPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2, KOLHAPUR , KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 175/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.175/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri A.D. Kulkarni
Section 143(3)Section 250

…the court has to see the true nature of the receipts and not go only by the entry in the books of account. We agree with the Tribunal that these deposits are really capital receipts and not revenue receipts. In Chowringhee Sales Bureau P. Ltd. V. CIT [1973] 87 ITR 542 (SC) which was followed in Sinclair Murray and Co. P. Ltd. V. CIT [1974] 97 ITR 615, the Supreme Court observed (page 619): “It is the true nature and quality of the receipt and not the head under which it is entered in the account books that would prove decisive. If a receipt is a trading receipt, the fact that it is not so shown in the account…

SYNAPTICS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT., CIRCLE - 8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 605/HYD/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: CA CS Subrahmanyam And Shri V. Siva Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr. AR
Section 143(1)

…e addition in the hands of the assessee. Therefore, the learned CIT(A) sustained addition 4 ITA.No.605/Hyd./2024 made by the Assessing Officer by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chowranghee Sales Bureau P. Ltd., vs. CIT [1973] 87 ITR 542 (SC) wherein it has been held that sales tax collected by the assessee is revenue receipt even if it is not shown by the assessee as non-revenue one and such treatment of assessee is not a decisive one. He submitted that since the assessee did not shown the VAT/GST refund as the income of the company, the learned CIT(A) rightly sustained the addit…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , RAIPUR vs. GRAND MOTORS, RAIPUR

ITA 544/RPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Grand Motors, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Lodhi Para Chowk, Pandri, Raipur Raipur, 492001, Chhattisgarh Chhattisgarh, 492001 Pan: Aagfg8524P

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Khatri, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT- DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 40Section 43B

…i decision in the case of Smt. Husna Parveen vs Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (ITA No.3VNS/2022 dated 25.8.2022) and the Supreme Court decision in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1973] 87 ITR 542 (SC). 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a firm engaged in the business of Automative products, had filed its return of income for the AY 2017-18 on 05.03.2018, declaring gross total income at Rs. NIL. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer, CPC has processed the return of assessee and issued an intimation u/s 143(1) on 24.03.20…

THE DY CIT CC-38, MUMBAI vs. M/S. UNITED PHOSPHOUROUS LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 4099/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2024AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt.Renu Jauhri, Accountan Member

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Heera Ram Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT.RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTAN MEMBER ITA No.3456/Mum/2004 (A.Y. 2000-01) ITA No. 2990/Mum/2005 (A.Y. 2001-02) United Phosphorus Ltd (Now Known as Uniphos Enterprises Ltd) Uniphos House, 11-C.D. Marg, Opp Madhu Park, Khar (W), Mumbai 400 052. Vs. DCIT, Central Circle – 38 Aayakar Bhavan, MK Road, Mumbai 400 050. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACU3440P Appellant .. Respondent ITA No. 4099/Mum/2004 (A.Y. 2000-01) DCIT, Central Circle – 38 Aayakar Bhavan, MK Road, Mumbai 400 050. Vs. United Phosphorus Ltd (Now Kno…

NIPPON AUDIOTRONIX PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 16(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2137/DEL/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2023-24] M/S Nippon Audiotronix Acit, Private Limited, Circle-16(1), N-191, Greater Kailash-I, Vs New Delhi New Delhi-110048 Pan-Aaacn2163L Assessee Revenue

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 194Q

…that the action of the CPC in restricting the TDS claim as per Rule-37BA(4) r.w.s. 143(1)(a)(ii) was justified and also relied upon certain case laws including the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau Pvt. Ltd. (1973) 87 ITR 542 (SC), wherein, the Hon’ble Court has held that the indirect tax component should be included while calculating the gross turnover or sales receipts. 3.1. Against the above order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. The ld. AR filed a written synopsis, which is reproduced as under:- That the provisions of section 194Q of the Act, obligates a…

MUNJAL AUTO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,VADODARA, GUJARAT vs. DCIT, CPC BANGALORE (NOW DCIT CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 878/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, S.R.-DR
Section 234CSection 250Section 43Section 43B

…r the Tax Audit Report. The adjustment was made by CPC on account of non- payment of GST, within the due date. Munjal Auto Industries Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst.Year –2018-19 - 3– 4. The Ld. CIT(A) relying on the judgment of Chowringhee Sales Bureau Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 87 ITR 542 (SC) and the case of Wyzminds Solutions Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO in ITA No. 3417/Bang/2018 upheld the action of the CPC. 5. The assessee in appeal before us against the aforesaid order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). 6. However, the facts reveal that the assessee has not claimed the amount of GST in the Profit & Loss Account. Hence, the facts of the judgment…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. HOTEL SUKHAMAYA PVT. LTD, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 206/CTK/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 Sept 2024AY 2012-13
Section 132Section 269SSection 271D

…the respondent. It is urged by Mr. Manchanda, that these receipts have been described in the bye-law 50 as deposits, but we fail to see how they can really be regarded as deposits. It was held by this Court in Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (1973) 87 ITR 542 that it is the true nature and quality of the receipt and not the head under which it is entered [in the account books as would prove decisive. if a receipt is a trading receipt, the fact that it is not so shown in the account books of the assessee would not prevent the assessing authority from treating it as a trading receipt. The same principle…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. HOTEL SUKHAMAYA PVT. LTD, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 205/CTK/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 Sept 2024AY 2009-10
Section 132Section 269SSection 271D

…the respondent. It is urged by Mr. Manchanda, that these receipts have been described in the bye-law 50 as deposits, but we fail to see how they can really be regarded as deposits. It was held by this Court in Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (1973) 87 ITR 542 that it is the true nature and quality of the receipt and not the head under which it is entered [in the account books as would prove decisive. if a receipt is a trading receipt, the fact that it is not so shown in the account books of the assessee would not prevent the assessing authority from treating it as a trading receipt. The same principle…

CLSA INDIA P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT LTU, MUMBAI

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

ITA 6232/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Clsa India Pvt. Ltd. Asst. Cit Ltu 29Th Floor, Centre 1 World Trade Formerly Known As Clsa India Ltd. Vs. 8/F Dalamal House, Nariman Point, Centre, Cuff Parade, Mumbai Mumbai-400 021 Pan/Gir No. Aaacc 2262 K (Assessee) : (Respondent) : Shri Mukesh Bhutani, Assessee By Ms. Karishma Phatarpekar, Shri Paras Savla : Shri Akhtar H. Ansari, Sr. Ar & Respondent By Shri A. K. Ambastha, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing : 23.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.05.2024

Section 250Section 92CSection 92C(3)

…ld. A.O. held the same to be the part of trading/business receipts and added the same as business income of the assessee. 18 CLSA India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Asst. CIT LTU The ld. A.O. had relied on the decision of Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT [1973] 87 ITR 542 (SC), Deccan Hides and Skins Co. vs. CIT [1983] 142 ITR 175 (Bom) and CWT vs. Shri Bagpatia Food Industries [1944] 207 ITR 1045 (Rajasthan), where it was held that sales tax/cess received by the assessee on account of sales but not paid to the exchequer neither refunded to the buyers will be trading receipts liable to be taxed as the business inc…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. K KALPANA INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue for Assessment Year

ITA 816/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 815 & 816/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income K Kalpana Industries India Ltd., Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Kolkata Vs Kolkata 28, Pretoria Street Kolkata - 700071 [Pan : Aabck2239D] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/02/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/03/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Kolkata [Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Evenly Dt. 25/09/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2012-13. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of 34 Days & 11 Days In Filing Of These Appeals By The Department For Assessment Year 2011-12 & 2012-13 Respectively. After Hearing The Ld. D/R We Are Convinced That It Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause From Filing These Appeals On Time. Though The Department Has Not Filed Any Petition/Application For Condonation, The Hon’Ble Apex Court In The Case Of Sesh Nath Singh & Ors. V. Baidyabati · Sheoraphuli Cooperative Bank

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 28Section 5

…that the assessee has not claimed the VAT as expenditure then the refund of such VAT cannot be treated as income. For arriving at this decision, ld. CIT(A) relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P) vs. CIT (1979) 87 ITR 542 (SC). 6. Aggrieved, the revenue is now in appeal before this Tribunal. 5 I.T.A. Nos. 815 & 816/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13 K Kalpana Industries India Ltd. 7. The ld. D/R vehemently argued supporting the order of the ld. Assessing Officer. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel for the assessee apart from placing reliance on the findin…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. K KALPANA INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue for Assessment Year

ITA 815/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 815 & 816/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income K Kalpana Industries India Ltd., Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Kolkata Vs Kolkata 28, Pretoria Street Kolkata - 700071 [Pan : Aabck2239D] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/02/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/03/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Kolkata [Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Evenly Dt. 25/09/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2012-13. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of 34 Days & 11 Days In Filing Of These Appeals By The Department For Assessment Year 2011-12 & 2012-13 Respectively. After Hearing The Ld. D/R We Are Convinced That It Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause From Filing These Appeals On Time. Though The Department Has Not Filed Any Petition/Application For Condonation, The Hon’Ble Apex Court In The Case Of Sesh Nath Singh & Ors. V. Baidyabati · Sheoraphuli Cooperative Bank

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 28Section 5

…that the assessee has not claimed the VAT as expenditure then the refund of such VAT cannot be treated as income. For arriving at this decision, ld. CIT(A) relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P) vs. CIT (1979) 87 ITR 542 (SC). 6. Aggrieved, the revenue is now in appeal before this Tribunal. 5 I.T.A. Nos. 815 & 816/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13 K Kalpana Industries India Ltd. 7. The ld. D/R vehemently argued supporting the order of the ld. Assessing Officer. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel for the assessee apart from placing reliance on the findin…

P. K. PARIKH, HUF,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 556/AHD/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Mar 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Or During The Hearing Of This Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore K. Parikh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. D.R
Section 139Section 43BSection 44A

…e CIT(A) has rightly disallowed Rs. 6,42,498/- towards the unpaid GST. The ld. D.R. relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A). The ld. D.R. relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 87 ITR 542. 7. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials available on record. The assessee did not debit the amount to the profit and loss account as an expenditure not the assessee claimed any deduction in respect of amount. In fact, the assessee has treated the same as current liabilities and provisions and also given the descri…

Showing 1–20 of 155 · Page 1 of 8

...
Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (87 ITR 542) — Cited in 155 Judgments | BharatTax