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

87 ITR 542Supreme Court of India1973#636 most cited

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

Indirect tax components, such as sales tax, are included when calculating gross turnover or sales receipts for determining business income. Deductions relating to these taxes are subject to the provisions of Section 43B, requiring actual payment for deductibility.

155

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

Chowringhee Sales Bureau · 87 ITR 542 · indirect tax component · gross turnover · sales receipts · Section 43B · actual payment · deductibility · sales tax

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

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, (It)-4(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, accordingly

ITA 2614/MUM/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh आअसं. 2135/मुं/ 2022 ("न.व. 2015-16) Shelf Drilling J.T.Angel Limited, 4Th Floor, Schindier House, Main Street, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai 400 076. Pan: Aascs-2719-P ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs.

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash

…be included in the aggregate amount paid or payable to the assessee for the purpose of computation of income as per the provisions of section 448. On this point Reliance is placed upon the following decisions: • Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P) Ltd. v. CIT [1973] 87 ITR 542 (SC) • CIT v. T. Naggi Reddy [1993] 202 ITR 253 (SC) • McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO [1985] 154 ITR 148/22 Taxman 11 (SC) • China Shipping Container Lines (Hong Kong) Co. Ltd. IT Appeal No.8516 (Mum.) of 2010 4. With a view to simplify and rationalize the assessment and computation of profit and gain of shipping business in the case of non resident,…

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, (It)-4(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Shelf Drilling J.T. Angel Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, accordingly

ITA 2613/MUM/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh आअसं. 2135/मुं/ 2022 ("न.व. 2015-16) Shelf Drilling J.T.Angel Limited, 4Th Floor, Schindier House, Main Street, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai 400 076. Pan: Aascs-2719-P ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs.

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash

…be included in the aggregate amount paid or payable to the assessee for the purpose of computation of income as per the provisions of section 448. On this point Reliance is placed upon the following decisions: • Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P) Ltd. v. CIT [1973] 87 ITR 542 (SC) • CIT v. T. Naggi Reddy [1993] 202 ITR 253 (SC) • McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO [1985] 154 ITR 148/22 Taxman 11 (SC) • China Shipping Container Lines (Hong Kong) Co. Ltd. IT Appeal No.8516 (Mum.) of 2010 4. With a view to simplify and rationalize the assessment and computation of profit and gain of shipping business in the case of non resident,…

Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT- It, Circle 4(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, accordingly

ITA 2137/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh आअसं. 2135/मुं/ 2022 ("न.व. 2015-16) Shelf Drilling J.T.Angel Limited, 4Th Floor, Schindier House, Main Street, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai 400 076. Pan: Aascs-2719-P ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs.

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash

…be included in the aggregate amount paid or payable to the assessee for the purpose of computation of income as per the provisions of section 448. On this point Reliance is placed upon the following decisions: • Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P) Ltd. v. CIT [1973] 87 ITR 542 (SC) • CIT v. T. Naggi Reddy [1993] 202 ITR 253 (SC) • McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO [1985] 154 ITR 148/22 Taxman 11 (SC) • China Shipping Container Lines (Hong Kong) Co. Ltd. IT Appeal No.8516 (Mum.) of 2010 4. With a view to simplify and rationalize the assessment and computation of profit and gain of shipping business in the case of non resident,…

Shelf Drilling J.T. Angel Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, It, Circle 4 (2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, accordingly

ITA 2135/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh आअसं. 2135/मुं/ 2022 ("न.व. 2015-16) Shelf Drilling J.T.Angel Limited, 4Th Floor, Schindier House, Main Street, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai 400 076. Pan: Aascs-2719-P ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs.

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash

…be included in the aggregate amount paid or payable to the assessee for the purpose of computation of income as per the provisions of section 448. On this point Reliance is placed upon the following decisions: • Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P) Ltd. v. CIT [1973] 87 ITR 542 (SC) • CIT v. T. Naggi Reddy [1993] 202 ITR 253 (SC) • McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO [1985] 154 ITR 148/22 Taxman 11 (SC) • China Shipping Container Lines (Hong Kong) Co. Ltd. IT Appeal No.8516 (Mum.) of 2010 4. With a view to simplify and rationalize the assessment and computation of profit and gain of shipping business in the case of non resident,…

M/S Dell International Services India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (Ltu), Bangalore

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

ITA 2835/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.2835/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 M/S.Dell International Services The Additional Commissioner India Private Limited Of Income-Tax (Ltu) V. Bangalore. Divyashree Greens, Sy.Nos.12/1, 12/2A & 13/1A,Challaghatta Village,Varthur Hobli Bengaluru – 560 071. Pan : Aaach1925Q. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.T.Suryanarayana, Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Praveen Karanth, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 20.01.2023 Date Of Hearing : 13.01.2023 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against Final Assessment Order Dated 30.11.2017 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The I.T.Act. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2013-2014. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Follows: The Assessee Is A Company, Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Trading In Computer Systems Including Support & Maintenance Services & Leasing Of Computers. For The Assessment Year 2013-2014, The Return Of Income Was Filed On 30.11.2013 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.22,31,24,760. The Assessment Was Selected For Scrutiny & Notice U/S 143(2) Of The I.T.Act Was Issued On 2 It(Tp)A No.2835/Bang/2017. M/S.Dell International Services India Private Limited. 11.09.2014. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, It Was Noticed That The International Transactions Entered By The Assessee With Its Associated Enterprises (Aes) Had Exceeded The Prescribed Limit, Hence, The Matter Was Referred To The Transfer Pricing Officer (Tpo) To Determine The Arm’S Length Price (Alp) Of The Said Transaction. The Tpo Passed Order U/S 92Ca Of The I.T.Act On 19.10.2016. In The Said Order, The Tpo Had Proposed Following Adjustments:-

For Appellant: Sri.T.Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Praveen Karanth, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 40Section 92CSection 92C(3)

…nd on identical issue the Tribunal in the case of Smt.Husna Parveen v. CIT(A) reported in (2022) 142 taxmann.com 2 (Varanasi-Trib.) by following the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P.) Ltd. v. CIT reported in (1997) 87 ITR 542 (SC) had decided the issue against the assessee. The relevant finding of the Tribunal reads as follows:- “6. I have considered the submissions of the assessee made before the authorities below as well as the submissions of the learned Sr. DR. There is no dispute that the assessee has not paid the GST within the time limit as prescribed under secti…

Vertex Securities Ltd, Ernakulam vs. The ITO, Kochi

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

ITA 11/COCH/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Jameskutty Antony, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 43BSection 80H

…n its balance sheet and having enriched by said amount, the assessee is liable to be included in the income of the assessee. Accordingly, we are of the opinion that judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau P. Ltd. reported in 87 ITR 542 (SC) is directly applicable to the facts of the present case, wherein held as follows:- “That the fact that the appellant credited the amount received as sales tax under the head “sales tax collection account” did not make any material difference. It is the true nature and quality of the receipt and not the head under which it is entered in the a…

ACIT(It), Circle - 1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Cathay Pacific Airways Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2468/KOL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16 Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Cathay Pacific Airways Income Tax (It), Circle-1(1), Limited Kolkata. C/O Pricewaterhouse-Coopers Vs. Ltd., Plot Y-14, Block-Ep, Sector-V, Salt Lake, Kolkata- 700091. (Pan: Aabcc5644E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Amal Kamat, Cit, Dr Respondent By : Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate

For Appellant: Shri Amal Kamat, CIT, DRFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Pratyush
Section 143(3)Section 44B

…provisions of section 44BB of the Act?” 9.3 While answering the above substantial question of law, Hon’ble High Court considered various decisions including the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1973) 87 ITR 592 (SC), CIT Vs. Lakshmi Machine Works (2007) 290 ITR 667 (SC), DIT Vs. Schlumberger Asia Services Ltd. (2009) 317 ITR 156 (Uttarakhand) and Sedco Forex International Inc. Vs. CIT (2008) 299 ITR 238 (Uttarakhand). The Hon’ble High Court also referred to the Circular issued by CBDT vide Circular No. 4/2008 dated 9 M/s. Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd., A.…

Shree Siddhi Vinayak Inductions Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result ITA NO. 01/JPR/2021 for A

ITA 1/JPR/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. P. R. Meena (PCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

…eipt and provisions of section 43B are applicable to the case. Ld. AO relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Associate Cement Company Ltd. vs CIT (1993) 201 ITR 435 and Apex Court decision in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau (1973) 87 ITR 542 in AY 2012-13 and in other two assessment years the ld. AO has relied upon the judgment of hon’ble Bench in the case of SVG Express Services which was relied upon by ld. CIT(A) in AY 2012-13 while dismissing the appeal of the assessee . In this regard, at the outset, provisions of section 43B are reproduced for the sake of convenience: [Certain d…

M/S Shri Siddhi Vinayak Induction P. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result ITA NO. 01/JPR/2021 for A

ITA 279/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. P. R. Meena (PCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

…eipt and provisions of section 43B are applicable to the case. Ld. AO relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Associate Cement Company Ltd. vs CIT (1993) 201 ITR 435 and Apex Court decision in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau (1973) 87 ITR 542 in AY 2012-13 and in other two assessment years the ld. AO has relied upon the judgment of hon’ble Bench in the case of SVG Express Services which was relied upon by ld. CIT(A) in AY 2012-13 while dismissing the appeal of the assessee . In this regard, at the outset, provisions of section 43B are reproduced for the sake of convenience: [Certain d…

Shree Siddhi Vinayak Induction Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Jaipur

In the result ITA NO. 01/JPR/2021 for A

ITA 116/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. P. R. Meena (PCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

…eipt and provisions of section 43B are applicable to the case. Ld. AO relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Associate Cement Company Ltd. vs CIT (1993) 201 ITR 435 and Apex Court decision in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau (1973) 87 ITR 542 in AY 2012-13 and in other two assessment years the ld. AO has relied upon the judgment of hon’ble Bench in the case of SVG Express Services which was relied upon by ld. CIT(A) in AY 2012-13 while dismissing the appeal of the assessee . In this regard, at the outset, provisions of section 43B are reproduced for the sake of convenience: [Certain d…

M/S Total Environment Building Systems Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands dismissed and the assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 46/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri Vilas V Shinde, CIT DR
Section 250Section 37Section 40Section 43B

…e paid to the service tax department or refunded to the customers and therefore cannot be disallowed under section 43B. 6.5 On the contrary the Ld.DR relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Chowranghee sales Buro vs. CIT, reported in (1973) 87 ITR 542 6.6 We have perused submissions advanced for both sides in light of records placed before us. 6.7 Section 43B does not contemplate liability to pay the service tax before actual receipt of the funds in the account of the assessee. In our opinion, when the assessee collected the amount, it should not kept it with them and same should be deposited t…

Total Environment Building Systems Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands dismissed and the assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 45/BANG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri Vilas V Shinde, CIT DR
Section 250Section 37Section 40Section 43B

…e paid to the service tax department or refunded to the customers and therefore cannot be disallowed under section 43B. 6.5 On the contrary the Ld.DR relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Chowranghee sales Buro vs. CIT, reported in (1973) 87 ITR 542 6.6 We have perused submissions advanced for both sides in light of records placed before us. 6.7 Section 43B does not contemplate liability to pay the service tax before actual receipt of the funds in the account of the assessee. In our opinion, when the assessee collected the amount, it should not kept it with them and same should be deposited t…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Total Environment Building Systems Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands dismissed and the assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 40/BANG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri Vilas V Shinde, CIT DR
Section 250Section 37Section 40Section 43B

…e paid to the service tax department or refunded to the customers and therefore cannot be disallowed under section 43B. 6.5 On the contrary the Ld.DR relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Chowranghee sales Buro vs. CIT, reported in (1973) 87 ITR 542 6.6 We have perused submissions advanced for both sides in light of records placed before us. 6.7 Section 43B does not contemplate liability to pay the service tax before actual receipt of the funds in the account of the assessee. In our opinion, when the assessee collected the amount, it should not kept it with them and same should be deposited t…

Orbit 9 Electronics, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 16/HYD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charym/S.Orbit 9 Electronics, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad Ward-6(2), [Pan No. Aabfo6265A] Hyderabad

For Appellant: Shri Swapnil Deshmukh, ARFor Respondent: Shri T.Sunil Goutam, DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 194JSection 44ASection 44BSection 80H

…rossing the threshold limits of Rs.2 Crores. Ld. CIT(A) placed reliance on the decisions reported in Jonnalla Narasimharao Vs. CIT [1993] 68 Taxman 340 (SC), Addl.CIT Vs. T.Naggi Reddy [1993] 202 ITR 253 (SC), Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P) Ltd., Vs. CIT [1973] 87 ITR 542 (SC), Sinclair Murray & Co. (P) Ltd Vs. CIT [1974] 97 ITR 615 (SC), Union of India Vs. Bombay Tyre International Ltd [1983] 15 Taxman 29 (SC) and Mc Dowell & Co. Ltd., Vs. CIT [1985] 22 Taxman 11 (SC). On this premise, Ld. CIT(A) proceeded to estimate the taxable income at 25% of the total turnover/gross receipts of Rs.2,00,85,193/- and directed t…

Mr.Nanjunda Renuka Aradhya, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 397/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Nitish Ranjan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Basaganni, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 194CSection 194C(2)Section 206ASection 40Section 43B

…ith regard to the service tax (which is a tax on services offered) when compared with sales tax (which is a tax on goods sold) was brought out clearly with reference to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Chowringhe Sales Bureau Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (87 ITR 542). Accordingly, it is evident that the jurisdictional ITAT has upheld the applicability of the said decision of the Supreme Court (supra) rendered in respect of sales tax in the context of service tax also. In case of Sinclair Murray & Co. (p) Lt d 97 ITR 615 the Apex Court has held that sales tax collected by the assessee company was part of its t…

M/S. Geotrix Building Envelope Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessees is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2561/BANG/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Ramasubramaniyan and Shri Sandeep, C.AsFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshini Basaganni, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 431Section 43B

…r relied upon decision of the Calcutta High Court in ITA No.2561 /Bang/2019 Page 5 of 9 CIT vs Associated Pigments Ltd., (1193) 71 Taxman 244 (Cal) where the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P) Ltd. v. CIT (1973) 87 ITR 542 and Sinclair Murray & Co (P) Ltd., vs CIT (1974) 97 ITR 615 is referred to. 7. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. During the course of hearing, the ld.AR did not press for ground No.5 relating to VAT and CST payable of Rs.46,99,607/-. The CIT(A) has remitted this issue back to the AO for proper verification…

Joint CIT (OSD) Cent Cir. 1(4), Mumbai vs. Grasim Industries Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 2155/MUM/2016[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 1996-97
Section 143(3)

…wever, the question in present appeals is whether Supreme Court decision in the exemption from sales tax due to case of Chowringhee Schemes/Notification of the respective State Sales Bureau v. CIT (WB) Government due to setting up industries in notified [1973]87 ITR 542 (SC) area is exempt or not. and Sinclair Murray and Co. Pvt. Ltd. V. CIT, The Supreme Court in case of Ponni Sugars (supra), Calcutta,[1974]97 ITR Balaji Alloys (supra) and Chaplakar Brothers (supra) 615. have consistently held that subsidy/incentive in whichever form, if received for setting up industries or industrialization or employment then i…

Shri. Boraiah Shivananjaiah, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 680/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Boraiah Shivananjaiah, Asst.Commissioner Of K. Janatha Colony, Income Tax, Bidadi Hobli, Vs. Circle - 3(2)(1) Ramnagara Dist., Bengaluru Bengaluru Pan – Anaps2762E Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Assessee by Sri Sreehari Kutsa, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43ASection 43B

…ow the question is that when the assessee has not claimed it as expenditure in the profit and loss account, could it be disallowed u/s 43B of the Act. This was considered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau P. Ltd. v. CIT [(1973) 87 ITR 542 (SC)], in which it was held that the sales tax collected by the assessee is revenue receipt even if it is shown by the assessee under non-revenue head and such treatment by the assessee is not decisive. Further, in the case of M/s.Jain Christopher v. DCIT in ITA No.855/Bang/2012 – order dated 12.04.2013, it was held as under:- 10 “7.2 During the…

Tata Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result additional ground raised by the assessee vide additional ground number 3 and ground number 5 of the appeal is allowed

ITA 2439/MUM/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tata Chemicals Limited Tax 2(3), Bombay House Aayakar Bhavan, Fort, Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aaact4059M Appellant By : Shri Nitesh Joshi, Ar Respondent By : Shri Milind Chavan, Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.02.2022

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan, DR
Section 41Section 80

…ssion (subsidy) of ₹ 105.40 crores, included in the computation of section 80IB claim, the Ld. counsel submits that the sales tax collected is a part of trading receipt as held by the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in the case of Sinclair Murray & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT 97 ITR 615 (SC) and cannot be excluded from the income of the unit. Further, it is submitted that the fertilizer concession received by the assessee is nothing but part of the sale proceeds, which cannot be excluded while working out profit u/s 80IB of the Act. 19. On the other hand, the Ld. DR submits that the sales tax remission/subsidy has been received…

M/S Ids Next Business Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner Pf Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2119/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rampriyadas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sankarganesh K, JCIT (DR)
Section 145ASection 43B

…ow the question is that when the assessee has not claimed it as expenditure in the profit and loss account, could it be disallowed u/s 43B of the Act. This was considered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau P. Ltd. v. CIT [(1973) 87 ITR 542 (SC)], in which it was held that the sales tax collected by the assessee is revenue receipt even if it is shown by the assessee under non-revenue head and such treatment by the assessee is not decisive. Further, in the case of M/s.Jain Christopher v. DCIT in ITA No.855/Bang/2012 – order dated 12.04.2013, it was held as under:- “7.2 During the cou…