CIT v. Acrow India Ltd.

96 ITR 64High Court1974#25941 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2019.

Judgments citing CIT v. Acrow India Ltd.

Dy. CIT, Circle-1, Jalgaon vs. Tulsi Extrusions Ltd., Jalgaon

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of

ITA 823/PUN/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.556/Pun/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

Section 14ASection 40A(3)

…mply on the ground that the assessee declared higher value to the banks. Our view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs. Acrow India Ltd. (2008) 298 ITR 448 (Bom.). Reliance of the ld. DR on V. Rajan vs. CIT (1974) 96 ITR 64 (Mad) is inconsequential in as much as in that case the explanation of the assessee was that stock in hand was actually inflated for the purpose of getting a higher loan from bank. Contrariwise, the case under consideration is that of estimation of stock value by the assessee at the time of furnishing statements to bank and not that of intentiona…

Tulsi Extrusions Ltd., Jalgaon vs. Joint CIT, Range-2, Jalgaon

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of

ITA 556/PUN/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.556/Pun/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

Section 14ASection 40A(3)

…mply on the ground that the assessee declared higher value to the banks. Our view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs. Acrow India Ltd. (2008) 298 ITR 448 (Bom.). Reliance of the ld. DR on V. Rajan vs. CIT (1974) 96 ITR 64 (Mad) is inconsequential in as much as in that case the explanation of the assessee was that stock in hand was actually inflated for the purpose of getting a higher loan from bank. Contrariwise, the case under consideration is that of estimation of stock value by the assessee at the time of furnishing statements to bank and not that of intentiona…

ITO, WD-41(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Image Sign, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 650/KOL/2014[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2017AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCITFor Respondent: Shri D. K. Bandyopadhyay, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 194CSection 40

…CIT Vs. Udaipur Chemicals & Fertilizers (P) Ltd. 211 CTR 191, iii) Coimbatore Spinning & Weaving Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 95 ITR 375 (Mad), iv) Dhansiram Agarwalla Vs. CIT 111 CTR 39 (Gau), v) Century Foams (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT 123 CTR 342 (All) and vi) V. Rajan Vs. CIT 96 ITR 64 (Mad). Since the subject mentioned issue also is debatable the same cannot be adjudicated in section 154 proceedings. Hence, the grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed and 6 M/s. Image Sign, AY 2006-07 the order of the Ld. CIT(A) does not require any interference and the same is hereby upheld. Hence the grounds raised by the revenue are dismis…

CIT v. Acrow India Ltd. (96 ITR 64) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax