CIT v. Bharat Carbon & Ribbon Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd.

239 ITR 505Supreme Court of India1999#4644 most cited

What is CIT v. Bharat Carbon & Ribbon Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd. authority for?

Statutory liabilities, like customs duty, are deductible only in the year they are actually paid, regardless of the assessee's accounting method, as per Section 43B.

25

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Bharat Carbon & Ribbon Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd. · Section 43B · statutory liability · customs duty · actual payment · deduction

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 115JBSection 37Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 92CA(3)Section 10(10C)Section 10(15)(iv)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 10(10c)section 14a(3)section 35ddasection 100section 35ddprofit split methodapproved gratuity fundsection 44cbright line testresale price methodsection 36(l)(va)amp expenditure

Judgments citing CIT v. Bharat Carbon & Ribbon Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd.

DCIT, Cir-5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Coal India Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1697/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.: 466/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Coal India Ltd. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 622/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata M/s. Coal India Ltd. (Appellant) Vs. (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 467/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Coal India Ltd. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 623/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 201…

DCIT, Circle - 5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Coal India Limited, Kolkata

ITA 623/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2012-13
Section 115JSection 250

…this regard was placed on the following judicial pronouncements: a. Saurashtra Cement and Chemical industries vs CIT (Guj) 213 ITR 523 (Page 327-333 of Paperbook) b. Kumar Aerosoles vs ACIT (Del) 55 TTJ 385 c. Bharat Carbon & Ribbon Mfg. Co. (P.) Ltd. vs CIT 239 ITR 505 (SC) 5.2 It was further submitted that in the notification No. S.O. 69(E) dated 25-01-1996 [218 ITR (st) 1], the CBDT has clarified that the term 'prior period items' means material changes or credits which arise in the previous years as results of errors or omissions in the preparation of the financial statements of one or more previous years. I…

DCIT, Circle - 5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Coal India Limited, Kolkata

ITA 622/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.: 466/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Coal India Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 622/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata M/s. Coal India Ltd. (Appellant) Vs. (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 467/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Coal India Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 623/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 201…

Coal India Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 5(1), Kolkata

ITA 467/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.: 466/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Coal India Ltd. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 622/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata (Appellant) Vs. M/s. Coal India Ltd. (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 467/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Coal India Ltd. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata (Appellant) Vs. (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 623/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 201…

Keysight Technologies India Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-13(1), Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4347/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Dr. Shashwat Bajpai, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 43B

…dication at higher level same is an allowable deduction. Reliance is rightly placed by ld. AR on decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd v. CIT [1971] 82ITR 363 (SC) and CIT v. Bharat Carbon & Ribbon Mfg. Co. (P.) Ltd. (1999) 239 ITR 505 (SC). ITAs No.4346 & 4347/Del/2024 7. We are of considered view that once the customs authority order for clearance of goods, then statutory liability of customs duty, is deemed to have incurred by the Appellant in such year in which the liability has been paid. Thus, on the basis of the aforesaid discussion, we are of the considered view that…

Keysight Technologies India Pvt Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-13(1), Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4346/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Dr. Shashwat Bajpai, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 43B

…dication at higher level same is an allowable deduction. Reliance is rightly placed by ld. AR on decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd v. CIT [1971] 82ITR 363 (SC) and CIT v. Bharat Carbon & Ribbon Mfg. Co. (P.) Ltd. (1999) 239 ITR 505 (SC). ITAs No.4346 & 4347/Del/2024 7. We are of considered view that once the customs authority order for clearance of goods, then statutory liability of customs duty, is deemed to have incurred by the Appellant in such year in which the liability has been paid. Thus, on the basis of the aforesaid discussion, we are of the considered view that…

DCIT 2(2)(2), Mumbai vs. The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corp Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed wherein

ITA 4786/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

Section 10(15)(iv)Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IT (245 ITR 428)  Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P) Ltd Vs CIT (180 Taxman 422)  Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd vs CIT (82 ITR 363)  Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Bharat Carbon & Ribbon Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd (239 ITR 505)  Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd vs CIT (210 ITR 358) 116. We find that the decision of the ITAT Delhi Special Bench in the case of NAFED (ITA No. 1999 & 2000/Del/2008) dated 16.10.2015 which has been relied upon by the income-tax department has been reversed by the Delhi High Court vide order dated 19 April 2017 (393…

The Hong Kong & Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd., Mumbai vs. Jt. Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) - Range -3, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed wherein

ITA 4765/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

Section 10(15)(iv)Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IT (245 ITR 428)  Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P) Ltd Vs CIT (180 Taxman 422)  Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd vs CIT (82 ITR 363)  Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Bharat Carbon & Ribbon Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd (239 ITR 505)  Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd vs CIT (210 ITR 358) 116. We find that the decision of the ITAT Delhi Special Bench in the case of NAFED (ITA No. 1999 & 2000/Del/2008) dated 16.10.2015 which has been relied upon by the income-tax department has been reversed by the Delhi High Court vide order dated 19 April 2017 (393…

DDIT (It) 3(1), Mumbai vs. Hongkong & Sanghai Banking Corporation Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed wherein

ITA 7824/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘H’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.7336/Mum/2010 (Assessment Year :2004-05) & ITA No.4765/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year :2005-06) The Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. Srnior Vice President Tax, India Area Management 5th Floor, Hongkong Bank Building, 52/60, MG Road Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 (Appellant) Vs. The Joint Director of Income Tax (International Taxation)-3, Mumbai 1st Flo

Section 10(15)(iv)Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IT (245 ITR 428)  Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P) Ltd Vs CIT (180 Taxman 422)  Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd vs CIT (82 ITR 363)  Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Bharat Carbon & Ribbon Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd (239 ITR 505)  Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd vs CIT (210 ITR 358) 116. We find that the decision of the ITAT Delhi Special Bench in the case of NAFED (ITA No. 1999 & 2000/Del/2008) dated 16.10.2015 which has been relied upon by the income-tax department has been reversed by the Delhi High Court vide order dated 19 April 2017 (393…

The Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd, Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed wherein

ITA 7336/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & The Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. Srnior (Vice President)

Section 10(15)(iv)Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IT (245 ITR 428)  Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P) Ltd Vs CIT (180 Taxman 422)  Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd vs CIT (82 ITR 363)  Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Bharat Carbon & Ribbon Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd (239 ITR 505)  Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd vs CIT (210 ITR 358) 116. We find that the decision of the ITAT Delhi Special Bench in the case of NAFED (ITA No. 1999 & 2000/Del/2008) dated 16.10.2015 which has been relied upon by the income-tax department has been reversed by the Delhi High Court vide order dated 19 April 2017 (393…

International Travel House Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-12(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 8423/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2016-17]

Section 37(1)Section 40

…has to be taken into account as per the provisions of the Act irrespective of the book entries [Refer: Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Company v.v. CIT: 82 ITR 363 (SC), Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT: 116ITR 1 (SC), Bharat Carbon and Ribbon Mfg. Co. P. Ltd.: 239 ITR 505 (SC), CIT vs. U. P. Electronics Corporation Limited: 282 ITR 470 (All HC), Dabur India Ltd. v. ACIT: ITA 3241 & 6525/Del/2014 (Del Trib.)] (ii) The assessing officer has alleged that ITC Ltd recognizes the cost of ESOP as capital contribution and not an expenditure. The said observation is factually incorrect and is not borne out of the records…

M/S. Dabur India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6525/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…on. If an item of per the provisions of the Act and not as per books of account:- i) Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Company vs. CIT, 82 ITR 363 (SC); ii) Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT, 116 ITR 1 (SC); iii) Bharat Carbon and Ribbon Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd. vs. CIT, 239 ITR 505 (SC); iv) CIT vs. UP Electronics Corporation Ltd., 282 ITR 470 (All) 114.6 We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the AO and the CIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. We find, the AO, in the instant case, disallowed t…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dabur India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6256/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…on. If an item of per the provisions of the Act and not as per books of account:- i) Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Company vs. CIT, 82 ITR 363 (SC); ii) Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT, 116 ITR 1 (SC); iii) Bharat Carbon and Ribbon Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd. vs. CIT, 239 ITR 505 (SC); iv) CIT vs. UP Electronics Corporation Ltd., 282 ITR 470 (All) 114.6 We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the AO and the CIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. We find, the AO, in the instant case, disallowed t…

M/S. Dabur India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3241/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…on. If an item of per the provisions of the Act and not as per books of account:- i) Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Company vs. CIT, 82 ITR 363 (SC); ii) Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT, 116 ITR 1 (SC); iii) Bharat Carbon and Ribbon Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd. vs. CIT, 239 ITR 505 (SC); iv) CIT vs. UP Electronics Corporation Ltd., 282 ITR 470 (All) 114.6 We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the AO and the CIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. We find, the AO, in the instant case, disallowed t…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dabur India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3114/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…on. If an item of per the provisions of the Act and not as per books of account:- i) Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Company vs. CIT, 82 ITR 363 (SC); ii) Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT, 116 ITR 1 (SC); iii) Bharat Carbon and Ribbon Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd. vs. CIT, 239 ITR 505 (SC); iv) CIT vs. UP Electronics Corporation Ltd., 282 ITR 470 (All) 114.6 We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the AO and the CIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. We find, the AO, in the instant case, disallowed t…

M/S. Trust Marketing, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 742/JPR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Oct 2019AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain (CA)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 27(1)(a)Section 41(1)

…thereby the mercantile system of accounting becomes irrelevant so far as the claim falling in the ambit of section 43B. He has also relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Bharat Carbon and Ribbon Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd. 239 ITR 505 (SC) and submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has reiterated its view as taken in case of Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, 82 ITR 363 (SC) by holding that the entitlement of deduction will depend on the provisions of law relating thereto and not on the view which the assessee might take of his rights nor can the existence or…

M/S Pradhan Engineering Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Dewas vs. The ACIT 1(1), Ujjain

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee for A

ITA 934/IND/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore14 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…Ind/2016 ii. Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Industries Ltd. vs. CIT (1995) 213 ITR 523 (Guj) High Court of Gujarat iii. CIT vs. Nathmal Tolaram (1973) 88 ITR 234 Hon'ble Guwahati High Court (Gua) iv. CIT vs. Bharat Carbon and Ribbon Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (199) 239 ITR 505 (Hon'ble Supreme Court) v. CIT vs. Ganga Galss Works (P) Ltd. (2005) 276 ITR 394 (All) vi. Standard Mills Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 366 (Bom) vii. CIT vs. B& A Plantations and Industries Ltd. (2002) 257 ITR 694 (Gua) viii. CIT vs. KR. Ganesh (2003) 259 ITR 174 (Mad.) ix. CIT vs. Kishor Chand Shricharan Lal (2004) 266 ITR 37 (All) 22. Per c…

M/S Pradhan Engineering Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Dewas vs. The ACIT 1(1), Ujjain

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee for A

ITA 933/IND/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore14 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…Ind/2016 ii. Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Industries Ltd. vs. CIT (1995) 213 ITR 523 (Guj) High Court of Gujarat iii. CIT vs. Nathmal Tolaram (1973) 88 ITR 234 Hon'ble Guwahati High Court (Gua) iv. CIT vs. Bharat Carbon and Ribbon Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (199) 239 ITR 505 (Hon'ble Supreme Court) v. CIT vs. Ganga Galss Works (P) Ltd. (2005) 276 ITR 394 (All) vi. Standard Mills Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 366 (Bom) vii. CIT vs. B& A Plantations and Industries Ltd. (2002) 257 ITR 694 (Gua) viii. CIT vs. KR. Ganesh (2003) 259 ITR 174 (Mad.) ix. CIT vs. Kishor Chand Shricharan Lal (2004) 266 ITR 37 (All) 22. Per c…

M/S. S.D. Lal, Solapur vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), Solapur

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 365/PUN/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jan 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

Section 43B

…eduction on payment made in the 3 M/s. S.D. Lal instant year. In our considered opinion, this view of the authorities is not in accordance with the settled legal position. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT VS. Bharat Carbon & Ribbon Manufg Co. P.Ltd. (1999) 239 ITR 505 (SC) has held that a statutory liability accrues on issuance of demand notice. Their Lordships laid down in this case that Excise department having issued demand notice asking assessee to pay basic excise duty and special excise duty for past years during the previous year in question, liability accrued at that stage and assessee is entitled…

Pebble Bay Developers P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 13(1)(2), Kalyan

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4890/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4890/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2011-12) M/S. Pebble Bay Developers P. Ltd. Dcit 13(1)(2) 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Raheja Chambers, Linking Road, बिाम/ Main Avenue, Santacruz (West) Mumbai Vs. Mumbai – 400054 स्थामी रेखा सं./जीआइआय सं ./Pan/Gir No. Aaccg1645E (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Nishit Gandhi प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Rajeev Gubgotra

For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Gubgotra
Section 154Section 36Section 43B

…le as business expenditure. In support of his contention the learned Authorized Representative relied upon following decisions. 1. Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd V/s. CIT. 1971, 82 ITR 363 (SC) 2. CIT V/s. Bharat Carbon and Ribban Mfg. Co. P. Ltd., 1999 239 ITR 505 (SC). 6 Pebble Bay Developers P. Ltd. 3. Mema Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. V/s. ACIT ITA no. 654/Mum/2011 dated 13.06.2016. 7. The learned Departmental Representative strongly relied upon the observations of the CIT(A) and Assessing Officer. 8. We have considered rival submissions and perused material on record. We have also applied to th…

CIT v. Bharat Carbon & Ribbon Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd. (239 ITR 505) — Cited in 25 Judgments | BharatTax