What is CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co Ltd. authority for?

Income received by an assessee for services rendered to an Indian company may not be taxable, particularly when the Revenue does not contest its non-taxability. This principle aligns with CBDT Circular No. 14 of 1955, which has been approved by the Supreme Court.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co Ltd.?

202 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co Ltd. (81 ITR 303), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 153C, Section 132(4), Section 153A, Section 132.

CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co Ltd. (81 ITR 303)

Gmr Enterprises Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 2145/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR-II)

Section 14A

…e to demonstrate that the income returned by him is not in accordance with law and requisite facts in this regard are placed on records. This very issue was decided by Hon'ble Delhi High Court also in the case of CIT v. Bharat General Insurance Co. Ltd [1971] 81 ITR 303. Thus, in our considered view, the assessee must be given an opportunity in the interest of justice and fair play to demonstrate and establish that disallowance made u/s 14A is not in accordance with law.” 11. As per this para of the Tribunal order in which the Tribunal has considered various judgements of Hon’ble Apex Court and Hon’ble Delhi High…

ITO, Ward-5(4) vs. Modern Home Care Products Ltd

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2595/DEL/2002[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Nov 2018AY 1998-1999

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiito, Vs. M/S. Modern Home Care Ward-5(4), Products Ltd, New Delhi 4, Community Centre, New Friends Colony, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 55

…ntention. 17. On the question that same has not been raised before the learned assessing officer or before the learned 1st appellate authority and 1st time before this tribunal , The learned authorised representative relied upon the decision of Bharat general 81 ITR 303 and submitted that It is true that the assessee itself had included that non compete fee income in its return for the year in question but there is no estoppels in the Income- tax Act and the assessee having itself challenged the validity of taxing the non compete fee during the year of assessment in question, it must be taken that it had resiled…

De La Rue Cash Processing Solution Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Gurgaon

ITA 2671/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

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

Section 145A

…y on that basis and that he has to consider its taxability in the light of other circumstances de hors the admission made in the return. Reference is made to SR Kosti v. CIT [2005] 276 ITR 165 (Gujarat HC) and CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd, [1971] 81 ITR 303 (Delhi HC). The Ld. AR submitted that since Countervailing Duty of Rs. 18,425,285/- is legitimate deduction in computing the total income for A.Y. 2007-08 therefore, the same deserves to be allowed. The issue whether CVD of Rs. 18,425,285/- paid on imported machinery is an allowable deduction is not in doubt because deduction of similar duty paid…

De La Rue Cash Systems India P, Ltd(Presently Known As - De La Rue Cash Processing Solutins P.Ltd, Gurgaon vs. ITO 1(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 5017/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

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

Section 145A

…y on that basis and that he has to consider its taxability in the light of other circumstances de hors the admission made in the return. Reference is made to SR Kosti v. CIT [2005] 276 ITR 165 (Gujarat HC) and CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd, [1971] 81 ITR 303 (Delhi HC). The Ld. AR submitted that since Countervailing Duty of Rs. 18,425,285/- is legitimate deduction in computing the total income for A.Y. 2007-08 therefore, the same deserves to be allowed. The issue whether CVD of Rs. 18,425,285/- paid on imported machinery is an allowable deduction is not in doubt because deduction of similar duty paid…

Ongc As Representative Assessee of Gulf Piping Company, Wll, Abu Dhabi, Uae, Dehradun vs. DCIT (International Taxation), Dehradun

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1330/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri N.K. Billaiya[Assessment Year: 2011-12] & [Assessment Year: 2011-12] M/S Ongc Ltd [As Representative Assessee Vs. The D.C.I.T Of Gulf Piping Co. Wll, Abu Dhabi, Uae International Taxation C/O Ongc Ltd, Corporate Tax Division Circle - Ii Tel Bhawan, Dehradun Dehradun Pan : Aaaco 1598 A [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR

Section 44BSection 9(1)(i)

…t prejudice to the main contention, the same cannot be held against the assessee as there is no estoppel in law. For this proposition, we draw support from the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bharat General Re-insurance Co. ltd 81 ITR 303[ Del] and HCL Technologies Vs. ACIT 377 ITR 483 [DEL]. 8. Moreover, the Hon'ble Uttarakhand High Court in the case of CIT Vs.Enron Espat Services Inv. 327 ITR 626 has categorically held that if the receipt by a non-resident is exempt from tax under the relevant DTAA, the said amount cannot be brought to tax u/s 44BB of the Act. 9. Considering th…

Thiruvananthapuram Road Development Co. Ltd, Orrissa vs. DCIT 14(3)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is disposed of in terms of the order in ITA

ITA 622/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2010-11 Thiruvananthapuram Road Dcit-14(3)(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ (Earlier Dcit-10(1), The Il & Fs Financial Centre, Room No.455, 4Th Floor, Vs. Plot No.C-22, Aayakar Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Kurla M. K. Road, Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400051 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aacct0547J Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-14(3)(1), Thiruvananthapuram Road (Earlier Dcit-10(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.455, 4Th Floor, The Il & Fs Financial Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Centre, Plot No.C-22, M. K. Road, G Block, Bandra Kurla Mumbai-400020 Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aacct0547J

Section 143Section 253Section 32

…collected. While holding so, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has relied upon the various decisions e.g. S.R. Koshti v. CIT [2005] 276 ITR 165/146 Taxman 335 (Guj), C.P.A. Yoosuf v. ITO [1970] 77 ITR 237 (Ker.), CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd. [1971] 81 ITR 303 (Delhi), CIT v. Smt. Archana R. Dhanwatey [1982] 136 ITR 355/[1981] 7 Taxman 121 (Bom.). In view of the above discussed factual and legal position, we have no hesitation to hold that the assessee is entitled to put his alternate claim that the deduction allowable to him may be considered as allowable as depreciation treating the project/investment…

DCIT 14(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Thirvanthapuram Road Development Company Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is disposed of in terms of the order in ITA

ITA 4346/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2010-11 Thiruvananthapuram Road Dcit-14(3)(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ (Earlier Dcit-10(1), The Il & Fs Financial Centre, Room No.455, 4Th Floor, Vs. Plot No.C-22, Aayakar Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Kurla M. K. Road, Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400051 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aacct0547J Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-14(3)(1), Thiruvananthapuram Road (Earlier Dcit-10(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.455, 4Th Floor, The Il & Fs Financial Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Centre, Plot No.C-22, M. K. Road, G Block, Bandra Kurla Mumbai-400020 Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aacct0547J

Section 143Section 253Section 32

…collected. While holding so, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has relied upon the various decisions e.g. S.R. Koshti v. CIT [2005] 276 ITR 165/146 Taxman 335 (Guj), C.P.A. Yoosuf v. ITO [1970] 77 ITR 237 (Ker.), CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd. [1971] 81 ITR 303 (Delhi), CIT v. Smt. Archana R. Dhanwatey [1982] 136 ITR 355/[1981] 7 Taxman 121 (Bom.). In view of the above discussed factual and legal position, we have no hesitation to hold that the assessee is entitled to put his alternate claim that the deduction allowable to him may be considered as allowable as depreciation treating the project/investment…

Oricon Enterprises Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 3(3), Mumbai

ITA 2913/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Swamy-CIT-DR

Section 14Section 148Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(v)Section 40A(7)Section 43Section 43B

…e to the assessee and the Department is bound to treat the accounts of a continuing business in a consistent manner. ix.It is trite law that the principle of estopple has no application in the Income-tax Act.In the case of Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd.(81 ITR 303)Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held as under: "It is true that the assessee itself had included that dividend income in its return for the year in question but there is no estopple in the Income tax Act and the assessee having itself challenged the validity of taxing the dividend during the year of assessment in question, it must be taken that it ha…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shraddha Constructions & Power Generation Pvt. Ltd., Pune

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

ITA 461/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.570/Pun/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal

Section 132Section 132(4)

…g before the AO. Relevant portion is extracted as under : "12. It is observed that a similar issue in the context of regular assessment arose for consideration before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Bharat General Insurance Co. Ltd. [1971] 81 ITR 303 wherein it was held by their Lordships that even if an assessee declares an income in the return, the Assessing Officer cannot assess it merely on that basis and he has to consider its taxability in the light of other circumstances de hors the admission made in the return. In the case of Narayanan v. Gopal AIR 1960 SC 235, the Hon'ble Supreme Cour…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Shivaji Bhagwanrao Jadhav, Pune

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

ITA 681/PUN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 680 To 682/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke & Shri Vikas AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma

Section 153A

…g before the AO. Relevant portion is extracted as under : "12. It is observed that a similar issue in the context of regular assessment arose for consideration before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Bharat General Insurance Co. Ltd. [1971] 81 ITR 303 wherein it was held by their Lordships that even if an assessee declares an income in the return, the Assessing Officer cannot assess it merely on that basis and he has to consider its taxability in the light of other circumstances de hors the admission made in the return. In the case of Narayanan v. Gopal AIR 1960 SC 235, the Hon'ble Supreme Cour…

Shivaji Bhagwanrao Jadhav, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

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

ITA 699/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 680 To 682/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke & Shri Vikas AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma

Section 153A

…g before the AO. Relevant portion is extracted as under : "12. It is observed that a similar issue in the context of regular assessment arose for consideration before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Bharat General Insurance Co. Ltd. [1971] 81 ITR 303 wherein it was held by their Lordships that even if an assessee declares an income in the return, the Assessing Officer cannot assess it merely on that basis and he has to consider its taxability in the light of other circumstances de hors the admission made in the return. In the case of Narayanan v. Gopal AIR 1960 SC 235, the Hon'ble Supreme Cour…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Shivaji Bhagwanrao Jadhav, Pune

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

ITA 682/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 680 To 682/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke & Shri Vikas AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma

Section 153A

…g before the AO. Relevant portion is extracted as under : "12. It is observed that a similar issue in the context of regular assessment arose for consideration before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Bharat General Insurance Co. Ltd. [1971] 81 ITR 303 wherein it was held by their Lordships that even if an assessee declares an income in the return, the Assessing Officer cannot assess it merely on that basis and he has to consider its taxability in the light of other circumstances de hors the admission made in the return. In the case of Narayanan v. Gopal AIR 1960 SC 235, the Hon'ble Supreme Cour…