CIT v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

202 ITR 492High Court1993#9045 most cited
12

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2023.

Judgments citing CIT v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

M/S HIGH RANGE FOODS PRIVATE LTD,KOCHI vs. ITO CORPORATE WARD 1(3), KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 22/COCH/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dashigh Range Foods Pvt. Ltd. The Income Tax Officer 28/3030, Cheruparambath Road Corporate Ward – 1(3) Vs. Kadavanthra, Kochi 682020 Kochi [Pan:Aaach6076L] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P.M. Veeramani, Ca Revenue By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 11.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.12.2023 O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, Am This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.06.2022 By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [Cit(A)], Disallowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting It’S Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Dated 27.12.2017 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2. The Appeal, Filed On 09.01.2023, Is Delayed By 135 Days. The Condonation Petition Accompanying The Appeal, Which Is Supported By A Sworn Affidavit Dated 29.12.2022 By Shri Simon John, The Director & Principal Officer Of The Assessee- Company, Explains The Delay In Terms Of Non-Conveyance Of The Impugned Order Inasmuch As It’S Uploading On The Itba Was Not Accompanied By A Simultaneous Uploading On The Mobile Application As Well As A Real Time Alert Through Sms, As Required By Clause 11 Of The National Faceless Appeal Scheme (Nfas), So That The Order Cannot Be Regarded As Served On 28.6.2022, The Date Of The Impugned Order And

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Veeramani, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…for the assessee in the case of CIT vs. Realest Builders and Services Ltd. – 307 ITR 202 (SC) in addition to the following cases – (a) Siddheswar Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. vs. CIT & Others – 270 ITR 1 (SC); (b) Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT – 202 ITR 492 (Cal). (c) Sugauli Sugar Works (Impugned) Ltd. – 236 ITR 518 (SC); 5 I.T.A. Nos. 73- 79/Coch/2014 Page 7 ITANo. 22/Coch/ 2023 (AY 2015-16) High Range Foods Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (d) Star India P. Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT – 311 ITR (ST) 235 (Mumbai). (e) Govind Prasad Prabhu Nath – 171 ITR 417 (All.); (f) Hindustan Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. –…

HIGH RANGE FOODS PVT LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT, KOCHI

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

ITA 64/COCH/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sri.V.M.Veeramani, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jammuna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 41(1)

…for the assessee in the case of CIT vs. Realest Builders and Services Ltd. – 307 ITR 202 (SC) in addition to the following cases – (a) Siddheswar Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. vs. CIT & Others – 270 ITR 1 (SC); (b) Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT – 202 ITR 492 (Cal). (c) Sugauli Sugar Works (Impugned) Ltd. – 236 ITR 518 (SC); 5 I.T.A. Nos. 73-79/Coch/2014 (d) Star India P. Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT – 311 ITR (ST) 235 (Mumbai). (e) Govind Prasad Prabhu Nath – 171 ITR 417 (All.); (f) Hindustan Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. – 161 ITR 524 (SC); (g) Ace Builders Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT – 225 ITR 746 (SC); (h)…

M/S.COMBINED FOODS P. LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 155/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Combined Foods Private The Principal Commissioner Of Limited, Income-Tax, Kochi-1. 28/3030, Elamkulam, Cheruparambath Road, Kadavanthara, Kochi-682 020. [Pan:Aaacc 9366N] Assessee-Appellant Revenue-Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 36(1)(iii)Section 43(1)

…or the assessee in the case of CIT vs. Realest Builders and Services Ltd. – 307 ITR 202 (SC) in addition to the following cases – (a) Siddheswar Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. vs. CIT & Others – 270 ITR 1 (SC); (b) Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT – 202 ITR 492 (Cal). (c) Sugauli Sugar Works (Impugned) Ltd. – 236 ITR 518 (SC); (d) Star India P. Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT – 311 ITR (ST) 235 (Mumbai). (e) Govind Prasad Prabhu Nath – 171 ITR 417 (All.); (f) Hindustan Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. – 161 ITR 524 (SC); (g) Ace Builders Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT – 225 ITR 746 (SC); (h) Mantra Tanta Yantra Vigy…

THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M/S. CREAMPACKS(P) LTD, COCHIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 608/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.608/Coch/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Cream Packs Private Ltd., Income-Tax, Circle-1(1), Kochi. 28/3030, Cheruparambath Road, Elamkulam, Kadavanthara, Kochi-682 020. [Pan:Aaacc 9368C]

…e case of CIT vs. Realest Builders and Services Ltd. – 307 ITR 202 (SC) in addition to the following cases – I.T.A. No.608/C/2017 (a) Siddheswar Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. vs. CIT & Others – 270 ITR 1 (SC); (b) Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT – 202 ITR 492 (Cal). (c) Sugauli Sugar Works (Impugned) Ltd. – 236 ITR 518 (SC); 5 I.T.A. Nos. 73-79/Coch/2014 (d) Star India P. Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT – 311 ITR (ST) 235 (Mumbai). (e) Govind Prasad Prabhu Nath – 171 ITR 417 (All.); (f) Hindustan Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. – 161 ITR 524 (SC); (g) Ace Builders Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT – 225 ITR 746 (SC); (h)…

DCIT 8(1), MUMBAI vs. APTECH LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2003/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.946 & 723/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 & 2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri S C Tiwari and Rutuja N
Section 14ASection 40

…the mercantile system of accounting there is no accrual of income if the billed amount was not accepted by the customers. The ld. Counsel in defence of his argument relied upon the decision in the case of : a) CIT Vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (1993) 202 ITR 492 (Cal) b) CIT V/s Kerala State Drugs and Pharmaceutical Lts 192 ITR 1 (Ker); c) CIT V/s Sikaria Sons and co. 216 ITR 440(Gau); Indian Overseas Bank V/s CIT 183 ITR 200(Mad) The ld.counsel further submitted that the assessee fulfilled all the conditions enumerated under section 37(1) of the Act. The ld. Counsel also submitted that Rs.2,50,00,000/…

APTECH LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 8(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1271/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.946 & 723/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 & 2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri S C Tiwari and Rutuja N
Section 14ASection 40

…the mercantile system of accounting there is no accrual of income if the billed amount was not accepted by the customers. The ld. Counsel in defence of his argument relied upon the decision in the case of : a) CIT Vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (1993) 202 ITR 492 (Cal) b) CIT V/s Kerala State Drugs and Pharmaceutical Lts 192 ITR 1 (Ker); c) CIT V/s Sikaria Sons and co. 216 ITR 440(Gau); Indian Overseas Bank V/s CIT 183 ITR 200(Mad) The ld.counsel further submitted that the assessee fulfilled all the conditions enumerated under section 37(1) of the Act. The ld. Counsel also submitted that Rs.2,50,00,000/…

APTECH LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 8(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 946/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.946 & 723/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 & 2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri S C Tiwari and Rutuja N
Section 14ASection 40

…the mercantile system of accounting there is no accrual of income if the billed amount was not accepted by the customers. The ld. Counsel in defence of his argument relied upon the decision in the case of : a) CIT Vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (1993) 202 ITR 492 (Cal) b) CIT V/s Kerala State Drugs and Pharmaceutical Lts 192 ITR 1 (Ker); c) CIT V/s Sikaria Sons and co. 216 ITR 440(Gau); Indian Overseas Bank V/s CIT 183 ITR 200(Mad) The ld.counsel further submitted that the assessee fulfilled all the conditions enumerated under section 37(1) of the Act. The ld. Counsel also submitted that Rs.2,50,00,000/…

APTECH LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 8(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 723/MUM/2013[2008--09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.946 & 723/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 & 2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri S C Tiwari and Rutuja N
Section 14ASection 40

…the mercantile system of accounting there is no accrual of income if the billed amount was not accepted by the customers. The ld. Counsel in defence of his argument relied upon the decision in the case of : a) CIT Vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (1993) 202 ITR 492 (Cal) b) CIT V/s Kerala State Drugs and Pharmaceutical Lts 192 ITR 1 (Ker); c) CIT V/s Sikaria Sons and co. 216 ITR 440(Gau); Indian Overseas Bank V/s CIT 183 ITR 200(Mad) The ld.counsel further submitted that the assessee fulfilled all the conditions enumerated under section 37(1) of the Act. The ld. Counsel also submitted that Rs.2,50,00,000/…

DCIT 8(1), MUMBAI vs. APATECH LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1228/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.946 & 723/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 & 2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri S C Tiwari and Rutuja N
Section 14ASection 40

…the mercantile system of accounting there is no accrual of income if the billed amount was not accepted by the customers. The ld. Counsel in defence of his argument relied upon the decision in the case of : a) CIT Vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (1993) 202 ITR 492 (Cal) b) CIT V/s Kerala State Drugs and Pharmaceutical Lts 192 ITR 1 (Ker); c) CIT V/s Sikaria Sons and co. 216 ITR 440(Gau); Indian Overseas Bank V/s CIT 183 ITR 200(Mad) The ld.counsel further submitted that the assessee fulfilled all the conditions enumerated under section 37(1) of the Act. The ld. Counsel also submitted that Rs.2,50,00,000/…

ACIT 8(1), MUMBAI vs. APATECH LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1227/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.946 & 723/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 & 2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri S C Tiwari and Rutuja N
Section 14ASection 40

…the mercantile system of accounting there is no accrual of income if the billed amount was not accepted by the customers. The ld. Counsel in defence of his argument relied upon the decision in the case of : a) CIT Vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (1993) 202 ITR 492 (Cal) b) CIT V/s Kerala State Drugs and Pharmaceutical Lts 192 ITR 1 (Ker); c) CIT V/s Sikaria Sons and co. 216 ITR 440(Gau); Indian Overseas Bank V/s CIT 183 ITR 200(Mad) The ld.counsel further submitted that the assessee fulfilled all the conditions enumerated under section 37(1) of the Act. The ld. Counsel also submitted that Rs.2,50,00,000/…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S BIG BAGS INERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

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

ITA 1041/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 May 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raodeputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 11(2), Bangalore. … Appellant Vs. M/S.Big Bags International Pvt. Ltd. No.61, Nadakerappa Industrial Estate, Viswadeepam Post, Peenya, … Respondent Bangalore-560091. Pan:Aabcb 4004 D

For Appellant: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri S.V.Ravishankar, Advocate
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 11(2), Bangalore. … Appellant Vs. M/s.Big Bags International Pvt. Ltd. No.61, Nadakerappa Industrial Estate, Viswadeepam Post, Peenya, … Respondent Bangalore-560091. PAN:AABCB 4004 D Appellant by : Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR) Respondent by : Shri S.V.Ravishankar, Advocate Date of hearing : 06/04/2016 Date of pronouncement : 06/05/2016 O R D E R Per INTURI RAMA RAO, AM : This is an appeal filed by the revenue directed again…

AJAY GULIYA

ITA/423/2012HC Delhi16 Jul 2012
Section 45Section 45(1)

…Page 4 of 10 receive the income becomes vested in the assessee, it is said to accrue or arise. 6.3 In the case of CIT Vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (1993) 202 ITR 492, the main question before the court was-whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the sum of Rs. 44,47,482/- representing additional claim under COPE scheme (realized by the assessee during the relevant previous year by way of adjustment and never refunded to the Government) d…