CIT v. British Paints India Ltd.

188 ITR 44Supreme Court of India1991#447 most cited

What is CIT v. British Paints India Ltd. authority for?

The Assessing Officer has a duty to examine whether an assessee's books of account truly disclose the correct income and is not bound to accept the accounting system regularly employed by the assessee or methods followed in earlier years. Each assessment year is a distinct and self-contained unit for tax purposes.

204

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. British Paints India Ltd. · 188 ITR 44 · Section 145 · Section 144 · Assessing Officer duty · method of accounting · books of account scrutiny · true income · assessment year distinct · valuation methods · SC 1991

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 115JBSection 153ASection 142(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 80hhcwritten down valuesection 145section 40(a)(i)interest u/s 234bprofits and gains of business or professionsection 145(3)section 127section 115jadvance taxbook profitspenalty u/s 271(1)(c)

Judgments citing CIT v. British Paints India Ltd.

Dinesh Kumar Soni, Jaipur vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1 Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 863/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Kumar Garg (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT) a
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 68Section 69C

…ntention in the appeal and being the specific provisions they are preferred and override the general provisions and are mutually exclusive and different from business income. Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT Vs British Paints India Ltd (1991) 188 ITR 44 (SC) has held that it is the duty of the assessing officer to determine the taxable income by making such computation as he considers appropriate in the given situation. Further, the issue in appeal is specifically held in favour of Revenue by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Devi Prasad Vishwanath [1969] 72 I…

New Balance It Services India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Income Tax Officer(1)- Circle 2, Punepune, Pune

ITA 246/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jun 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 0245 & 0246/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2020-21 & 2022-23 New Balance It Services India Pvt. Ltd. Level-1, Wing-A, Tower-06, Cybercity, Magarpatta, Pune-411013. Pan : Aaccn5091R . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S. Income Tax Officer-1, Circle-2, Pune . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Rajendra Agiwal [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 05/06/2024 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Twin Appeals Are Instituted U/S 253(1)(Aa) Of The Income Tax Act [‘The Act’] By The Assessee Challenging The Respective First Appellate Orders Dt. 19/12/2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By The Commissioner Of Income Tax Appels [‘Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Years 2020-21 & 2022-23 [‘Ay’] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Mr Rajendra Agiwal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 145Section 145(2)Section 250Section 253(1)(aa)Section 28

…ITA No.245 & 246/PUN/2024 14. The appellant’s argument that difference of income arisen followed through consistent incorrect method of accounting/valuation etc., is tax-neutral cannot in view of Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT Vs British Paint India Ltd. [1991, 188 ITR 44 (SC)] pass the test of acceptability as it violates the clear provision of section 145(2) of the Act. However this per-se in our considered view cannot saddle the assessee unless factual exercise as to whether non-adherence to applicable ICDS-II, IV & V etc., by has resulted into loss to the Revenue. Therefore the appellant request/prayer for an o…

New Balance It Services India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Income Tax Officer(1)- Circle 2, Pune

ITA 245/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 0245 & 0246/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2020-21 & 2022-23 New Balance It Services India Pvt. Ltd. Level-1, Wing-A, Tower-06, Cybercity, Magarpatta, Pune-411013. Pan : Aaccn5091R . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S. Income Tax Officer-1, Circle-2, Pune . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Rajendra Agiwal [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 05/06/2024 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Twin Appeals Are Instituted U/S 253(1)(Aa) Of The Income Tax Act [‘The Act’] By The Assessee Challenging The Respective First Appellate Orders Dt. 19/12/2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By The Commissioner Of Income Tax Appels [‘Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Years 2020-21 & 2022-23 [‘Ay’] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Mr Rajendra Agiwal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 145Section 145(2)Section 250Section 253(1)(aa)Section 28

…ITA No.245 & 246/PUN/2024 14. The appellant’s argument that difference of income arisen followed through consistent incorrect method of accounting/valuation etc., is tax-neutral cannot in view of Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT Vs British Paint India Ltd. [1991, 188 ITR 44 (SC)] pass the test of acceptability as it violates the clear provision of section 145(2) of the Act. However this per-se in our considered view cannot saddle the assessee unless factual exercise as to whether non-adherence to applicable ICDS-II, IV & V etc., by has resulted into loss to the Revenue. Therefore the appellant request/prayer for an o…

Novartis India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 7(1), Mumbai

ITA 2308/MUM/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 37(1)Section 41(3)Section 80H

…ing full expenditure on account of freight as deduction from its taxable income, proportionate amount thereof, has not been included in the valuation of closing stock. It may be mentioned here that as laid down by the apex court in CIT Vs. British Paints 1991 188 ITR 44, it is the real cost of stock-in-trade which has been taken into account to determine the taxable income of the assessee for the relevant year. It is held by the apex court that in this regard section 145 of the IT Act not only confers the relevant powers of the AO but also imposes duty upon him to make such computation in such a manner so as to e…

ACIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai vs. Novartis India ( Formelry Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, (i) the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose (ii) the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and (iii) the Cross Objections filed by the assessee ...

ITA 2188/MUM/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal & Co 76/Mum/2013 (A.Y 2003-04) Novartis India Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income–Tax–14(1)(1) Inspire Bkc, 7Th Floor, Room No 432, Bandra Kurla Complex, Aaykar Bhawan, Bandra (E) M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400020. Pan/Gir No. Aaach2914F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Deputy Commissioner Vs. Novartis India Limited Of Income–Tax–14(1)(1) Inspire Bkc, 7Th Floor, Room No 432, Bandra Kurla Complex, Aaykar Bhawan, Bandra (E) M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400020 Pan/Gir No. Aaach2914F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 37(1)Section 41(3)Section 80H

…ing full expenditure on account of freight as deduction from its taxable income, proportionate amount thereof, has not been included in the valuation of closing stock. It may be mentioned here that as laid down by the apex court in CIT Vs. British Paints 1991 188 ITR 44, it is the real cost of stock-in-trade which has been taken into account to determine the taxable income of the assessee for the relevant year. It is held by the apex court that in this regard section 145 of the IT Act not only confers the relevant powers of the AO but also imposes duty upon him to make such computation in such a manner so as to e…

Amalgam Foods Limited, Kochi vs. The DCIT, Circle-1, Alappuzha

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

ITA 561/COCH/2022[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 May 2024AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Amalgam Foods Limited Dy. Cit, Circle-1, Alappuzha Amalgam House, Bristow Road, Vs. Willingdon Island, Kochi-682 002 [Pan:Aabca 8283D] (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : None Respondent By : Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi Date Of Hearing : 14.02.2024 : 14.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Bench: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee, Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2022 By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department [Cit(A)], Dismissing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting It’S Assessment Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 254 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Dated 26.12.2019, For Assessment Year (Ay) 2001-2002. 2. None Appeared For & On Behalf Of The Assessee-Appellant When The Appeal Was Called Out For Hearing. Taking Note Of The Request Dated 05.02.2024 By Sri R. Srinivasan, Ca, The Learned Counsel For The Assessee, That His Personal Appearance May Be Dispensed With & The Matter Decided After Considering Written Submissions, Enclosed Along With, The Hearing In The Matter Was Proceeded With.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi
Section 143(3)Section 254

…decisions in Rotrak Controls India P. Ltd. v. CIT [2009] 314 ITR 62 (SC), Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. v. CIT [2000] 245 ITR 428 (SC); Madras Industrial Inv. Corp. Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 802 (SC), to cite few, as also to CIT v. British Paints (I) Ltd. [1991] 188 ITR 44 (SC). Financial obligation in FE may also be added to this list. The actual discharge of the liability during the relevant year is not a condition precedent. This shall also meet the Revenue’s objection that the loss arising on repayment is w.r.t. the rates obtaining thereat, and cannot therefore relate to the earlier year/s. This though is subjec…

M/S Satwant Agro Engineers, Bhawanigarh vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Patiala

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

ITA 753/CHANDI/2022[AY 2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 May 2024

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69Section 69A

…fect in the books and record a clear finding." The AO in this case has clearly recorded the findings for rejection of books of accounts. It has further been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. British Paints India Ltd., reported in [1991] 188 ITR 44 that "it is duty of the AO to consider whether or not the books disclose the true state of accounts and correct income of the assessee." As the AO has duly followed the legal precedents, the books of accounts have rightly been rejected. The contention of the AR that the AO could not deem income u/s 68/69 in case the books of accounts had been reje…

Shri.Prakash R. Nair, Kollam vs. DCIT, Kollam

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 141/COCH/2021[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2024AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasprakash R. Nair Dy.Cit, Central Circle Prop. Dhanya Foods Kollam Kochuppilammoodu Vs. Kollam 691001 [Pan:Abfpn4424P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 148(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80Section 801A(9)Section 80HSection 80I

…the different grades fall within a small price range or the sale of inferior goods is marginal, not impacting the operating result for the relevant year in any significant manner. Reference for the purpose may be made to CIT v. British Paints (I) Ltd. [1991] 188 ITR 44 (SC). As clarified therein, section 145 confers power as well as imposes duty on the AO to determine the correct profit and gain of the business. As such, where the accounts are prepared without disclosing the real cost of the goods in trade, he is duty bound to determine the taxable income by making computation in the manner he deems fit. Given t…

K P Muhammed Ali, Calicut vs. ITO ( International Taxation), Kozhikode

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1008/COCH/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Manomohan Dask.P. Muhammed Ali Income Tax Officer K.P. House: 19/1866 (International Taxation) Chalappuram Vs. Kozhikode Calicut 673002 [Pan:Agnpm9397F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Raghunathan Palakkal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 2(47)(vi)Section 53A

…ght year, and it is being offered to tax in the hands of another person or year would be of no moment in law, for which, apart from sections 8 K.P. Muhammed Ali v. ITO 3-5 of the Act, we may refer to some decisions, viz. CIT v. British Paints (I) Ltd. [1991] 188 ITR 44 (SC);CIT v. Chunilal V. Mehta & Sons P. Ltd. [1971] 82 ITR 54 (SC). Under the circumstances, in our clear view, the transaction between the 5.6 assessee and Plasma Developers Ltd. vide the documents afore-referred, constitutes a transfer u/s. 2(47)(vi) of the Act, liable to capital gain for the current year. 5.7 This leaves us with the issue of…

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)

…rmination of the relevant agreements. It is, however, again trite that income is liable to be taxed for the right year, and it being taxed in another year is no ground for it being not brought to tax for the right year [CIT v. British Paints India Ltd. [1991] 188 ITR 44 (SC);CIT vs. Chunilal V. Mehta & Sons P. Ltd. [1971] 82 ITR 54 (SC)]. We decide accordingly. 7. The only other issue arising in the instant appeal, projected per Gds. 4-6, is qua disallowance under section 14A of the Act, effected by the AO at Rs. 44,361, being Rs.34,397 and Rs.10,324 in respect of interest and indirect expenditure under rule 8D(2…

DCIT Cir - 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Bajaj Auto Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesse are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 573/MUM/2007[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2023AY 2000-2001

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel & Shri CharuFor Respondent: Shri. Krishna Bandi
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3055/Mum/2005 (A.Y. 2000-2001) Bajaj Auto Ltd. Vs. DCIT Rg. 3(1), Bajaj Bhavan, 226 6th Floor, Aayakar Nariman Point, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent ITA No. 2655/Mum/2005 DCIT Rg. 3(1), Vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd. 6th Floor, Aayakar Bajaj Bhavan, Bhavan, M. K. Road, 226 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent C.O. N…

M/S. Bajaj Auto Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesse are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3055/MUM/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2023AY 2000-2001

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel & Shri CharuFor Respondent: Shri. Krishna Bandi
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3055/Mum/2005 (A.Y. 2000-2001) Bajaj Auto Ltd. Vs. DCIT Rg. 3(1), Bajaj Bhavan, 226 6th Floor, Aayakar Nariman Point, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent ITA No. 2655/Mum/2005 DCIT Rg. 3(1), Vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd. 6th Floor, Aayakar Bajaj Bhavan, Bhavan, M. K. Road, 226 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent C.O. N…

The DCIT 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Bajajaj Auto Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesse are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2655/MUM/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2023AY 2000-2001

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel & Shri CharuFor Respondent: Shri. Krishna Bandi
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3055/Mum/2005 (A.Y. 2000-2001) Bajaj Auto Ltd. Vs. DCIT Rg. 3(1), Bajaj Bhavan, 226 6th Floor, Aayakar Nariman Point, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent ITA No. 2655/Mum/2005 DCIT Rg. 3(1), Vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd. 6th Floor, Aayakar Bajaj Bhavan, Bhavan, M. K. Road, 226 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent C.O. N…

M/S. Bajaj Auto Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesse are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2125/MUM/2005[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2023AY 1999-2000

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel & Shri CharuFor Respondent: Shri. Krishna Bandi
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3055/Mum/2005 (A.Y. 2000-2001) Bajaj Auto Ltd. Vs. DCIT Rg. 3(1), Bajaj Bhavan, 226 6th Floor, Aayakar Nariman Point, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent ITA No. 2655/Mum/2005 DCIT Rg. 3(1), Vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd. 6th Floor, Aayakar Bajaj Bhavan, Bhavan, M. K. Road, 226 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent C.O. N…

The Dy CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Bajaj Auto Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesse are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1933/MUM/2005[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2023AY 1999-2000

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel & Shri CharuFor Respondent: Shri. Krishna Bandi
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3055/Mum/2005 (A.Y. 2000-2001) Bajaj Auto Ltd. Vs. DCIT Rg. 3(1), Bajaj Bhavan, 226 6th Floor, Aayakar Nariman Point, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent ITA No. 2655/Mum/2005 DCIT Rg. 3(1), Vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd. 6th Floor, Aayakar Bajaj Bhavan, Bhavan, M. K. Road, 226 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent C.O. N…

Shri. Babu Sebastian, Thrissur vs. ACIT Circle 2(1), Thrissur

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

ITA 869/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasbabu Sebastain Asst. Cit, 19/348/1B, Puthur House Circle- 2(1) Poothole, Thrissur 680004 Vs. Thrissur [Pan:Ajaps9036R] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Anil D. Nair, Advocate Revenue By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 13.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2023 O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, Am This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Dated 22.6.2022 By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department [Cit(A)], Dismissing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting His Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) Dated 20.11.2019 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Short Question Arising In The Instant Appeal Is The Correct Application Of Section 145A Of The Act, Reading As Under, In The Given Facts Of The Case, I.E., Given That There Is No Change In The Assessee’S Regular Method Of Accounting & Valuation Of Inventories Of Goods, So That The Purport Is The Correct Computation Of Income By Way Of Profits & Gains Of His Business Under The Act: Method Of Accounting In Certain Cases. 145A. For The Purpose Of Determining The Income Chargeable Under The Head "Profits & Gains Of Business Or Profession",—

For Appellant: Shri Anil D. Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 145A

…regulatory body for the profession of Accountancy in India. In fact, even in a case where the assessee’s method of accounting was found improper, i.e.,as not yielding the true profit of the business, the Hon'ble Apex Court in British Paints India Ltd. [1991] 188 ITR 44 (SC) found nothing wrong in the Revenue valuing both the opening and closing stock at the changed, correct method of valuation. The decision is not inconsistent with Melmould Corp. (supra) inasmuch as there was, again, no change in the method of valuation of inventories by the assessee, but an adjustment effected to its income on applying the corr…

V Guard Industries Limited, Vennala vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Kochi

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

ITA 63/COCH/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Mar 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Sandeep Gosainv-Guard Industries Ltd. Principal Cit-1, 42/962, Vennala High School C R Building, I S Press Road, Vs. Road, Vennala, Kochi 682018 Ernakulam 682028 [Pan: Aaacv5492Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Anil D. Nair, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Prashant V.K., Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.03.2023 O R D E R Per: Bench This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Challenging The Revision Of It’S Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) Dated 28/12/2018 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17 By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Kochi (‘Pr. Cit’ For Short) Vide Order U/S. 263 Dated 22/03/2021. 2. The Appeal, Filed On 08/03/2022, Though Delayed By 256 Days, Was Admitted In View Of The Blanket Condonation By The Apex Court In Suo Motu Wp(C) No.3/2020, Dated 10/01/2022, Excluding The Period From 15/3/2020 To 28/02/2022 In Reckoning The Delay In Computing Limitation Under Law & The Hearing Accordingly Proceeded With. The Assessee Is A Company Manufacturing Electrical Cables, Pumps, Solar Water Heaters, Etc. & Trading In Electrical & Electronic Goods. Revision Of It’S Impugned Assessment Is On Several Issues On Which The Revisionary Authority Found An Absence Or Lack Of Enquiry By The Assessing Officer

For Appellant: Shri Anil D. Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Prashant V.K., CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member and Shri Sandeep Gosain, Judicial Member V-Guard Industries Ltd. Principal CIT-1, 42/962, Vennala High School C R Building, I S Press Road, vs. Road, Vennala, Kochi 682018 Ernakulam 682028 [PAN: AAACV5492Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Anil D. Nair, Advocate Respondent by: Shri Prashant V.K., CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 01.02.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 20.03.2023 O R D E R Per: Bench This is an Appeal by the Assessee challenging the revision of it’s assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax A…

M/S. Corporate Leisure & Property Development Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed

ITA 1053/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth G.S., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankarganesh K., D.R

…elevant. In this regard, the ld. D.R. relied on judgement of Hon’ble Supreme M/s. Corporate Leisure & Property Development Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 10 of 32 Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. British Paints India Ltd [1991] 54 Taxman 499 (SQ/188 ITR 44 (SC). As such this argument of the assessee that its accounting method was earlier accepted by the AO and the same needed to be followed, itself is on a weak footing. 6.1 The ld. D.R. further submitted that the other argument of the assessee is with regard to the accounting method to be followed in its case. In this regard, it is important to not…

Shri Rajkot District Cooperative Bank Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Pr. Commr. of Income Tax-1, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 123/RJT/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year :2011-12 Shri Rajkot District Cooperative Vs. Pr.Cit, Rajkot-1 Bank Ltd. Rajkot. ‘Jilla Bank Bhavan’, Kasturba Road Opp: Chaudhari High School Rajkot. Pan : Aaaar 0564 K 0 अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assesseeby : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Ld.Ar Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Ld.Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 17/11/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/02/2023

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, ld.CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36

…order as under: “4.5. In Para no. 2 of the submission dated 16.02.2016, with regard to book entry, the assessee has relied on the following decisions: i. CIT v. HiraLal Mittal & Sons, (1972) 86 ITR 463(AII) ii. CIT v. Chunilal V. Mehta & Sons P. Ltd. (1971) 82 ITR 54(SC) iii. CIT v. Mogul Line Ltd. (1963)46 ITR 590,600(Bom) iv. State Bank of India Vs. CIT(1996) 157 ITR 67 (SC) The issue involved in the above decisions is summarized hereunder: (i) CIT v. HiraLal Mittal & Sons, (1972) 86 ITR 463(AII) The issue in the cited case was whether the assessee was entitled to the deduction of the interest claimed even…

ACIT, Circle- 26(2), Delhi vs. Vic Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7103/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)

…s. 10(38) . 10.2 The AO relied on the following case laws: • CIT vs. Associated Industrial Development Co . Ltd. 82 ITR 586 (Se) • Karampura Development Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 44 ITR 362 (Se) • Dalmiya cements Ltd. vs. CIT 12 ITR 50 (Patna) • CIT vs. British Paints 188 ITR 44, 49 (SC) . 11.1 The main contentions o f the AR as gathered from the various submissions made are as under: • Shares of Dabur India Ltd. have been held as investment is by the assessee as a promoter for controlling interest for over two decades . This position was accepted by the Department up to A.Y . 2005-06. • The intention of the assessee is o…