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 367,154 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.

M/S. Angul Sukinda Railway Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward- 1(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 385/CTK/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.384&385/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Angul Sukinda Railway Ltd., Vs. Ito Ward-1(3), Bhubaneswar Plot No.7622/4706, Press Chhaka Gajapati Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751005 Pan No. : Aahca 6638 E (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 21/10/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03/11/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.09.2019, Passed By The Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar For The Assessment Year 2013-2014 & 2014-2015. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee For A.Y.2013-2014 Are As Under :- 1. That The Order Of The Ld. Ao Is Illegal, Arbitrary Contrary To Evidence On Record & Without Application Of Mind & For That Matter The Said Order Is Liable To Be Quashed And/Or Annulled. 2. That On The Facts Of Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Ao Has Erred In Treating Interest On Fdr & Flexi Deposit Amounting To Rs. 1,08,02,969/- As Revenue Receipt & Made Addition Although The Said Interest Is Inextricably Linked To The Project & Is Purely A Capital Receipt & Hence The Aforesaid Addition Is Liable To Be Deleted. 3. That The Ld. Ao Has Erred Both In Law & Facts By Treating Capital Receipt As Revenue 5. That The Appellant Craves Leave To Add Or To Amend The Above Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal. 6. For These & Among Other Grounds To Be Urged At The Time Of Hearing, Adequate Relief As May Be Deemed Fit Be Granted In The Matter.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT DR
Section 115J

…ong in the past that wrong thing need not to be followed in subsequent years. This is so because an error cannot be allowed to be perpetuate forever. 38. In this regard reliance has been placed on the following decisions:- i. CIT v British Paints India Ltd in 188 ITR 44 (SC) ii. ANUP SHARMA v. CIT, ITA No. 161/CHD/2012 iii. Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) iv. Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) 39. Thus, even if, the assessee has wrongly considered interest income as income from other sources in the AY 2012-13, such wrong treatment may not be accepted in the subs…

M/S. Angul Sukinda Railway Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward- 1(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 384/CTK/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.384&385/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Angul Sukinda Railway Ltd., Vs. Ito Ward-1(3), Bhubaneswar Plot No.7622/4706, Press Chhaka Gajapati Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751005 Pan No. : Aahca 6638 E (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 21/10/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03/11/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.09.2019, Passed By The Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar For The Assessment Year 2013-2014 & 2014-2015. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee For A.Y.2013-2014 Are As Under :- 1. That The Order Of The Ld. Ao Is Illegal, Arbitrary Contrary To Evidence On Record & Without Application Of Mind & For That Matter The Said Order Is Liable To Be Quashed And/Or Annulled. 2. That On The Facts Of Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Ao Has Erred In Treating Interest On Fdr & Flexi Deposit Amounting To Rs. 1,08,02,969/- As Revenue Receipt & Made Addition Although The Said Interest Is Inextricably Linked To The Project & Is Purely A Capital Receipt & Hence The Aforesaid Addition Is Liable To Be Deleted. 3. That The Ld. Ao Has Erred Both In Law & Facts By Treating Capital Receipt As Revenue 5. That The Appellant Craves Leave To Add Or To Amend The Above Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal. 6. For These & Among Other Grounds To Be Urged At The Time Of Hearing, Adequate Relief As May Be Deemed Fit Be Granted In The Matter.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT DR
Section 115J

…ong in the past that wrong thing need not to be followed in subsequent years. This is so because an error cannot be allowed to be perpetuate forever. 38. In this regard reliance has been placed on the following decisions:- i. CIT v British Paints India Ltd in 188 ITR 44 (SC) ii. ANUP SHARMA v. CIT, ITA No. 161/CHD/2012 iii. Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) iv. Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) 39. Thus, even if, the assessee has wrongly considered interest income as income from other sources in the AY 2012-13, such wrong treatment may not be accepted in the subs…

ACIT 4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. The New Piece Goods Bazar Co. Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 6496/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2020AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik (DR)For Respondent: Sh. B.V. Jhaveri (Adv.)
Section 143(3)Section 22Section 24

…ase is without any factual or legal basis. 7 Asst. CIT vs. The New Piece Goods Bazar Co. Ltd. 4.3 The reliance on the orders in the past is, in view of the change in law and non-substantiation of facts, misplaced. In CIT v. British Paints (India) Ltd. [1991] 188 ITR 44 (SC), the Apex Court discountenanced the plea by the assessee of following a method of valuation of stock consistently for the past several years, and accepted as such. The orders by the Tribunal, as for example in Star Gold Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (ITA No. 349/Mum/2015, dated 22.06.2016) and Asha Ashar v. ITO [2016] 46 ITR (Trib) 492 (Mum), would be…

Siroya Developers, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(3)(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 409/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Soodm/S Siroya Developers Ito-17(3)(3)[Previously Assessed 101, Kingston Towers, With Acit-31(3)], Gd Ambekar Marg, Parel Tank Mumbai Road, Parel – East, Vs. Mumbai – 400 033

For Appellant: Shri B.V Jhaveri, A.RFor Respondent: Shri. Avaneesh Tiwari, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80I

…im of the ld. A.R that the assessee was consistently following the aforesaid method for valuation of closing stock, the same we are afraid does not find favour with us. As observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. British Paints Ltd. (1991) 188 ITR 44 (SC), in a case where an assessee was not following the correct system of accounting and the valuation of the stock-in-trade was likely to result in a distorted picture of the true state of business for the purpose of computing the chargeable income, there even if the assessee had adopted a regular system of accounting, it was the duty of the A.O…

Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., Sambalpur vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur

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

ITA 174/CTK/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Jun 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.174/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015 - 2016) Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Jagriti Vihar, Burla, Sambalpur स्थायी ऱेखा सं./Pan No. : Aabcm 5188 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.S.Podar, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.M.Keshkamat, Citdr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/01/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/06/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am :

For Appellant: Shri S.S.Podar, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.M.Keshkamat, CITDR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32Section 35ESection 37Section 37(1)

…Stock Valuation: The object of stock valuation is correct determination of the profit and gains resulting from a year's trading. It is true result of the trading activities of that year, that must be disclosed by books (CIT Vs British Paints India Ltd. (1991) 188 ITR 44 SC ). One cannot arrive at the profit of the year without taking into account the value of the stock one has at the beginning of, and at the end of, the accounting year. c) Source of Profit & Gains: It was let down authoritatively by Supreme Court in the case of Chain Rup SampatramVs CIT (1953) 24 ITR 481 that the source of profits and gains of a…

ACIT, Sangrur vs. M/S Aggarsain Fibres Ltd., Samana

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

ITA 829/CHANDI/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Feb 2020AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudarshan, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 145(3)

…t and hence not reliable to compute business income therefrom. He therefore rejected the books of accounts by invoking the provisions of Section 145(3) of the Act. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: • CIT Vs. British Paints India Ltd. (1991) 188 ITR 44 (SC) • Dondiram Dalichand Vs. CIT(1971) 81 ITR 609 (Bom) • Bharat Milk Products Vs. CIT (1981) 128 ITR 682 (AD) • Punjab Trading Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT • Howrah Trading Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (1968) 67 ITR 582 (Cal.) • Orissa Fisheries Development Corporation Ltd. Vs. CIT (1978) 111 ITR 923 (Ori) • S.N. Namasivayam Chettiar Vs. CIT [1960] 38 ITR 579 (SC)…

DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi vs. Halla Visteon Climate Systems India Ltd., Bhiwadi

In the result, the finding of the First

ITA 4061/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 145a

…all these items the gross profit of the assessee comes more by Rs.37411219/- and which is clearly income of the assessee u/s 145a. Therefore the plea of the assessee on this account cannot be accepted. In the case of CIT Vs British Paints India Limited (1991) 188 ITR 44 the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under: In the valuation of closing stock of good-in-process or finished goods, all overhead expenses, besides the cost of raw material, had to be added. If any system of accounting excluded these expenses, it will result in distorted picture of profits as the profit of one year was likely to be shifted to another…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Vic Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1893/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N. K. Choudharydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1893/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs M/S Vic Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, 10, Income Tax, Circle-26(1), New Delhi-110002 Rouse Avenue, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacv0132B Assessee By : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.02.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.02.2020

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…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 of 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 of…

M/S. Gl Litmus Events Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2682/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavam/S.Gl Litmus Events Pvt. Vs. Acit Ltd. Central Circle-17, B-90, Second Floor, Room No. 356, Vishwakarma Colony Ara Centre, New Delhi – 110 044 Jhandewalan Extension Pan Aadcg6909N New Delhi – 110 055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Raghunath, Sr. DR
Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

…hat for this reason, 20 GL Litmus Events Pvt. Ltd. vs ACIT the profits of the assessee cannot be derived for taxation purposes correctly. In fact the rejection should be based on cogent reason as held by the honourable Supreme Court in CIT vs. British paints 188 ITR 44 (SC). ii. The another issue for which the method of accounting adopted by the assessee is rejected is for the reason that from the residence of a director in the assessee company are rough handwritten note and a print out of an email dated 16/6/2010 which was sent by Mr. Oliver of GL events France , whereas there is a working of a sum of INR 35.8…

L'Oreal India P.Ld, Mumbai vs. CIT -6, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partially allowed

ITA 2635/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am M/S. L’Oreal India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Commissioner Of A-Wing, 8Th Floor Income Tax-6 Marathon Futurex Aayakar Bhavan N.M. Joshi Marg M.K.Road Lower Parel Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 013 Pan/Gir No.Aaacl0738K (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 145ASection 263

…assessee that the valuation method followed by it was in accordance with provisions of Section 145 of the Act and also the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Zinc Ltd. reported in 291 ITR 391 and British Paints India Ltd., reported in 188 ITR 44. It was pleaded that the concept of market price / net realizable value also envisages reducing the cost of inventories appropriately in cases where they are damaged, or if they have become wholly or partially obsolete, or if their selling prices have declined or they are non-moving. The assessee in this regard placed reliance on the decision of t…

ACIT Circle 1, Madurai vs. Thiagarajar Mills Ltd., Madurai

In the result, the appeals filed by

ITA 1801/CHNY/2007[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao]

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. A.Sundararajan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 80

…cost price overhead expenses.. The Tribunal has not dealt with this aspect, viz., the manner in which the closing stock has been valued in the present case. Therefore, the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. British Paints India Ltd., (1991) 188 ITR 44, is not attracted to the question before us for consideration. The decision of the Tribunal is on the footing that since the closing stock was valued by adopting a certain method, the earns method should be adopting in valuing the opening stock. In other words, the change in the method of valuation, according to the Tribunal, should commence with…

Thiagarajar Mills Limited, Madurai vs. ACIT Company Circle I, Madurai

In the result, the appeals filed by

ITA 1160/CHNY/2007[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao]

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. A.Sundararajan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 80

…cost price overhead expenses.. The Tribunal has not dealt with this aspect, viz., the manner in which the closing stock has been valued in the present case. Therefore, the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. British Paints India Ltd., (1991) 188 ITR 44, is not attracted to the question before us for consideration. The decision of the Tribunal is on the footing that since the closing stock was valued by adopting a certain method, the earns method should be adopting in valuing the opening stock. In other words, the change in the method of valuation, according to the Tribunal, should commence with…

M/S.Muthoot Bankers, Cochin vs. The ACIT, Cochin

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 93/COCH/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10Section 14A

…ions. The matter is not clear from the order of the Tribunal. Further, Counsel for the Revenue on the basis of the decision of CIT vs. A. Krishnaswami Mudaliar 53 ITR 122; Sundaram and Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 35 ITR 162 (Mad) and CIT vs. British Paints India Ltd. 188 ITR 44 (SC) contends that even if in the system of accounting, the Assessing Officer can exercise the power under the proviso when he finds that the method of accounting is not propr. Hence, the High Court set aside the order of the Tribunal and directed the Tribunal to reconsider the matter on the basis of the above directions. 9 I.T.A. Nos.92 & 93/C…

M/S.Muthoot Bankers, Cochin vs. The ACIT, Cochin

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 92/COCH/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10Section 14A

…ions. The matter is not clear from the order of the Tribunal. Further, Counsel for the Revenue on the basis of the decision of CIT vs. A. Krishnaswami Mudaliar 53 ITR 122; Sundaram and Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 35 ITR 162 (Mad) and CIT vs. British Paints India Ltd. 188 ITR 44 (SC) contends that even if in the system of accounting, the Assessing Officer can exercise the power under the proviso when he finds that the method of accounting is not propr. Hence, the High Court set aside the order of the Tribunal and directed the Tribunal to reconsider the matter on the basis of the above directions. 9 I.T.A. Nos.92 & 93/C…

Kantilal Shivlal Zaveri, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1238/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Nov 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…at assessee could not substantiate the correctness of following the weighted average method arbitrarily for valuation of closing stock with relevant supporting evidences. We also consider that Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. British Paints India Ltd. 188 ITR 44 held and observed that any system of accounting which excluded valuation of closing stock of costs other than the cost of raw materials for the goods in process and finished products was likely to result in a distorted pictures of two states of business for the purpose of computing the chargeable income. Under the above circumstances, we consider…

Shah Kantilal Shivlal HUF, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-6(1)(4), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2381/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Nov 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…at assessee could not substantiate the correctness of following the weighted average method arbitrarily for valuation of closing stock with relevant supporting evidences. We also consider that Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. British Paints India Ltd. 188 ITR 44 held and observed that any system of accounting which excluded valuation of closing stock of costs other than the cost of raw materials for the goods in process and finished products was likely to result in a distorted pictures of two states of business for the purpose of computing the chargeable income. Under the above circumstances, we consider…

DCIT Corporate Circle 4(2), Chennai vs. Khazanchi Jewellers Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1030/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1030/Chny/2018. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-2012. Vs. M/S. Khazanchi Jewellers Pvt Ltd, The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.52, Nsc Bose Road, Corporate Circle 4(2) Sowcarpet, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 079. [Pan Aabck 4583E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Sheri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar

…of method of accounting lies with the assessee but assessee is bound to show that he follows this method of accounting regularly. Reliance in this regard can be placed on the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of CIT vs. British Paints India Ltd, 188 ITR 44 and United Commercial Bank vs. CIT, 240 ITR 355. It is equally settled principle of law that assessee’s method of accounting cannot be rejected as improper merely because it gave him benefit in certain years or because according to the Assessing Officer another method is preferable. Reliance can be placed on the decision of Hon’ble Andhra Prade…

Star Internaitonal Movies Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (It) 4(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the ground taken by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1637/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1519/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) बिाम/ Channel V Music Networks Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax(International Limited Taxation)- 2(1)(1) Partnership V. Scindia House, C/O Star India Private Ltd., Mumbai- 400038 Star House, Urmi Estate, 95, Ganpat Rao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-400013 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan :Aaefc6136H (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri. Porus KakaFor Respondent: Shri. Pavan K Beerla (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(10)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 253Section 92C

…y using the current financial year data in the comparability analysis, even if such data was not available to the assessee in the public database at the time of preparation of transfer pricing report. In the case of CIT vs British Paints India Ltd reported in 188 ITR 44, it has been held that it is not only the right but the duty of the Assessing Officer, to act in exercise of his statutory power, for determining, what in his opinion, is the correct taxable income. The analysis of the assessee has been duly examined before arriving at an opinion regarding the study carried out by the assessee. The TPO has comment…

Channel Music Networks Ltd Partnership, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the ground taken by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1519/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1519/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) बिाम/ Channel V Music Networks Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax(International Limited Taxation)- 2(1)(1) Partnership V. Scindia House, C/O Star India Private Ltd., Mumbai- 400038 Star House, Urmi Estate, 95, Ganpat Rao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-400013 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan :Aaefc6136H (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri. Porus KakaFor Respondent: Shri. Pavan K Beerla (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(10)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 253Section 92C

…y using the current financial year data in the comparability analysis, even if such data was not available to the assessee in the public database at the time of preparation of transfer pricing report. In the case of CIT vs British Paints India Ltd reported in 188 ITR 44, it has been held that it is not only the right but the duty of the Assessing Officer, to act in exercise of his statutory power, for determining, what in his opinion, is the correct taxable income. The analysis of the assessee has been duly examined before arriving at an opinion regarding the study carried out by the assessee. The TPO has comment…

Echjay Industries P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 45, Mumbai

Appeals are allowed

ITA 5245/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Assessment Year :2006-07) Assessment Year :2010-11) Assessment Year :2011-12) Assessment Year :2012-13) Assessment Year :2013-14) Assessment Year :2014-15) Assessment Year :2010-11) & Assessment Year :2012-13) M/S. Echjay Industries Pvt. Ltd. M/S. Echjay Industries Pvt. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, Central Circle- 83, Bajaj Bhavan 45,/Dy.Commissioner Of Nariman Point Income Tax-Circle 8(2) Mumbai – 400 023 Mumbai, Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No. : Aaace1157B (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N.R. RaoFor Respondent: Shri Sachchidanand Dube
Section 143(3)Section 147

…gress and finished goods since inception from 1960 onwards and the same had been accepted by the revenue till Asst Year 2009-10. We find that the ld AO had relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of British Paints India Ltd reported in 188 ITR 44 (SC) . We find from the perusal of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court supra , it had not stated that the ‘add on method’ was the only one method of valuation of inventories. We find that the Hon’ble Supreme Court had not held that the ‘direct cost’ method was not an acceptable method of valuation. We find from the facts in British India Paints…