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.

How many judgments cite CIT v. British Paints India Ltd.?

204 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. British Paints India Ltd. (188 ITR 44), spanning 2008 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. British Paints India Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 144, Section 145(3), Section 271(1)(c), Section 37(1), Section 115JB.

CIT v. British Paints India Ltd. (188 ITR 44)

The ACIT, Central-2, Indore vs. Shri Amit Tiwari, Indore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the

ITA 250/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…e Act in the event that on the basis of the accounts, the correct figure of the profit cannot be deduced. In support of this, Ld. D.R. relied upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of British Paint India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 188 ITR 44. 7. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the A.O. would be within his power to reject books of accounts, if he is satisfied that the books of accounts placed before him do not give the correct figure of…

The ACIT, Central-2, Indore vs. Shri Amit Tiwari, Indore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the

ITA 249/IND/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…e Act in the event that on the basis of the accounts, the correct figure of the profit cannot be deduced. In support of this, Ld. D.R. relied upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of British Paint India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 188 ITR 44. 7. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the A.O. would be within his power to reject books of accounts, if he is satisfied that the books of accounts placed before him do not give the correct figure of…

Shri Amit Tiwari, Indore vs. The DCIT-1(1), Indore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the

ITA 146/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…e Act in the event that on the basis of the accounts, the correct figure of the profit cannot be deduced. In support of this, Ld. D.R. relied upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of British Paint India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 188 ITR 44. 7. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the A.O. would be within his power to reject books of accounts, if he is satisfied that the books of accounts placed before him do not give the correct figure of…

Shri Amit Tiwari, Indore vs. The DCIT-1(1), Indore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the

ITA 145/IND/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…e Act in the event that on the basis of the accounts, the correct figure of the profit cannot be deduced. In support of this, Ld. D.R. relied upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of British Paint India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 188 ITR 44. 7. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the A.O. would be within his power to reject books of accounts, if he is satisfied that the books of accounts placed before him do not give the correct figure of…

Sree Alankar, Ganjam vs. Principal CIT-1, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 108/CTK/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack11 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2012-2013

For Appellant: Sri S.K.Tulsiyan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saad Kidwai, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 145Section 263

…in the opinion of the Income-tax Officer, the income cannot be properly deduced therefrom, the computation shall be made in such manner and on such basis as the Income-tax Officer may determine. "[Emphasis supplied] • CIT vs. British Paints India Ltd. (1991) 188 ITR 44 (SC) P a g e 8 | 22 ITA No. 108/CT K/ 2018 Asse ssment Year : 20 12- 201 3 "The question to be determined by the Assessing Officer in exercise of his power under section 145 is whether or not income can properly be deduced from the accounts maintained by the assessee, even if the accounts are correct and complete to the satisfaction of the Offi…

Umapati Synthetics Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4) ( New Ward-2(1)(4)), Surat

In the result,appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 493/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.493/Ahd/2016/Srt "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2009-10 Umapati Synthetics Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer, 302-A, Centre Point, Ward-4(4), 3Rd Floor,Ring Road, (New Ward-2(1)(4)) Surat. Surat. [Pan: Aaacu 6139P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri Ramesh Kumar Malpani, C.A ""यथ"क"ओरसे /Revenue By : Shri J.K. Chandnani, Sr. D.R सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 05-06-2018 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-08-2018

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Kumar MalpaniFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Chandnani, Sr. D.R

Section 145(3)Section 234BSection 234C

…ods manufactured and dispatch of the sale, stock register trading goods etc. but they failed to produce these registers for having not prepared. Placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of British Prints India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 188 ITR 44 (SC), wherein it was held that where the accounts are prepared without disclosing the real cost of the stock in trade albeit on sound expert advice in the interest of efficient administration of business, it is the duty of the AO to determine the taxable income by making such computation as he thinks fit. 6 ITA No.493/Ahd/2016/SRT (A.Y: 2009-10)…

ITO, WD-46(1), Kolkata vs. Provash Adhikari, Howrah

In the result, the appeal of revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1101/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2018AY 2011-2012

For Appellant: Shri Sallon Yaden, Addl. CIT, ld. DRFor Respondent: none appeared

Section 143(3)

…(weighted average cost method) to market price.” The Hon'ble Supreme Court has clearly held that the valuation of stock in trade whether at cost or market price, which is a matter entirely within the discretion of the assessee C I T Vs. British Paints Ltd (188 ITR 44). Similarly, the Apex Court has held in Chainrup Sampatram Vs. CIT (24 ITR 481) that while valuing the closing stock, it is only the anticipated loss that is required to be taken into account, while the anticipated profit in the shape of appreciated value of stock is not required to be brought into account till its actual realization. Further, the…

The Fine Arts Society, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) 2(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 189/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 2171/Mum/2016 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, DR

Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…TR 24), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that where question of law is involved, the rule of consistency will not prevail. Similar observations were made by Hon'ble apex court in 313 ITR 363; 307 ITR 338; 300 ITR 336. Further, in the case of British Paints (188 ITR 44), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that there cannot be estoppel against the law. Similar view was held in the cases of Luchi Ram Puranmal [177 CTR 640 (MP)]; Foss Electric 263 ITR 125] and Distributors of Baroda [118 ITR 243]. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CWT vs. Meattles (p) Ltd. 156 ITR 569 has held that the revenue authorities cannot be s…

The Fine Arts Society, Mumbai vs. Dy Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) - 1(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 2171/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 2171/Mum/2016 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, DR

Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…TR 24), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that where question of law is involved, the rule of consistency will not prevail. Similar observations were made by Hon'ble apex court in 313 ITR 363; 307 ITR 338; 300 ITR 336. Further, in the case of British Paints (188 ITR 44), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that there cannot be estoppel against the law. Similar view was held in the cases of Luchi Ram Puranmal [177 CTR 640 (MP)]; Foss Electric 263 ITR 125] and Distributors of Baroda [118 ITR 243]. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CWT vs. Meattles (p) Ltd. 156 ITR 569 has held that the revenue authorities cannot be s…

ACIT, Central Circle - 1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Citation Infowares Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1987/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy] I.T.A. No. 1987/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit, Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata…..………………………..……..………………………………Appellant Aaykarbhawanpoorva 110, Shantipally 3Rd Floor Kolkata – 700 107 M/S. Citation Infowares Ltd………………………………………………………………….………Respondent 21A, Shakespeare Sarani 3Rd Floor Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aabcc 6044 J] Appearances By: Shrisubashagarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shrisailensamaddar, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing :May 24Th,2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order :June 27Th,2018 Order Per J. Sudhakarreddy :- This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 25/06/2018, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Assessee Is A Company & Is In The Business Of Running A Bpo Call Centre & Also Of Providing Software & It Enabled Services. It Had Closing Stock Of Work In Progress (Wip) Of Software Developed By It In House. The Expenditure Incurred By The Assessee Company Towards Development Of Software From Year Ending 31St March, 2006, Is Being Disclosed As, The Value Of Inventory Under The Category Work-In-Progress (Wip). During The Year, The Assessee Reduced The Value Of Inventory By Rs.43,25,000/-, Based On An Advise Taken From “Data Infosys” Which Is A Consultant. The Assessing Officer Rejected This Claim Of The Assessee As Not Maintainable, For The Reason That, The Expert “Data Infosys” Has Not Given Any Comparable Cases While Giving Its Opinion, The Basis Which Prompted The Assessee

Section 250

…s. 43,25,000/ - on account of devaluation of WIP by relying on the 3 I.T.A. No. 1987/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Citation Infowares Ltd ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. British Paints India Ltd. reported in 188 ITR 44(SC) which is in fact in favour of Revenue. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law by failing to appreciate that in the case (supra) the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the correct principle of accounting is to enter the stock in the books of account at cost unless the value is required to be reduced by reason of the fall of market value the goods bel…

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

…estopple or acquiescence.When law requires something and provides a particular status with particular description,it is to be treated accordingly.A mistaken claim will not make any difference,either for affirmance or denial. viii.In British Paints India Ltd.(188 ITR 44),the Supreme Court observed that there was no estopple in the matter of method of accounting consistently followed by the assessee and the Assessing Officer is not bound by the method followed in the earlier years, if correct profits cannot be deduced therefrom. However, it is also well settled that the Department should not ordinarily depart from…

M/S Kashmir Steel Rolling Mills, Jammu vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jammu

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

ITA 548/ASR/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar09 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 548/(Asr)/2016 Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Bansal (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…ome is to be brought to tax for the 14 ITA No. 548 (Asr)/2016 (AY 2009-10) Kashmir Steel Rolling Mills v. Asst. CIT right year, and it being taxed for another year is no ground for it being not tax for the right year (CIT v. British Paints India Ltd. [1991] 188 ITR 44 (SC)), it yet furnishes a valid ground for non-levy of penalty in-as-much as a plausible explanation saves penalty. There would be, in such as case, clearly, no evasion of tax, but only a deferment thereof on the basis of a consistent method adopted. However, the assessee has not demonstrated the same in any manner, and at any stage, including bef…

Amar Jewellers, Thane vs. Asst CIT Cir 2, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 5631/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Amar Jewellers Acit, Circle-2 1, Zenda Naka, Bazar Peth, Vs. Kalyan. Murbad, Dist. Thane-421402 Pan No. Aaofa7485M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Mr. Ajay R. Singh, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Pooja Swaroop, Dr Date Of Hearing : 17/04/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 26/04/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Ajay R. Singh, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, DR

Section 143(3)

…, whichever is lower and (2) that the value of closing stock must be the value of opening stock in the succeeding year. The above two principles are enunciated in Chainrup Sampatram v. CIT, (1953) 24 ITR 481, 486 (SC); CIT v. British Paints India Ltd., (1991) 188 ITR 44, 51 (SC). The theory that underlines the accepted Shri Amar Jewellers 5 principle, that the closing stock could be valued at the option of the assessee at cost or market value, whichever was lower, was explained by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chainrup Sampatram (supra). Their Lordships held at page 485 : “While anticipated loss is thus taken int…

Sohanlal M Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(1), Thane

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 5776/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Vimal PunamiyaFor Respondent: Shri. V. Justin (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…its accounts and by following the project completion method of accounting the assessee is not presenting the correct , true and fair picture of its taxable profit. The AO relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of British Paints P. Ltd. 188 ITR 44 , BSR Footwear 77 ITR 857 and also decision in the case of Champion Construction 5 ITD 495, Bhagya Nagar Construction 46 ITD 236 , the AO applied percentage completion method. The AO also observed that the assessee has only incurred expenditure of Rs. 2,46,733/- towards purchases during the year under consideration and no other expenditure was inc…

Rupam Jewellers, Purba Medinipur vs. ACIT, Circle, -27(1) Haldia, Haldia

In the result this ground of appeal is allowed

ITA 267/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Mar 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ]

For Appellant: Shri S..K.Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.Dasgupta, Addl. CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 145Section 145ASection 194CSection 40

…ounting regularly employed by the assessee and that this section over rides Sec.145 of the Act. (e) for the proposition argued above reliance is placed on the following case laws :- i)United Commercial Bank vs CIT 240 ITR 355 (SC) (ii)CIT vs British Paints 188 ITR 44 (SC) (iii)CIT vs J.P.Patel 263 ITR 421 (MP) (f) the findings of the AO that LIFO method of valuation of inventory is not prescribed in AS-2, is factually and legally incorrect, as AS-2 gives liberty to the assessee to follow a valid stock formula that may be applied. (g) the calculation made by the AO, that the assessee has valued its closing s…

Asst CIT 17(3), Mumbai vs. Ramanlal Jamndas Parekh, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1142/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 143(3)

…ircumstances, the unutilized sales-tax credit cannot be assessed as suppression of sales. The AO, without appreciating the fact has made addition towards unutilized VAT credit by following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of British Paints 188 ITR 44 (SC). The Ld.CIT(A), after considering relevant facts has rightly deleted addition made by the AO towards suppression of sales on account of unutilized VAT credit. We do not find any error in the order of the CIT(A). Hence, we are inclined to uphold findings of the CIT(A) and dismiss appeal filed by the revenue. 6 ITA 1142/Mum/2015 8. In the res…

ITO 9(1)(3), Mumbai vs. Anchor Residency P.Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 4407/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(iii)

…ot entitled to make a pure guess and makes an assessment without reference to any evidence or any material at all. There must be something more than bare suspicion to support the assessment under section 23(3)." 2. CIT v/s. British Paints India Ltd. - [(1991) 188 ITR 44 (SC)] "What is the profit of trade or business is a question of fact and it must be ascertained, as all facts must be ascertained, with reference to the relevant evidence, and not on doctrines or theories: "no assumption need be made unless the facts cannot be ascertained, and then only to the extent to which they cannot be ascertained. There is n…

Maharashtra Stae Road Development Corporation Td, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(2), Mumbai

ITA 4900/MUM/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Years: 2002-03 Dcit-5(2), M/S Maharashtra State Road R. No.571, Development Corporation बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Limited, Vs. M.K. Road, Pwd Compound, Near Mumbai-400020 Priyadarshni Park, Nepeansea Road, Mumbai-400036 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaacm6833C Assessment Years: 2002-03 M/S Maharashtra State Dcit-5(2), Road Development R. No.571, बनाम/ Corporation Limited, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Pwd Compound, Near M.K. Road, Priyadarshni Park, Mumbai-400020 Nepeansea Road, Mumbai-400036 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacm6833C "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri B.S. Sharma & Shri Dalpat Shah राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri Narendra Singh Janpangi-Dr

Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 147Section 148

…were unsustainable.” While coming to the aforesaid conclusion, the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court also considered the following cases:- i. Caprihans India Ltd. v. Tarun Seem, Deputy CIT [2004] 266 ITR 566 (Bom) ii. CIT v. British Paints India Ltd. [1991] 188 ITR 44 (SC) iii. CIT v. Foramer France [2003] 264 ITR 566 (SC) iv. CIT v. Indo Nippon Chemical Co. Ltd. [2000] 245 ITR 384 (Bom) v. CIT v. Indo Nippon Chemicals Co. Ltd. [2003] 261 ITR 275 (SC) vi. CIT v. Indo Nippon Chemicals Co. Ltd. [2003] 1 RC 208 (SC) vii. Grindwell Norton Ltd. v. Jagdish Prasad Jangid, Asst. CIT [2004] 267 ITR 673 (Bom) viii. Hindu…

DCIT 5(2), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 4519/MUM/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Years: 2002-03 Dcit-5(2), M/S Maharashtra State Road R. No.571, Development Corporation बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Limited, Vs. M.K. Road, Pwd Compound, Near Mumbai-400020 Priyadarshni Park, Nepeansea Road, Mumbai-400036 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaacm6833C Assessment Years: 2002-03 M/S Maharashtra State Dcit-5(2), Road Development R. No.571, बनाम/ Corporation Limited, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Pwd Compound, Near M.K. Road, Priyadarshni Park, Mumbai-400020 Nepeansea Road, Mumbai-400036 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacm6833C "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri B.S. Sharma & Shri Dalpat Shah राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri Narendra Singh Janpangi-Dr

Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 147Section 148

…were unsustainable.” While coming to the aforesaid conclusion, the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court also considered the following cases:- i. Caprihans India Ltd. v. Tarun Seem, Deputy CIT [2004] 266 ITR 566 (Bom) ii. CIT v. British Paints India Ltd. [1991] 188 ITR 44 (SC) iii. CIT v. Foramer France [2003] 264 ITR 566 (SC) iv. CIT v. Indo Nippon Chemical Co. Ltd. [2000] 245 ITR 384 (Bom) v. CIT v. Indo Nippon Chemicals Co. Ltd. [2003] 261 ITR 275 (SC) vi. CIT v. Indo Nippon Chemicals Co. Ltd. [2003] 1 RC 208 (SC) vii. Grindwell Norton Ltd. v. Jagdish Prasad Jangid, Asst. CIT [2004] 267 ITR 673 (Bom) viii. Hindu…

DCIT, Circle - 16(2), Hyderabad vs. M/S Maheshwari Mega Ventures Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1352/HYD/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Jan 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri J. Siri Kumar

Section 115JSection 133ASection 143(1)

…n showing lower profits in respect of other divisions and the profit gets postponed to the subsequent years. 9.4 In view of the above observations, the AO relying on the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. British Paints India Ltd., 188 ITR 44, opined that the allocation of indirect expenses to the projects under construction is necessary to work out the correct WIP The total of indirect expenses as discussed above comes to 1,01,55,068/- (Adm. Rs. 41,84,365 + salaries: Rs.42,32,673 + depreciation: Rs.17,38,030). As held in the earlier paras, 84% of the work relates to construction of th…

CIT v. British Paints India Ltd.

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

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. British Paints India Ltd.

The ACIT, Central-2, Indore vs. Shri Amit Tiwari, Indore

The ACIT, Central-2, Indore vs. Shri Amit Tiwari, Indore

Shri Amit Tiwari, Indore vs. The DCIT-1(1), Indore

Shri Amit Tiwari, Indore vs. The DCIT-1(1), Indore

Sree Alankar, Ganjam vs. Principal CIT-1, Bhubaneswar

Umapati Synthetics Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4) ( New Ward-2(1)(4)), Surat

ITO, WD-46(1), Kolkata vs. Provash Adhikari, Howrah

The Fine Arts Society, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) 2(4), Mumbai

The Fine Arts Society, Mumbai vs. Dy Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) - 1(2), Mumbai

ACIT, Central Circle - 1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Citation Infowares Limited, Kolkata

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

M/S Kashmir Steel Rolling Mills, Jammu vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jammu

Amar Jewellers, Thane vs. Asst CIT Cir 2, Mumbai

Sohanlal M Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(1), Thane

Rupam Jewellers, Purba Medinipur vs. ACIT, Circle, -27(1) Haldia, Haldia

Asst CIT 17(3), Mumbai vs. Ramanlal Jamndas Parekh, Mumbai

ITO 9(1)(3), Mumbai vs. Anchor Residency P.Ltd, Mumbai

Maharashtra Stae Road Development Corporation Td, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(2), Mumbai

DCIT 5(2), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation Ltd, Mumbai

DCIT, Circle - 16(2), Hyderabad vs. M/S Maheshwari Mega Ventures Limited, Hyderabad