CIT v. Chari & Ram

Asst CIT 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Jagadish ()

…n within a classification is therefore contrary to the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in the aforementioned judgements. 66. In context of netting off depreciation against appreciation, the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Chari & Ram [1949] 17 ITR 1 (Madras) has held that there would be no assurance that there would be a market for the entire stock of articles of which the market value is higher and therefore, it would be hazardous to assume that the entire stock could be sold at the prevailing market rate and necessarily bring in a profit. The High Court also held that there is no provision of…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Jagadish ()

…n within a classification is therefore contrary to the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in the aforementioned judgements. 66. In context of netting off depreciation against appreciation, the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Chari & Ram [1949] 17 ITR 1 (Madras) has held that there would be no assurance that there would be a market for the entire stock of articles of which the market value is higher and therefore, it would be hazardous to assume that the entire stock could be sold at the prevailing market rate and necessarily bring in a profit. The High Court also held that there is no provision of…

DCIT 2(2), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and 2007 – 08 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm A.Y.2006-07 [ By Assessee] &

…tated that this issue has already been decided in favour of the assessee by the coordinate benches for assessment year 2009 – 10, 2005 – 06, 2004 – 05 and 2008 – 09. The learned AR further placed reliance on the decision of the honourable madras High Court in 17 ITR 1 and UCO bank in case of 240 ITR 355. 130) The learned CIT DR submitted that assessee has not made such claim in the return of income. During the course of assessment proceedings letter dated 4 March 2008 was submitted wherein such claim was made. The learned CIT – A confirmed the action of the AO holding that the depreciation/appreciation in individ…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm

…that this issue has already been decided in favour of the assessee by the coordinate benches for assessment year 2009 – 10, 2005 – 06, 2004 – 05 and 2008 – 09. The learned AR further placed reliance on the decision of the honourable madras High Court in 17 ITR 1 and UCO bank in case of 240 ITR 355. 130) The learned CIT DR submitted that assessee has not made such claim in the return of income. During the course of assessment proceedings letter dated 4 March 2008 was submitted wherein such claim was made. The learned CIT – A confirmed the action of the AO holding that the depreciation/appreciation in i…

Asst CIT Cir 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…on within a classification is therefore contrary to the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in the aforementioned judgements. 66. In context of netting off depreciation against appreciation, the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Chari & Ram [1949] 17 ITR 1 (Madras) has held that there would be State Bank of India ITA no.3645/Mum./2016 ITA no.4564/Mum./2016 no assurance that there would be a market for the entire stock of articles of which the market value is higher and therefore, it would be hazardous to assume that the entire stock could be sold at the prevailing market rate and necessarily bring in…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…on within a classification is therefore contrary to the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in the aforementioned judgements. 66. In context of netting off depreciation against appreciation, the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Chari & Ram [1949] 17 ITR 1 (Madras) has held that there would be State Bank of India ITA no.3645/Mum./2016 ITA no.4564/Mum./2016 no assurance that there would be a market for the entire stock of articles of which the market value is higher and therefore, it would be hazardous to assume that the entire stock could be sold at the prevailing market rate and necessarily bring in…

DCIT 2(2), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. State Bank Of India, Dcit, Financial Reporting & Circle -2(2), Taxation Dept., Mumbai 3Rd Floor, Vs. Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Office Of The Dcit-2(2), M/S. State Bank Of India, R.No.545, Central Office, Aayakar Bhavan, Accounts & Compliance M.K. Road, Dept., Vs. 14Th Floor, Mumbai- 400 020 Madam Cama Rd., Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent)

…A.Y. 2004-05 vide order dated 30.09.2012 in ITA No.3780/M/2012, for A.Y. 2008-09 vide order dated 03.02.2020 in ITA No.3644/M/2016 and has also placed reliance on decision rendered by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in case of CIT vs. Chari & Ram (1949) 17 ITR 1 (Madras) and on the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of United Commercial Bank vs. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 355 (SC). This factual position has not been controverted by the Ld. D.R. for the Revenue. 28 ITA No.3685/M/2013 & ITA No.4951/M/2013 M/s. State Bank of India 28. We have perused the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench of t…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. State Bank Of India, Dcit, Financial Reporting & Circle -2(2), Taxation Dept., Mumbai 3Rd Floor, Vs. Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Office Of The Dcit-2(2), M/S. State Bank Of India, R.No.545, Central Office, Aayakar Bhavan, Accounts & Compliance M.K. Road, Dept., Vs. 14Th Floor, Mumbai- 400 020 Madam Cama Rd., Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent)

…A.Y. 2004-05 vide order dated 30.09.2012 in ITA No.3780/M/2012, for A.Y. 2008-09 vide order dated 03.02.2020 in ITA No.3644/M/2016 and has also placed reliance on decision rendered by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in case of CIT vs. Chari & Ram (1949) 17 ITR 1 (Madras) and on the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of United Commercial Bank vs. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 355 (SC). This factual position has not been controverted by the Ld. D.R. for the Revenue. 28 ITA No.3685/M/2013 & ITA No.4951/M/2013 M/s. State Bank of India 28. We have perused the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench of t…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

…on within a classification is therefore contrary to the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in the aforementioned judgements. 66. In context of netting off depreciation against appreciation, the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Chari & Ram [1949] 17 ITR 1 (Madras) has held that there would be no assurance that there would be a market for the entire stock of articles of which the market value is higher and therefore, it would be hazardous to assume that the entire stock could be sold at the prevailing market rate and necessarily bring in a profit. The High Court also held that there is no provision of…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, as indicated above

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri G Manjunatha, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 3644/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2008-09) State Bank Of India The Dy. Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Corporate Centre Income Tax, Circle -2(2)(1) बनाम/ Madam Cama Road Mumbai Vs. Nariman Point Mumbai-400021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaacs8577K

…P a g e State Bank of India ITA Nos.3644&4563/Mum/2016 principle laid down by the Supreme Court in the aforementioned judgements. 66. In context of netting off depreciation against appreciation, the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Chari & Ram [1949] 17 ITR 1 (Madras) has held that there would be no assurance that there would be a market for the entire stock of articles of which the market value is higher and therefore, it would be hazardous to assume that the entire stock could be sold at the prevailing market rate and necessarily bring in a profit. The High Court also held that there is no provision of…