CIT v. Chopra Bros. India (P) Ltd. (252 ITR 412)

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 271/COCH/2021[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…daliar v. CIT [1964] 51 itr 644 (Mad) iv. Kodidasn Appalaswamy & Suryanarayana v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 735 (AP) v. Chouthmal Agarwalla v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 262 (Assam) vi. Swamy Bros v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 123 (Ker) vii. CIT v. Chopra Bros (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2001] 252 ITR 412 (P&H). What follows from the above discussion is that the rate of profit to be the average profit reported in preceding 3 years, which in the present case works out as under: - AY Turnover as Income Returned % of Income per ITR as per ITR Returned to turnover 2007-08 118,609,437 6,662,975 5.62 2008-09 62,942,544 3,760,768 5.97 2009-10 78,707,217…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 270/COCH/2021[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…daliar v. CIT [1964] 51 itr 644 (Mad) iv. Kodidasn Appalaswamy & Suryanarayana v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 735 (AP) v. Chouthmal Agarwalla v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 262 (Assam) vi. Swamy Bros v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 123 (Ker) vii. CIT v. Chopra Bros (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2001] 252 ITR 412 (P&H). What follows from the above discussion is that the rate of profit to be the average profit reported in preceding 3 years, which in the present case works out as under: - AY Turnover as Income Returned % of Income per ITR as per ITR Returned to turnover 2007-08 118,609,437 6,662,975 5.62 2008-09 62,942,544 3,760,768 5.97 2009-10 78,707,217…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 269/COCH/2021[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…daliar v. CIT [1964] 51 itr 644 (Mad) iv. Kodidasn Appalaswamy & Suryanarayana v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 735 (AP) v. Chouthmal Agarwalla v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 262 (Assam) vi. Swamy Bros v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 123 (Ker) vii. CIT v. Chopra Bros (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2001] 252 ITR 412 (P&H). What follows from the above discussion is that the rate of profit to be the average profit reported in preceding 3 years, which in the present case works out as under: - AY Turnover as Income Returned % of Income per ITR as per ITR Returned to turnover 2007-08 118,609,437 6,662,975 5.62 2008-09 62,942,544 3,760,768 5.97 2009-10 78,707,217…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 268/COCH/2021[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…daliar v. CIT [1964] 51 itr 644 (Mad) iv. Kodidasn Appalaswamy & Suryanarayana v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 735 (AP) v. Chouthmal Agarwalla v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 262 (Assam) vi. Swamy Bros v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 123 (Ker) vii. CIT v. Chopra Bros (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2001] 252 ITR 412 (P&H). What follows from the above discussion is that the rate of profit to be the average profit reported in preceding 3 years, which in the present case works out as under: - AY Turnover as Income Returned % of Income per ITR as per ITR Returned to turnover 2007-08 118,609,437 6,662,975 5.62 2008-09 62,942,544 3,760,768 5.97 2009-10 78,707,217…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 267/COCH/2021[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…s) Muniratham Mudaliar v. CIT [1964] 51 itr 644 (Mad) Kodidasn Appalaswamy & Suryanarayana v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 735 (AP) Chouthmal Agarwalla v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 262 (Assam) Swamy Bros v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 123 (Ker) CIT v. Chopra Bros (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2001] 252 ITR 412 (P&H). What follows from the above discussion is that the rate of profit to be the average profit reported in preceding 3 years, which in the present case works out as under: - AY Turnover as per ITR Income Returned as per ITR % of Income Returned to turnover 2007-08 118,609,437 6,662,975 5.62 2008-09 62,942,544 3,760,768 5.97 2009-10 78,707,217…

AKM ERECTORS,ERNAKULAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed

ITA 185/COCH/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 May 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 44A

…daliar v. CIT [1964] 51 itr 644 (Mad) iv. Kodidasn Appalaswamy & Suryanarayana v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 735 (AP) v. Chouthmal Agarwalla v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 262 (Assam) vi. Swamy Bros v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 123 (Ker) vii. CIT v. Chopra Bros (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2001] 252 ITR 412 (P&H) 9. In this case the CIT(A) merely estimated the taxable income at 12% of the gross receipts. On appeal before the CIT(A), while estimating the profit at 12% of the contract receipts, the CIT(A) neither referred to any material nor referred to the previous assessment in assessee’s own case. Thus, we are of the considered opinion that estimat…

AKM ERECTORS,ERNAKULAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed

ITA 184/COCH/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 44A

…daliar v. CIT [1964] 51 itr 644 (Mad) iv. Kodidasn Appalaswamy & Suryanarayana v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 735 (AP) v. Chouthmal Agarwalla v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 262 (Assam) vi. Swamy Bros v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 123 (Ker) vii. CIT v. Chopra Bros (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2001] 252 ITR 412 (P&H) 9. In this case the CIT(A) merely estimated the taxable income at 12% of the gross receipts. On appeal before the CIT(A), while estimating the profit at 12% of the contract receipts, the CIT(A) neither referred to any material nor referred to the previous assessment in assessee’s own case. Thus, we are of the considered opinion that estimat…

M/S VIJAY KUMAR GARG CONTRACTORS vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeal is allowed

ITA/110/2003HC Punjab & Haryana08 Aug 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

…RASHMI 2024.08.09 12:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document ITA-110-2003 3(O&M) Page 3 of 4 appears to be fair and rea so, the AO has not allo depreciation. This is c jurisdictional High Cour Court in the case of CIT Ltd., 252 ITR 412, where CBDT's Circular No.29- held that even if income is rate, the AO is duty boun same is claimed by the ass full particulars thereof. Th of the AO in estimating th rate of 7%, we direct the A the provisions of law and k Punjab & Haryana High Bros (supra). We order ground is partly allowed. 10. The next ground of the CIT(A) was not disal…

MARUTI INFRAVENTURES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,SECUNDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-16(1) , HYDERABAD

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

ITA 160/HYD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 160/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Maruti Infrainventures Vs. Income Tax Officer (India) Private Ltd Ward 16(1) Secunderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aafcm6624A (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Ch Rajeswara Reddy, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 01/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 03/07/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri P. Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Shri CH Rajeswara Reddy, DR

Section 115J

…s as part of business receipts for the purpose of estimation of net profit. The learned Counsel for the assessee further took us to the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Chopra Brothers India (P) Ltd reported in (2001) 252 ITR 412 and Circular No.29D(XIX)-14 dated 31.08.1985 issued by the CBDT and submitted that, even after estimation of net profit from business deduction towards depreciation should be separately allowed. Therefore, submitted that a direction may Page 5 of 10 ITA No 160 of 2024 Maruti Infraventures India P Ltd be given to the Assessing Officer to allow d…

BHAVANI COTTON GINNING & PRESSING FACTORY,,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(2)(5),, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

ITA 1131/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1130-1131/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2013-2014 & 2014-15) Bhavani Cotton Ginning & Pressing I.T.O., Factory, Vs. Ward-3(2)(5), Plot No.100/15, Gidc, Ahmedabad. Ranpur Road, Dhandhuka, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divitia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyusingh Yadav, Sr. D.R

Section 145(3)Section 250

…11.7 Following cases support the view that depreciation is a statutory allowance and same is allowable after applying estimated income:– -Girdhari Lal v. CIT [2002] 256 ITR 318/[2001] 119 Taxman 863 (Punj. & Har.). -CIT v. Chopra Bros. India (P.) Ltd. [2001] 252 ITR 412/119 Taxman 866 (Punj. & Har.). -CIT v. Sriram & Co. [2001] 250 ITR 169/[2002] 120 Taxman 238 (Raj.). 11.8 Further as provided by presumptive taxes, under sections 44AD, 44AE and 44AF, all deductions under sections 30 to 38 shall be deemed to have been allowed, and no further deduction under those sections would be allowable. No such provision ha…

BHAVANI COTTON GINNING & PRESSING FACTORY,,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(2)(5),, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

ITA 1130/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1130-1131/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2013-2014 & 2014-15) Bhavani Cotton Ginning & Pressing I.T.O., Factory, Vs. Ward-3(2)(5), Plot No.100/15, Gidc, Ahmedabad. Ranpur Road, Dhandhuka, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divitia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyusingh Yadav, Sr. D.R

Section 145(3)Section 250

…11.7 Following cases support the view that depreciation is a statutory allowance and same is allowable after applying estimated income:– -Girdhari Lal v. CIT [2002] 256 ITR 318/[2001] 119 Taxman 863 (Punj. & Har.). -CIT v. Chopra Bros. India (P.) Ltd. [2001] 252 ITR 412/119 Taxman 866 (Punj. & Har.). -CIT v. Sriram & Co. [2001] 250 ITR 169/[2002] 120 Taxman 238 (Raj.). 11.8 Further as provided by presumptive taxes, under sections 44AD, 44AE and 44AF, all deductions under sections 30 to 38 shall be deemed to have been allowed, and no further deduction under those sections would be allowable. No such provision ha…

ACIT, C-7, LUDHIANA vs. M/S CEIGALL INDIA LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 291/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: The Appeal Is Finally Heard Or Disposed Off.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. C. Chandrakanta, CIT

Section 133ASection 145(3)Section 69C

…ation against the income so determined by applying the net profit rate. The reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the cases of CIT Vs. Vinod Kumar [1995] reported in 211 ITR 253 and CIT Vs. Chopra Brothers reported in 119 Taxmann 866. 20. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on the record. In the present case it is not in dispute that the income of the assessee was worked out by applying the net profit rate and rejecting the books of accounts. Therefore in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High C…

M/S. P.K. COTTON MILLS (P) LTD.,,MEERUT vs. ACIT, MEERUT

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2504/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 263

…ITA No.- 2504/Del/2016. P.K. Cotton Mills (P) Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘F’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No:- 2504/Del/2016 (Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/s P.K. Cotton Mills (P) Ltd., ACIT, 202, New Mohanpuri, Vs. Circle-2, Meerut. Meerut. PAN No: AADCP4270D APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee By : Shri Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. and Shri Pulkit Advani, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR Per Anadee Nath Misshra, AM (A) This appeal by Assessee is filed against the order of Learned C…

M/S. RAJ BUILDCON CONSTRUCTION LTD.,,GURGAON vs. JCIT, GURGAON

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

ITA 2422/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Raj Buildcon Vs. Jcit(A), Construction Ltd., Range-Ii, Gurgaon (Haryana) 404, Welldone Tech Park, Sector-48, Sohna Road, Gurgaon (Haryana) Pan :Aadcr6387F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rohit Tiwari, Adv. Respondent By Smt. Rinku Singh, Sr.Dr

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 3

…ruction has been assessed applying net profit rate to gross receipts, the assessee would not be entitled to depreciation separately. 6.6 We note that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Income Tax Officer Vs. Chopra Bros. India (P.) Ltd., 252 ITR 412, allowed depreciation allowance from the income estimated by the Assessing Officer. In the case, the assessee was a construction contractor. The Assessing Officer noticed defects in the maintenance of accounts and invoked the provisions of S. 145, rejecting the book results. He applied a net profit rate of 10% to the gross receipts to compute the…

ITO, WD-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GOURANGALAL CHATTERJEE CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1429/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Sept 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 1425- 1429/Kol/2015 Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2008-09 To 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Kalyan Nath, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri D.S. Damle, FCA

Section 144Section 147Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V. Vasudevan, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] I.T.A Nos. 1425- 1429/Kol/2015 Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2008-09 to 2011-12 ITO, Ward-10(1),Kolkata -vs- M/s Gourangalal Chatterjee Construction Pvt. Ltd. [PAN: AABCG 9694 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri Kalyan Nath, Addl. CIT For the Respondent : Shri D.S. Damle, FCA Date of Hearing : 19.08.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 21.09.2017 ORDER Per Bench: 1. These appeals by the Revenue arise out of the orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -4,…

ITO, WD-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GOURANGALAL CHATTERJEE CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1428/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Sept 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 1425- 1429/Kol/2015 Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2008-09 To 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Kalyan Nath, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri D.S. Damle, FCA

Section 144Section 147Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V. Vasudevan, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] I.T.A Nos. 1425- 1429/Kol/2015 Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2008-09 to 2011-12 ITO, Ward-10(1),Kolkata -vs- M/s Gourangalal Chatterjee Construction Pvt. Ltd. [PAN: AABCG 9694 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri Kalyan Nath, Addl. CIT For the Respondent : Shri D.S. Damle, FCA Date of Hearing : 19.08.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 21.09.2017 ORDER Per Bench: 1. These appeals by the Revenue arise out of the orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -4,…

ITO, WD-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GOURANGALAL CHATTERJEE CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1427/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Sept 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 1425- 1429/Kol/2015 Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2008-09 To 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Kalyan Nath, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri D.S. Damle, FCA

Section 144Section 147Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V. Vasudevan, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] I.T.A Nos. 1425- 1429/Kol/2015 Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2008-09 to 2011-12 ITO, Ward-10(1),Kolkata -vs- M/s Gourangalal Chatterjee Construction Pvt. Ltd. [PAN: AABCG 9694 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri Kalyan Nath, Addl. CIT For the Respondent : Shri D.S. Damle, FCA Date of Hearing : 19.08.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 21.09.2017 ORDER Per Bench: 1. These appeals by the Revenue arise out of the orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -4,…

ITO, WD-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GOURANGALAL CHATTERJEE CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1426/KOL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 1425- 1429/Kol/2015 Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2008-09 To 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Kalyan Nath, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri D.S. Damle, FCA

Section 144Section 147Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V. Vasudevan, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] I.T.A Nos. 1425- 1429/Kol/2015 Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2008-09 to 2011-12 ITO, Ward-10(1),Kolkata -vs- M/s Gourangalal Chatterjee Construction Pvt. Ltd. [PAN: AABCG 9694 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri Kalyan Nath, Addl. CIT For the Respondent : Shri D.S. Damle, FCA Date of Hearing : 19.08.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 21.09.2017 ORDER Per Bench: 1. These appeals by the Revenue arise out of the orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -4,…

ITO, WD-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GOURANGALAL CHATTERJEE CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1425/KOL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Sept 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 1425- 1429/Kol/2015 Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2008-09 To 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Kalyan Nath, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri D.S. Damle, FCA

Section 144Section 147Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V. Vasudevan, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] I.T.A Nos. 1425- 1429/Kol/2015 Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2008-09 to 2011-12 ITO, Ward-10(1),Kolkata -vs- M/s Gourangalal Chatterjee Construction Pvt. Ltd. [PAN: AABCG 9694 G] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri Kalyan Nath, Addl. CIT For the Respondent : Shri D.S. Damle, FCA Date of Hearing : 19.08.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 21.09.2017 ORDER Per Bench: 1. These appeals by the Revenue arise out of the orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -4,…

ACIT, CIRCLE-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GOURANGALAL CHATTERJEE, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 760/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri P.B. Pramanick, JCIT, ld. Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri D.S Damle, FCA

Section 143(3)Section 145Section 44A

…the AO at the time of assessment? 2) Whether the Hon’ble ITAT was correct in law in confirming the order of the learned CIT(A) allowing the depreciation out of the net profit? Held : “7. The issue before this Court in CIT v. Chopra Bros. India (P) Ltd [2001] 252 ITR 412/119 Taxman 866 and Girdhari Lal v. CIT [2002] 256 ITR 318 [2001] 119 Taxman 863 was with regard to deduction to be made on account of depreciation from the gross receipts while applying net profit rate. It was held on the basis of a circular issued by the Board, which was binding on the revenue that the gross receipts to which net profit rate is…

CIT v. Chopra Bros. India (P) Ltd.

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Chopra Bros. India (P) Ltd.

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

AKM ERECTORS,ERNAKULAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOCHI, KOCHI

AKM ERECTORS,ERNAKULAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KOCHI, KOCHI

M/S VIJAY KUMAR GARG CONTRACTORS vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

MARUTI INFRAVENTURES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,SECUNDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-16(1) , HYDERABAD

BHAVANI COTTON GINNING & PRESSING FACTORY,,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(2)(5),, AHMEDABAD

BHAVANI COTTON GINNING & PRESSING FACTORY,,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(2)(5),, AHMEDABAD

ACIT, C-7, LUDHIANA vs. M/S CEIGALL INDIA LTD., LUDHIANA

M/S. P.K. COTTON MILLS (P) LTD.,,MEERUT vs. ACIT, MEERUT

M/S. RAJ BUILDCON CONSTRUCTION LTD.,,GURGAON vs. JCIT, GURGAON

ITO, WD-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GOURANGALAL CHATTERJEE CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

ITO, WD-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GOURANGALAL CHATTERJEE CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

ITO, WD-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GOURANGALAL CHATTERJEE CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

ITO, WD-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GOURANGALAL CHATTERJEE CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

ITO, WD-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GOURANGALAL CHATTERJEE CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

ACIT, CIRCLE-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S GOURANGALAL CHATTERJEE, KOLKATA