CIT v. Crescent Export Syndicate

216 Taxmann 258High Court2013#1729 most cited

What is CIT v. Crescent Export Syndicate authority for?

For the purpose of disallowance under section 40(a)(ia), the word 'payable' includes amounts already 'paid' without deduction or deposit of tax. The benefit of the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) is not available if the prescribed certificate is not filed.

66

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Crescent Export Syndicate · Section 40(a)(ia) · interpretation of 'payable' · meaning of 'paid' · disallowance of expenditure · non-deduction of tax · TDS default · second proviso 40(a)(ia) · certificate filing · Calcutta High Court · business income deduction

Also reported as

357 ITR 31233 Taxmann.com 250262 CTR 525

Sections most often in play

Section 40(a)(ia)Section 194CSection 195Section 143(3)Section 147Section 197Section 197ASection 43B

Issues it is cited on

section 197section 194asection 40(a)(ia)section 40a(3)section 40(a)section 194section 40section 19section 271(1)(c)previous yearpersonbusiness

Judgments citing CIT v. Crescent Export Syndicate

M/S Tirupati Construction., Hooghly vs. I.T.O WD - 1(4), Hooghly.

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

ITA 372/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: S/Sh Somnath GhoshFor Respondent: Shri D.Lahiri,JCIT, ld.DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 271CSection 40

…IN THE INCME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “C” BENCH, KOLKATA Shri Mahavir Singh,Judicial Member, and Before : Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member I.T.A No. 372/Kol/2013 A.Y : 2006-07 M/s. Tirupati Construction Vs. I.T.O Ward 1(4), Hooghly PAN: AADFT-3834G (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant/Assessee: S/Sh Somnath Ghosh Sh Sarnath Ghosh, & Sh. Sourav Salui, Advocates, ld.ARs For the Respondent/ Department: Shri D.Lahiri,JCIT, ld.DR Date of Hearing: 09-10-2015 Date of Pronouncement: 15-10-2015 ORDER SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM This appeal of the assessee arises out of the order of the Learned CITA in…

ITO, Ward-45(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Ashok Trading Company, Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 650/KOL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shrin.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2006-07

Section 143(3)(II)Section 194CSection 40Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “B” KOLKATA Before ShriN.V.Vasudevan, Judicial Member and Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member Assessment Year :2006-07 I.T.O. Ward-45(2), 3, V/s. M/s Ashok Trading Govt. Place (W), Gr. Company, 13, Floor, Kolkata – 01 NoormalLohia Lane, Kolkata-07 [PAN No.AAGFA 0299 M] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ShriPinaki Mukherjee, JCIT-SR-DR अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri V.N. Purohit, FCA ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 09-09-2015 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 07-10-2015 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश/O R D E R PER Waseem Ahmed, AccountantMem…

I.T.O WD - 29(1), Kolkata vs. Sandeep Basu, Kolkata

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

ITA 225/KOL/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Oct 2015AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri D. Banerjee, JCITFor Respondent: N o n e
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri Mahavir Singh, JM & Shri M. Balaganesh, AM] I.T.A No.225/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Income-tax Officer, Ward-29(1), Kolkata. Vs. Sandeep Basu (PAN:AHOPB6856C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Date of hearing: 21.09.2015 Date of pronouncement: 05.10.2015 For the Appellant: Shri D. Banerjee, JCIT For the Respondent: N o n e ORDER Per Shri Mahavir Singh, JM: This appeal by assessee is arising out of order of CIT(a)-XVI, Kolkata in Appeal No. 25/CIT(A)-XVI/10-11 dated 16.10.2012. Assessment was framed by ITO, Ward- 29(1), Kolkata u/s. 143(3) of the…

M/S. Matrix Infrastructure, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5428/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. A. T. Varkey, Jm & Sh. O.P.Kant, Am

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 40

…supra) that the disallowance for non deduction of tax at source can apply only for the balance amount at the end of the accounting year. There is an adverse judgement of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujrat in the case of CIT V. Sikandarkhan N. Tunvar reported in 357 ITR 312. The ld. AR has submitted that there is no judgement of the jurisdictional High Court on this dispute, so the judgement which in favour of the assessee may be considered, in view of the decisions in the case of ITO Vs Theekathir (Supra) and Jitendra Mansukhlal Shah Vs. DCIT (Supra) . The circular cited by the ld SR DR may be binding on the depart…

M/S Vodafone East Ltd.(Formerly Known As Vodafone Essar East Limited), Kolkata vs. A.D.I.T Range - 7, Kol., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1864/KOL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Sept 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 40

…I.T.A. No. 1864/KOL./2012 Assessment year: 2009-2010 & Assessment Year : 2010-2011 & Assessment Year : 2010-2011 Page 1 of 56 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Mahavir Singh, Judicial Member and Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 1864/KOL/ 2012 Assessment year : 2009-2010 M/s. Vodafone East Limited,........................................………….…Appellant (Formerly known as Vodafone Essar East Limited), 11, Dr. U.N. Brahmchari Road, Kolkata-700 017 [PAN : AAACU 3796 J] -Vs.- Additional Commissioner of Income Tax,.........…….................Respondent Range-…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - IV vs. National Mineral Development Corporation Ltd

ITTA/330/2013HC Telangana13 Aug 2013