CIT v. Echjay Forgings (P) Ltd.

251 ITR 15High Court2001#1516 most cited

What is CIT v. Echjay Forgings (P) Ltd. authority for?

Wealth tax paid by an assessee cannot be added back to net profit for the purpose of computing book profit under section 115J or section 115JB, as wealth tax is not included in the definition of 'income-tax' under the Explanation to these sections.

75

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Echjay Forgings · Echjay Forgings · section 115J · section 115JB · book profit · wealth tax · addition to net profit · computation of book profit · Minimum Alternate Tax · MAT · wealth tax not income-tax

Also reported as

116 Taxmann 322

Sections most often in play

Section 115JBSection 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 14ASection 1963

Issues it is cited on

section 80hhesection 115jb(2)section 92fsection 115jasection 10bbook profitswritten down valuesection 115jdeduction u/s 80iasection 80asection 32(1)section 115jb

Judgments citing CIT v. Echjay Forgings (P) Ltd.

M/S. the Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi, Ufj Ltd., New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 3707/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 115JSection 44CSection 90

…DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .No. 3707/DEL/2014 (A.Y .2005-06) The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi, UFJ Vs DDIT Ltd. Circle-1(1) International (Earlier known as The Bank of Taxation Tokyo Mitsubishi Ltd.) New Delhi Jeevan Vihar Building, 3, Parliament Street, New Delhi AABCA8439Q (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) I.T.A .No. 3755/DEL/2014 (A.Y .2005-06) DDIT Vs The Bank of Tokyo- Circle-1(1) International Taxation Mitsubishi, UFJ Ltd. New Delhi Jeevan Vihar Building, 3, Parliament Street, New Delhi AABCT3880D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) A…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Continental Datagraphics Technical Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 432/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Aug 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Shri Sriraman Seshadri, AdvocateFor Respondent: 04.07.2017
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 37

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘एस.एम.सी’ ‘डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘SMC’ ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी,लेखा सद"य केसम" Before Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.431& 432/Mds/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) The ACIT, Vs M/s. Continental Datagraphics Corporate Circle 1(2), Technical Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., 9A Block, 3rd Floor, DLF IT SEZ, Chennai – 34. 1/124, Mount Poonamallee Road, Manapakkam, Chennai 600 089. PAN: AADCC8178R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri Sagadevan, JCIT अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri S…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Continental Datagraphics Technical Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 431/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Aug 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Shri Sriraman Seshadri, AdvocateFor Respondent: 04.07.2017
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 37

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘एस.एम.सी’ ‘डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘SMC’ ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी,लेखा सद"य केसम" Before Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.431& 432/Mds/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) The ACIT, Vs M/s. Continental Datagraphics Corporate Circle 1(2), Technical Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., 9A Block, 3rd Floor, DLF IT SEZ, Chennai – 34. 1/124, Mount Poonamallee Road, Manapakkam, Chennai 600 089. PAN: AADCC8178R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri Sagadevan, JCIT अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri S…

Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 2554/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 2554/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income 4Th Floor, Dhaka House, 18/17 Tax, Circle-11(1), W.E.A, Pusa Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi New Delhi-110005 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace0138N Assessee By : Sh. Ravi Sharma, Adv. & Sh. Anubhav Rastogi, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. T. M. Shiva Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.05.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.07.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 31.01.2014 Passed By The Ao U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act).

For Appellant: Sh. Ravi Sharma, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. T. M. Shiva Kumar, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(12)Section 92CSection 92C(3)Section 92D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I-2’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM and Ms. Suchitra Kamble, JM ITA No. 2554/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income 4th Floor, Dhaka House, 18/17 Tax, Circle-11(1), W.E.A, Pusa Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi New Delhi-110005 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACE0138N Assessee by : Sh. Ravi Sharma, Adv. & Sh. Anubhav Rastogi, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. T. M. Shiva Kumar, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 04.05.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 28.07.2017 ORDER Per N. K. Saini, AM: This is an appeal by the assessee against the…

Addl CIT 2(1), Mumbai vs. Gtl Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 5419/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 10BSection 143(1)

…he other hand, the ld. counsel for the assessee contended that the assessee has not claimed any deduction, therefore, the conclusion arrived at in the impugned order was defended. Reliance was placed upon the decision from Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in 251 ITR 15(Bom.) and Hon'ble Apex Court in 255 ITR 273 (SC). 4.2. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts, in brief are that the assessee company made investment in the shares of M/s Indian Agri Business System Pvt. Ltd. and the same were shown as at cost. The assessee follows valuing the investment a…

M/S. Tata Chemical Ltd., Mumbai vs. Jt. CIT RG. 1, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessee and Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5897/MUM/2004[1997-1998]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2017AY 1997-1998

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Vyas and Shri Atul T SuraiyaFor Respondent: Mrs Vidisha Kalra
Section 35E

…) as additional ground, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has not adjudicated this ground. He submits that this is purely a legal ground and therefore the Ld. CIT (Appeals) should have admitted and adjudicated upon. He further submits that in the case of Echjay Forgings [251 ITR 15], the Hon’ble Bombay High Court held that the amount transferred to debenture redemption reserve is an amount set aside 11 ITA Nos. 5897 and 7035/Mum/2004 (A.Y.1997-98) M/s Tata Chemicals Ltd. to meet a known liability and as such the debenture redemption reserve cannot be considered to be a ‘reserve’ for the purpose of computing book profits u…

Dy.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. Lenovo India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal for the Assessment Years 2007-08 as well

ITA 511/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri P. Pardiwala, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR) (ITAT)-2, Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(v)Section 40A(9)

…s gratuity would be covered under Clause (c) to Explanation 1 to Section 115JB of the Act. The 26 IT(TP)A Nos.511, 580 & 581/Bang/2015 & 1307/Bang/2011 Tribunal relied on the decision of the Bombay High Court in case of CIT v. Echjay Forgings (P.) Ltd. [2001] 251 ITR 15/116 Taxman 322 and confirmed the view of the CIT(A). 17. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused documents on record, we notice that CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal both noted that such provision for payment of gratuity was made on the basis of actuarial valuation method to this aspect. The revenue has not been able to make…

D.C.I.T., Circle-4, Kolkata vs. M/S Hindustan Heavy Chemicals Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2816/KOL/2013[1990-91]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Mar 2017AY 1990-91

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri D. S. Damle, FCAFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 251

…d to be an unascertained or contingent liability as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. Vs. CIT 245 ITR 428 (SC). The similar view was taken by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Echjay Forging Pvt. Ltd. 251 ITR 15 (Bom) and also by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of DCIT Vs. Inox Leisure Ltd. 351 ITR 314 (Guj.). the Ld. CIT(A) held that in view of the above factual position, accounting principles and judicial decisions, the AO was not justified in making addition of Rs.36,93,429/- on account of provisions for gratuity while computing the book pro…

Kesoram Industries Limited (Sucessor of Hindusthan Heavy Chemicals Ltd.), Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., CC-X, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2815/KOL/2013[1990-91]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Mar 2017AY 1990-91

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri D. S. Damle, FCAFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 251

…d to be an unascertained or contingent liability as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. Vs. CIT 245 ITR 428 (SC). The similar view was taken by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Echjay Forging Pvt. Ltd. 251 ITR 15 (Bom) and also by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of DCIT Vs. Inox Leisure Ltd. 351 ITR 314 (Guj.). the Ld. CIT(A) held that in view of the above factual position, accounting principles and judicial decisions, the AO was not justified in making addition of Rs.36,93,429/- on account of provisions for gratuity while computing the book pro…

Reliance Ports and Terminals Ltd ( Engineering & Construction Division) (Erstwhile Reliance Engg. Associates P.Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 3(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicate hereinabove

ITA 5151/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Nov 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma() & Shri Amit Shukla () Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri. Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri. Satyapal Kumar
Section 115JSection 14Section 143Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA(ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Addl. CIT, M/s Reliance Ports And Terminals Ltd. Range 3(3) (Engineering & Construction Division) Aayakar Bhavan (Erstwhile Reliance Engg. Associates M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400020 P. Ltd.), 5th Floor, Maker Chamber-IV 222, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 PAN No. AABCR3878B & ITA Nos. 5151/MUM/2012 Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/s Reliance Ports And Terminals Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT, (Engineering & Construction Division) Range 3(3) (Erstwhile Reliance Engg.…

D.C.I.T Cir - 12, Kolkata vs. M/S Jct Limited., Kolkata

In the result the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1106/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A Nos. 1106 To 1109/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2004-05, 2006-07,2007-08 & 2008-09 D.C.I.T., Circle-12, -Vs.- M/S. J.C.T. Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaacj 6733 E] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Angam Shaiza, Cit For The Respondent : Shri A.K.Gupta, Fca

For Appellant: Shri Angam Shaiza, CITFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Gupta, FCA
Section 145Section 145ASection 43B

…tax and accordingly, cannot be disallowed while computing the book profit by invoking cl.(a) of the Explanation to s.115JA(2) of the Act. “ 45. The same view has also been taken by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Echjay Forgings Pvt. Ltd. 251 ITR 15 (Bom). In view of the aforesaid precedents of the issue we do not find any merits in ground no.4 raised by the revenue. Consequently ground no.4 raised by the revenue is dismissed. ITA No.1108/Kol/2013 A.Y.2007-08 : 46. This is an appeal by the Revenue against the order dated 07.02.2013 of CIT(A)- XII, Kolkata relating to AY 2007-08. 47. Ground N…

Wockhardt Hospitals Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 10(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee company in ITA no

ITA 3002/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 805/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3002/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) M/S Wockhardt Hospitals Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ Ltd., Income Tax – Range 10(1), V. Wockhardt Towers, Aayakar Bhavan, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400 020 Bandra(E), Mumbai – 400051. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacw3342G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri S.K. Bepari D.R
Section 115JSection 36

…hment and gratuity as ascertained liabilities not includible while computing profit ITA 805/M/11 & 3002/M/2013 18 u/s.115JB. There is no infirmity in the order of CIT(A). Our view is supported by the following decisions : i) CIT vs. Enchjay Forgings Ltd., 251 ITR 15; ii) CIT vs. National Hydro Electric Power Corporation Ltd., 45 DTR 117; and iii) Dresser Value India Private Ltd. Vs.ACIT, 30 SOT 495.” Respectfully following the decision of the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in afore-stated decision, we hold that provisions for gratuity of Rs.42,17,911/- and provision for leave encashment of Rs.17,53,115/-…

Wockhardt Hospitals Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee company in ITA no

ITA 805/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 805/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3002/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) M/S Wockhardt Hospitals Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ Ltd., Income Tax – Range 10(1), V. Wockhardt Towers, Aayakar Bhavan, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400 020 Bandra(E), Mumbai – 400051. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacw3342G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri S.K. Bepari D.R
Section 115JSection 36

…hment and gratuity as ascertained liabilities not includible while computing profit ITA 805/M/11 & 3002/M/2013 18 u/s.115JB. There is no infirmity in the order of CIT(A). Our view is supported by the following decisions : i) CIT vs. Enchjay Forgings Ltd., 251 ITR 15; ii) CIT vs. National Hydro Electric Power Corporation Ltd., 45 DTR 117; and iii) Dresser Value India Private Ltd. Vs.ACIT, 30 SOT 495.” Respectfully following the decision of the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in afore-stated decision, we hold that provisions for gratuity of Rs.42,17,911/- and provision for leave encashment of Rs.17,53,115/-…

Nhpc Ltd., Faridabad vs. ACIT, Faridabad

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 433/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Feb 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu, Judicialmember & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

Section 115JSection 154Section 234B

…n of bad and doubtful debts is not to be adjusted 115JB of the I.T.Act, in view of the following judgments: (i) Mahatrashtra State Electricity Board Vs JCIT 82 ITD 422 (Mum.) (ii) ACIT Vs J.G.Vaccum Flask 83 ITD 242 (Pune) (iii) CIT Vs H.J. Foregings (P) Ltd. 251 ITR 15 (Ban.) (iv) Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs DCIT 76 ITD 69 (DelhI)(TM). v) JCIT Vs Usha Martin Inds. Ltd. (2006) 105 TTJ (Cal.)(SB) 543. 5 Keeping in view the above discussions, the disallowance of provision of bad and doubtful debts made by the AO u/s 115JB is not sustained and therefore, it stands deleted.” 13. Therefore in view of above facts…

OBC vs. Commr. of Income Tax-1 & Anr

The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent

ITA - 20 / 1999HC Delhi14 Feb 2013
For Appellant: Mr Rajat Navet, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr Puneet
Section 115Section 115JSection 260A

…assessee submitted at the outset that question Nos.2 & 3 are covered in favour of the assessee. In so far as question No.2 is concerned, he placed reliance on the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Echjay Forgings Pvt. Ltd.: (2001) 251 ITR 15 (Bom.) where the Bombay High Court considered the question as to whether the net profit was required to be increased by an amount of `3,46,370/- being the provision for bonus while considering 2013:DHC:791-DB ITA 20/1999 Page 3 of 5 computation under section 115J of the said Act. The Bombay High Court observed as under: -…