CIT v. Elphistone Spg. &Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd.

40 ITR 142Supreme Court of India1960#5367 most cited

What is CIT v. Elphistone Spg. &Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd. authority for?

Profits and gains are understood to include losses, meaning profits can be positive or negative income. Both positive and negative profits are of a revenue character and must be included in the computation of taxable income.

22

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2005 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Elphinstone Spg. & Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd. · profits and gains include losses · negative profit · revenue character · computation of taxable income · section 3 · section 6 · total income

Issues it is cited on

section 115wasection 57(i)section 115bbdsection 2(43)section 4(1)section 2(45)section 115osection 10(33)section 14a(1)section 191section 49treaty benefits

Judgments citing CIT v. Elphistone Spg. &Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd.

MR. NIKHIL SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1249/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarmr. Nikhil Sawhney, Vs. Dcit, 17, Sunder Nagar, Central Circle, New Delhi-11003 Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaups0222Q

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur hansra, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

…cluding losses also, so that, in one sense "profits and gains" represent "plus income" whereas losses represent "minus income" [CIT v. Karamchand Prem Chand, (1960) 3 SCR 727 : 40 ITR 106 (SC) : CIT v. Elphinstone Spg. & Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd. (1960) 3 SCR 953 : 40 ITR 142 (SC)] . In other words, loss is negative profit. Both positive and negative profits are of a revenue character. Both must enter into computation, wherever it becomes material, in the same mode of the taxable income of the assessee. Although section 6 classifies income under six heads, the main charging provision is section 3 which levies income ta…

ACIT, CIRCLE, BHILWARA vs. M/S. BHILWARA ZILA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI SANGH LTD., BHILWARA

In the result the ground No

ITA 163/JODH/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur11 Sept 2023AY 2016-17
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 2(19)Section 22Section 80P(2)(d)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM ITA Nos. 163/Jodh/2019 (ASSESSMENT YEAR- 2016-17) Asstt. Commissioner of Vs Bhilwara Zila Dugdh Income Tax, Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Circle, Limited, Bhilwara. 5 K.M. Stone, Ajmer Road, Bhilwara-311001. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN NO. AAAAB 0214 A (Virtual hearing) Shri Rajendra Jain-Adv. Assessee By Revenue By Shri S.M. Joshi, JCIT-DR Date of hearing 14/07/2023 Date of Pronouncement 11/09/2023 O R D E R PER: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, JM The Revenue has filed an appeal against the ord…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 1953/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: FixedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसुं.6997/म ुं/2019(धन.व. 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai ...... अपीलाथी/Appellant बनाम Vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria, Andheri ( East), Mumbai 400 059 ..... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaace-2175-M C.O. No.57/Mum/2019 Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai – 400 059 ...... Cross Objector बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ...... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai.

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT-DR
Section 115

…y and not on dividend. Section 115-O of the Act is not a procedural section but a charging section, it deals with undistributed profits and not accumulated profits. Referring to the decision rendered in the case of CIT vs. Elphistone Spg. &Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd. 40 ITR 142 (SC), the ld. DR submits that the additional tax levied under the section is on the distributable profits of the company. 34. On constitutional validity of section 115-O of the Act, the ld. DR placed reliance on the decision in the case of Tea Estate India (P.) ltd. vs. CIT 103 ITR 785 (SC) and submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court in the aforesa…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 1952/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: FixedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसुं.6997/म ुं/2019(धन.व. 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai ...... अपीलाथी/Appellant बनाम Vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria, Andheri ( East), Mumbai 400 059 ..... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaace-2175-M C.O. No.57/Mum/2019 Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai – 400 059 ...... Cross Objector बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ...... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai.

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT-DR
Section 115

…y and not on dividend. Section 115-O of the Act is not a procedural section but a charging section, it deals with undistributed profits and not accumulated profits. Referring to the decision rendered in the case of CIT vs. Elphistone Spg. &Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd. 40 ITR 142 (SC), the ld. DR submits that the additional tax levied under the section is on the distributable profits of the company. 34. On constitutional validity of section 115-O of the Act, the ld. DR placed reliance on the decision in the case of Tea Estate India (P.) ltd. vs. CIT 103 ITR 785 (SC) and submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court in the aforesa…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 521/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: FixedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसुं.6997/म ुं/2019(धन.व. 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai ...... अपीलाथी/Appellant बनाम Vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria, Andheri ( East), Mumbai 400 059 ..... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaace-2175-M C.O. No.57/Mum/2019 Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai – 400 059 ...... Cross Objector बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ...... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai.

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT-DR
Section 115

…y and not on dividend. Section 115-O of the Act is not a procedural section but a charging section, it deals with undistributed profits and not accumulated profits. Referring to the decision rendered in the case of CIT vs. Elphistone Spg. &Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd. 40 ITR 142 (SC), the ld. DR submits that the additional tax levied under the section is on the distributable profits of the company. 34. On constitutional validity of section 115-O of the Act, the ld. DR placed reliance on the decision in the case of Tea Estate India (P.) ltd. vs. CIT 103 ITR 785 (SC) and submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court in the aforesa…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, SPL. RANGE-6, NEW DELHI

ITA 8968/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसुं.6997/म ुं/2019(धन.व. 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai ...... अपीलाथी/Appellant बनाम Vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria, Andheri ( East), Mumbai 400 059 ..... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaace-2175-M C.O. No.57/Mum/2019 Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai – 400 059 ...... Cross Objector बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ...... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai.

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT-DR
Section 115

…y and not on dividend. Section 115-O of the Act is not a procedural section but a charging section, it deals with undistributed profits and not accumulated profits. Referring to the decision rendered in the case of CIT vs. Elphistone Spg. &Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd. 40 ITR 142 (SC), the ld. DR submits that the additional tax levied under the section is on the distributable profits of the company. 34. On constitutional validity of section 115-O of the Act, the ld. DR placed reliance on the decision in the case of Tea Estate India (P.) ltd. vs. CIT 103 ITR 785 (SC) and submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court in the aforesa…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 8009/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसुं.6997/म ुं/2019(धन.व. 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai ...... अपीलाथी/Appellant बनाम Vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria, Andheri ( East), Mumbai 400 059 ..... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaace-2175-M C.O. No.57/Mum/2019 Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai – 400 059 ...... Cross Objector बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ...... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai.

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT-DR
Section 115

…y and not on dividend. Section 115-O of the Act is not a procedural section but a charging section, it deals with undistributed profits and not accumulated profits. Referring to the decision rendered in the case of CIT vs. Elphistone Spg. &Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd. 40 ITR 142 (SC), the ld. DR submits that the additional tax levied under the section is on the distributable profits of the company. 34. On constitutional validity of section 115-O of the Act, the ld. DR placed reliance on the decision in the case of Tea Estate India (P.) ltd. vs. CIT 103 ITR 785 (SC) and submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court in the aforesa…

JAIN IRRIGATION SYSTEMS LTD,,JALGAON vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, JALGAON

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 227/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr.Dipak P.Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.227/Pun/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Jain Plastic Park, N.H No.6, Vs Income Tax, Circle-2, Jalgaon – 425001. . Jalgaon. Pan: Aaacj 7163 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Percy Pardiwala; Shri Prashant Maheshwari & Ms.Monicamulchandani – Ar’S Revenue By Shri B Koteswara Rao – Dr Date Of Hearing 23/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22/12/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’Sappeal For Assessment Year 2013-14Is Directed Against Thedeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cricle-2, Jalgaon’S Assessment Order Dated 29.10.2017, Framed In Furtherance To The Dispute Resolution Panel-3, Mumbai (Drp)’S Direction Dated 25.09.2017 Passed In Objection No.78, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) R,.W.S 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

Section 143(3)Section 92D

…the given facts since the assessee had not charged any price at all for these corporate guarantees. And that such a course of action would amount to improvement in the provisions of the Act not sustainable in law as per Elphinstone Spinning Mills Company case 40 ITR 142 (SC). Learned Senior Counsel’s last plea is that without prejudice to all the foregoing arguments, the impugned corporate guarantee adjustment ITA No.227/PUN/2018 for A.Y. 2013-14(A) Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd., @2% deserves to be reduced to 0.5% only in light of CIT Vs. Everest Kanto Cylinders Ltd., [2015] 328 ITR 57 (Bom). 9. The Revenue has…

THE SECUNDERBAD CLUB ,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD -10(2), HYDERABAD

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 166/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri L.Jeevanlal, DR
Section 143(3)

…the following decisions: 1) CIT(Central) Vs. Harprasad & Co. P. Ltd. [1975] 991TR 118 (SC) 2) CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food (P.) Ltd. [20081304 ITR 308 (SC) 3) CIT v. J.H. Gotla [1985] 156 ITR 323 (SC) 4) CIT v. Elphinstone Spg. and Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd. [1960] 40 ITR 142; [1960] 3 SCR 953 (SC) In all the above mentioned decisions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that loss is only negative income and that the definition of income u/s. 2(24) of the Act includes "loss" also. In other words, it assumes the same character and quality as does the positive income. In view of this, if a particular income is exempt from…

AGRO TECH FOODS LIMITED., SEC'BAD,SECUNDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 775/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Dec 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Sri Dhanesh BafnaFor Respondent: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 264Section 92C

…A of the Act. The support of the argument was with reference to the earlier decisions which have held that the order could not be erroneous when he follows his superior orders. The Supreme Court decision in CIT v. Elphinstone Spg. & Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd. [1960] 40 ITR 142 was referred to for the proposition that fiction created by the section should not be carried beyond the purpose for which it was intended which was reiterated by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Moon Mills Ltd. [1966] 59 ITR 574, in CIT v. Ajax Products Ltd. [1965] 55 ITR 741 , in CIT v. Amarchand N. Shroff [1963] 48 ITR 59 . It was submitted that the…

MR. NIKHIL SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1248/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishimr. Nikhil Sawhney Acit, 17 – Sunder Nagar, Central Circle, Vs. New Delhi – 110 003. Noida. Pan: Aaups0222Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143

…losses also, so that, in one sense 'profits and gains' represent 'plus income' whereas losses represent 'minus income'*. In * CIT v. Karamchand Premchand Ltd. [1960] 40 ITR 106; [1960] 3 SCR 727 (SC) and CIT v. Elphinstone Spg. and Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd. [1960] 40 ITR 142; [1960] 3 SCR 953 (SC). other words, loss is negative profit. Both positive and negative profits are of a revenue character. Both must enter into computation, wherever it becomes material, in the same mode of the taxable income of the assessee. Although section 6 classifies income under six heads, the main charging provision is section 3 which lev…

M/S. UNITED SPIRITS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

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

ITA 489/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No.489/Bang/2017 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. United Spirits Limited, Ub Towers, No.24, Vittal Mallya Road, Bangalore-560 001 ….Appellant Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 7(1)(1), Bangalore. ……Respondent. Assessee By: Shri Perci Pardiwala, Senior Advocate & Shri Ketan Ved, C.A. Revenue By: Shri Bipin C.N, Jcit (D.R) Date Of Hearing : 06.03.2020. Date Of Pronouncement : 29.05.2020. O R D E R Per Shri B.R. Baskaran, A.M. : The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Challenging The Assessment Order Dated 31-01-2017 Passed By The Assessing Officer For Assessment Year 2012-13 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Perci Pardiwala, Senior Advocate and Shri Ketan Ved, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Bipin C.N, JCIT (D.R)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(10)Section 144C(13)Section 14ASection 154Section 36(1)(iii)Section 92C

…statute must be construed according to the plain language used by the Legislature and the more so if the plain language supports the subject against the taxing Department.” 12 IT(TP)A No.489/Bang/2017 . The Hon'ble Supreme court has upheld above decision in 40 ITR 142 by further observing that the Courts cannot be invited to supply the omission made by the Legislature. Accordingly, he submitted that sec. 92(1) should be interpreted strictly and Courts should not supplement the language of section. The Ld A.R submitted that Sec.92(1) states that any “income” arising from an international transaction shall be com…

RELIGARE CAPITAL MARKETS LTD.,NOIDA vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 1763/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvoateFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…llowing cases: (a) CIT vs. T.V. Sundaram Iyyengar [1975] 101 ITR 764 (SC) – If the language of the statute is clear and unambiguous, the Court cannot discard the plain meaning, even if it leads to an injustice. (b) CIT vs. Elphinstone Spg. &Wvg. Mills Co Ltd. 40 ITR 142 (SC) and CIT vs. Motors & General Stores Ltd. 66 ITR 692 (SC) – No tax can be imposed on the subject without words in the Act clearly showing an intention to lay a burden upon him. In other words, the subject cannot be taxed unless he comes within the letter of the law, and not merely the spirit of the law. (c) KeshavjiRavji& Co. vs. CIT [1990] 49…

M/S RELIGARE CAPITAL MARKETS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 1881/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: PendingITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvoateFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…llowing cases: (a) CIT vs. T.V. Sundaram Iyyengar [1975] 101 ITR 764 (SC) – If the language of the statute is clear and unambiguous, the Court cannot discard the plain meaning, even if it leads to an injustice. (b) CIT vs. Elphinstone Spg. &Wvg. Mills Co Ltd. 40 ITR 142 (SC) and CIT vs. Motors & General Stores Ltd. 66 ITR 692 (SC) – No tax can be imposed on the subject without words in the Act clearly showing an intention to lay a burden upon him. In other words, the subject cannot be taxed unless he comes within the letter of the law, and not merely the spirit of the law. (c) KeshavjiRavji& Co. vs. CIT [1990] 49…

PHILIPS INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-IV, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1142/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Mar 2019AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 1142/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Philips India Limited..........……………………………………....………………..…………………….….Appellant Earlier Known As Philips Electronics India Limited 7 No. Justice Chandra Madhab Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Aabcp 9487 A] Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - Iv, Kolkata…….............…....................…...Respondent Appearances By: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate & Shri Navneet Misra, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Cit D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 10Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 27Th, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy :-

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32

…A of the Act. The support of the argument was with reference to the earlier decisions which have held that the order could not be erroneous when he follows his superior orders. The Supreme Court decision in CIT v. Elphinstone Spg. & Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd. [1960] 40 ITR 142 was referred to for the proposition that fiction created by the section should not be carried beyond the purpose for which it was intended which was reiterated by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Moon Mills Ltd. [1966] 59 ITR 574, in CIT v. Ajax Products Ltd. [1965] 55 ITR 741 , in CIT v. Amarchand N. Shroff [1963] 48 ITR 59 . It was submitted that the…

M/S GIE JEWELS,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 794/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Dec 2017AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Neena Jeph (J.CIT)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 208Section 234Section 234B

…eyond that unless it is clearly and expressly provided. Therefore, it is not permissible to impose the liability of supposition of law. In support of his contention he has relied upon the following decisions:- (i) CIT vs. Elphinstone Sps & Wvg. Mills Co Ltd 40 ITR 142 (SC) (ii) Balkrishnan Memon (MK) vs. ACED 83 ITR 162 (SC) (iii) CIT vs. Amarchand N Shroof 48 ITR 59 (SC) (iv) Executor & Trustees of Sir Cawasji Jehangir Vs. CIT 35 ITR 537 (Bom) To sum up his arguments, the ld. AR has submitted that the provisions of section 115JC are introduced in the statute with the purpose to tax the other persons in…

M/S MEDI DRIPS CARRIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-12(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 471/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.471/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-2009) M/S Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd Vs. Ito, Ward-12(4), 8Th Floor, R.No.818, P-7, Chowringhee Square, 4, Synagogue Street, Aayakar Bhawan, Kolkata-700001 Kolkata-700069 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcm 8139 Q .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashish Rustogi, Aca Revenue By : Shri Saurav Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 01/03/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 08/03/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To Assessment Year 2008-09, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Cit(A)-Xii, Kolkata, In Appeal No.490/Xii/12(4)/10-11, Dated 11.11.2013, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 28.12.2010. 2. The Said Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Time Barred By Four Days. The Assessee Filed The Petition For Condonation Of Delay & Expressed The Reasons Of Delay. After Verification Of Petition We Found That There Was A Reasonable Cause For Four Days Delay In Filing The Appeal. Even Ld Dr Did Not Object To Condone The Delay. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Hearing. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Company Filed Its Return Of Income On 30.09.2008. Subsequently The 2 M/S Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd. Assessee Company Filed Its Revised Return Of Income On 9-12-2008

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Rustogi, ACAFor Respondent: Shri Saurav Kumar, JCIT
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.471/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-2009) M/s Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd Vs. ITO, Ward-12(4), 8th Floor, R.No.818, P-7, Chowringhee Square, 4, Synagogue Street, Aayakar Bhawan, Kolkata-700001 Kolkata-700069 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AABCM 8139 Q .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ashish Rustogi, ACA Revenue by : Shri Saurav Kumar, JCIT सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 01/03/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement 08/03/2017 आदेश…

M/S. MS SHOES EAST LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 116/DEL/2014[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2016AY 1994-95

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjay Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 275Section 27I(1)(C)Section 69Section 80HSection 80I

…2006 of the Gujarat High Court in Tax Appeal No. 1904 of 2005) set aside; CIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food (P) Ltd. (2008) 218 CTR (SC) 359 : (2008) 11 DTR (SC) 185 : (2008) 304 ITR 308 (SC) followed; CIT vs. Elphinstone Spinning & Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. (1960) 40 ITR 142 (SC) distinguished. Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food (P) Ltd., 304 ITR 308 (SC) has observed as under : Explanation 4 to s. 271(1)(c) intended to levy the penalty not only in a case where after addition of concealed income, a loss returned, after assessment becomes positive income but also in a case where addition…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. MOSER BAER INDIA LIMITED

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/1458/2006HC Delhi17 Sept 2007
Section 10BSection 260Section 271(1)(c)

…High Court that for levy of penalty there had to be a positive income. The position that existed in law earlier has been explained. The relevant observations of the Supreme Court in this regard reads as under (ITR,p.105): “Applying Elphinstone case [1960] 40 ITR 142 (SC) to the present case, it can be held: a. Total income" can only connote a positive figure and prior to the 2003 Amendment, Explanation 4(a) to Section 271(1)(c) required the computation to be done with reference to "total income". b.The computation in the case of a loss making assesses, as in the present case cannot be made. 2007:DHC…

M/S.VIRTUAL SOFT SYSTEMS LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-I

C.A. No.-007115-007115 - 2005Supreme Court06 Feb 2007
For Respondent: Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-I
Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…the charging Section 271(1)(c)(iii)? ii. What is meant by the term "total income" in Explanation 4(a)? Both these questions are fully answered by this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay City v. Elphinstone Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd., 40 ITR 142 (SC). Under the Finance Act, 1951, a provision was enacted to discourage the declaration of dividend disproportionate to the declared income. It provided that where the "total income" exceeded the dividend by a certain amount, a rebate would be allowed, and where the dividend exceeded the "total income" by such amount, "an additional…

Showing 1–20 of 22 · Page 1 of 2