CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd.

358 ITR 295Supreme Court of India2013#49 most cited

What is CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. authority for?

When an income or expenditure is revenue neutral across different assessment years, where any benefit derived is offset by a corresponding liability or reversal, no additional tax liability arises, particularly concerning income recognition under the mercantile system of accounting.

935

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. · Excel Industries Ltd SC 2013 · Revenue Neutral principle · mercantile system of accounting · right to receive income · taxability of revenue neutral transactions · Section 147 Income Tax Act · reassessment · Section 148 Income Tax Act · profits and gains of business or profession · no tax liability revenue neutral · income accrual reversal

Also reported as

38 Taxmann.com 100219 Taxmann 379

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 147Section 14ASection 132Section 153ASection 1961Section 148
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

right to receivemercantile system of accountingrule of consistencysection 35profits and gains of business or professionrevenue expenditureliable to taxsection 80isection 37(1)section 28section 32capital expenditure

Judgments citing CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd.

Deloitte Haskins & Sells, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle- 61(1), New Delhi

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2867/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Aug 2022AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250(6)Section 37(1)Section 40

…CIT v. G. Basu & Co. (182 ITR 472) (Cal) -Bombay High Court judgement in CIT v. V. G. Bhuta (203 ITR 249) (Bom) -Madras High Court judgement in CIT v. V.N.V. Devara Julu Chetty & Co. (18 ITR 357) (Mad) -Supreme Court judgement in CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. (358 ITR 295) (SC) -Bombay High Court judgement in CIT v. Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe (190 ITR 198) (Bom) Page 6 of 11 Deloitte Haskins & Sells vs. ACIT (C.1) At the time of hearing before us, representatives of both sides, the Ld. Counsel for assessee and Ld. Sr. DR for Revenue were in agreement; that on merits, the issue regarding the assessee’…

Sanbtosh Hospital P.Ltd, Ghaziabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi

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

ITA 282/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. T.S Kapoor & Sh. Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year: 2014-15 Santosh Hospital P. Ltd. Acit No.1, Santosh Nagar, Vs Central Circle -6 Pratap Vihar, Ghaziabad New Delhi Pan No.Aabcs2244J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139Section 143Section 153Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPLLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. T.S KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 Santosh Hospital P. Ltd. ACIT No.1, Santosh Nagar, Vs Central Circle -6 Pratap Vihar, Ghaziabad New Delhi PAN No.AABCS2244J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. S. K. Gupta, CA Respondent by Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR Date of hearing: 30/06/2022 Date of Pronouncement: 03/08/2022 ORDER PER C.M.GARG JM: This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-24, New Delhi dated 14.10.2019 pertaining to A.Y. 2014-15.…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax 2(1), Raipur (Cg) vs. Shri Shri Arun Singhania, Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the Revenue being bereft of any merit is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 313/BIL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur28 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No. 313/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Shri Arun Singhania Gokul, Geeta Nagar, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Akhps6503R

For Appellant: Shri Amit M Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36

…nghania have been allowed. Our aforesaid conviction as regards adopting of a consistent approach by the department is supported by the following judicial pronouncements: (i) Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT, 193 ITR 321 (SC) (ii) CIT Vs. Excel Industries Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 295 (SC) (iii) BSNL Vs. Union of India & Others (2006) 282 ITR 273(SC) (iv) PCIT Vs. Quest Investment Advisor (P) Ltd., ITA 280 of 2016 dated 28.06.2018 (Bom. HC) Accordingly, we find no infirmity in the view taken by the CIT(Appeals), who had rightly observed that as the interest bearing loans had been raised by the assessee for the purpose of his…

Mylan Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T. 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee and Revenue is partly allowed and the cross-objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1467/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2022AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Ms. Hirali Desai/AmolFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kalra

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, AM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1467/Mum/2012 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Mylan Pharmaceuticals Pvt. ACIT-6(3) बिधम/ Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. (Formerly known as Mylan Mumbai. India Pvt. Ltd. and earlier to that as Merck Development Centre Pvt. Ltd.) One India Bulls Centre, Tower 2B, 7th Floor, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, (W), Mumbai-400013. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1283/Mum/2012 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) ACIT, Cir-6(3) बिधम/ Mylan Pharmaceuticals Room No.522, 5th…

ACIT 6(3), Mumbai vs. Mylan Developemtnt Centre P.Ltd ( Formelry Merck Development Centre P.Ltd ), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee and Revenue is partly allowed and the cross-objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1283/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2022AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Ms. Hirali Desai/AmolFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kalra

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, AM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1467/Mum/2012 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Mylan Pharmaceuticals Pvt. ACIT-6(3) बिधम/ Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. (Formerly known as Mylan Mumbai. India Pvt. Ltd. and earlier to that as Merck Development Centre Pvt. Ltd.) One India Bulls Centre, Tower 2B, 7th Floor, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, (W), Mumbai-400013. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1283/Mum/2012 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) ACIT, Cir-6(3) बिधम/ Mylan Pharmaceuticals Room No.522, 5th…

ACIT, Circle-10(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Philips Carbon Black Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2628/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 2628/Kol/2019 Assessment Year : 2013-14 ACIT, Circle-10(2), Kolkata Vs. M/s Philips Carbon Black Ltd. (PAN: AABCP 5762 E) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 11.05.2022 Date of Pronouncement 05.07.2022 For the Appellant Shri Ashim Choudhury, Advocate Shri Kinjal Buria, ACA For the Respondent Shri Manish Kanojia, CITDR Shri Tushar Dhawal Singh, CITDR ORDER Per Shri Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the revenue against the order of the Commissioner…

Indian Academy of Highway Engineers, Noida vs. CIT(E), Lucknow

ITA 645/DEL/2021[----]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2022

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 645 /Del/2021 (Assessment Year : ……..)

Section 10

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI) (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE SH. G.S.PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 645 /Del/2021 (Assessment Year : ……..) Indian Academy of Highway Vs. CIT(Exemptions) Engineers Lukhnow, A-5, Industrial Area, Sec-62, Noida PAN : AABAI2196K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Sh. Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. Sh. Vipin Garg, Adv. Revenue by Ms. Deepshikha Sharma, CIT(DR) Date of hearing: 10.06.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 30.06.2022 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: The appeal has been preferred by the assessee…

ACIT, Circle- 3, Nagpur vs. M/S Solaries Holding Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 509/NAG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2008-2009 The Acit Vs. M/S. Solaries Holdings Ltd. Circle-3, Thapar House, 124, Nagpur Janpath, New Delhi Panno.:Aahcs 59040 B Appellant Respondent Revenue By :Shripiyushkolhe (Cit-Dr) Assessee By: Shri K.P. Dewani (Adv.) Date Of Hearing: 18/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/06/2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Department Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit-Ii, Nagpur Dated 01/09/2014 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y. 2008-09 Wherein The Department Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani (Adv.)For Respondent: ShriPiyushKolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 133A(1)(ia)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…income within the four corners of the law. Scores of judicial pronouncements have held that if no actual transaction has happened and the entries are mere book entries, the same cannot be brought to tax. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Excell Industries 358 ITR 295 (SC) was deciding a case where the assessee, without importing any goods in real, in order to keep intact its 11 ACIT, Circle-3, Nagpur vs M/s. Solaries Holdings Ltd. right on duty free entitlements, passed certain entries in its books and department taxed the amount. However, appellate courts have held that no actual transaction has happened and…

DCIT, Circle 1(1) Exemption, New Delhi vs. India Habitate Centre, New Delhi

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5740/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandra[Assessment Year: 2016-17]

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2Section 2(15)Section 80G(5)(vi)

…ition to be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not be at all appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year." This principle has again been noticed and followed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd., 358 ITR 295 (SC). 7.3 In the High Court Judgment delivered on 12/10/2011 also the principle of consistency was applied to IHC. There is no fundamental change in the nature of activities oflHCfor the period prior to AY 2008- 09 and subsequent years. Accordingly based on the aforesaid High Court Judgments and the fact that he assessing officers have consisten…

M/S. Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Mangaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle -1, Mangaluru

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 948/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…ITA No.947&948 /Bang/2019, ITA 1962/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.2086 to 2089/Bang/2018 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra, Udupi & Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Manguluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Rajathadri DC Office complex ACIT (Exemptions) Endpoint, Manipal Circle-1 Vs. Udupi 576 104 Mangaluru PAN NO :AAATU1950D ASSESSEE RESPONDENT AssessmentYear:2016-17 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Deputy Commissioner of Udupi 576 104 Income-tax (Exemptions) Vs…

M/S. Udupi Nirmithi Kedra, Udupi vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle - 1, Mangaluru

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 947/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…ITA No.947&948 /Bang/2019, ITA 1962/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.2086 to 2089/Bang/2018 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra, Udupi & Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Manguluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Rajathadri DC Office complex ACIT (Exemptions) Endpoint, Manipal Circle-1 Vs. Udupi 576 104 Mangaluru PAN NO :AAATU1950D ASSESSEE RESPONDENT AssessmentYear:2016-17 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Deputy Commissioner of Udupi 576 104 Income-tax (Exemptions) Vs…

Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Mangaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemptions), Circle-1, Mangaluru

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 2089/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…ITA No.947&948 /Bang/2019, ITA 1962/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.2086 to 2089/Bang/2018 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra, Udupi & Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Manguluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Rajathadri DC Office complex ACIT (Exemptions) Endpoint, Manipal Circle-1 Vs. Udupi 576 104 Mangaluru PAN NO :AAATU1950D ASSESSEE RESPONDENT AssessmentYear:2016-17 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Deputy Commissioner of Udupi 576 104 Income-tax (Exemptions) Vs…

Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Mangaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Mangaluru

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 2088/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…ITA No.947&948 /Bang/2019, ITA 1962/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.2086 to 2089/Bang/2018 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra, Udupi & Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Manguluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Rajathadri DC Office complex ACIT (Exemptions) Endpoint, Manipal Circle-1 Vs. Udupi 576 104 Mangaluru PAN NO :AAATU1950D ASSESSEE RESPONDENT AssessmentYear:2016-17 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Deputy Commissioner of Udupi 576 104 Income-tax (Exemptions) Vs…

Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Mangaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Mangaluru

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 2087/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…ITA No.947&948 /Bang/2019, ITA 1962/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.2086 to 2089/Bang/2018 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra, Udupi & Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Manguluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Rajathadri DC Office complex ACIT (Exemptions) Endpoint, Manipal Circle-1 Vs. Udupi 576 104 Mangaluru PAN NO :AAATU1950D ASSESSEE RESPONDENT AssessmentYear:2016-17 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Deputy Commissioner of Udupi 576 104 Income-tax (Exemptions) Vs…

Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Mangaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Mangaluru

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 2086/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…ITA No.947&948 /Bang/2019, ITA 1962/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.2086 to 2089/Bang/2018 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra, Udupi & Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Manguluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Rajathadri DC Office complex ACIT (Exemptions) Endpoint, Manipal Circle-1 Vs. Udupi 576 104 Mangaluru PAN NO :AAATU1950D ASSESSEE RESPONDENT AssessmentYear:2016-17 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Deputy Commissioner of Udupi 576 104 Income-tax (Exemptions) Vs…

M/S. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra, Udupi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemptions) Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 1962/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…ITA No.947&948 /Bang/2019, ITA 1962/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.2086 to 2089/Bang/2018 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra, Udupi & Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Manguluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Rajathadri DC Office complex ACIT (Exemptions) Endpoint, Manipal Circle-1 Vs. Udupi 576 104 Mangaluru PAN NO :AAATU1950D ASSESSEE RESPONDENT AssessmentYear:2016-17 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Deputy Commissioner of Udupi 576 104 Income-tax (Exemptions) Vs…

Wel Intertrade Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1460/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Before Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year : 2011-12 Wel Intertrade Private Vs. Acit, Circle-27(2), Limited, New Delhi. 5,E Local Shopping Centre Masjid Moth, Greater Kailash Part 2, New Delhi – 110 048 Pan Aaacw10187F (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Agarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…efore, the principle of consistency applies as in the preceding and subsequent assessment years the income from Business Centre has been assessed as Business income. Reliance is placed on the judgement of the Apex Court in CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 295 (SC), CIT vs. J.K. Charitable Trust 308 ITR 161 (SC) and CIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. 416 ITR 613 (SC). 6.8.3 The contention of the assessee is that it has not let out any property or part thereof, instead it has been allowing the spaces for commercial use by commercially exploiting the property for the purpose of business. Therefore the imp…

ITO 5(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Malabar Hills Club Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3592/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 5(2)(3) V. M/S. Malabar Hill Club Limited Room No. 566, 5Th Floor B.G. Kher Marg, Malabar Hill Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400006 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacw3868M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Niraj D. Sheth & Shri Vishal Asrani Department By : Shri T. Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Niraj D. Sheth and Shri Vishal AsraniFor Respondent: Shri T. Shankar
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER Income Tax Officer – 5(2)(3) v. M/s. Malabar Hill Club Limited Room No. 566, 5th Floor B.G. Kher Marg, Malabar Hill Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400006 Mumbai - 400020 PAN: AAACW3868M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Niraj D. Sheth and Shri Vishal Asrani Department by : Shri T. Shankar Date of Hearing : 08.02.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 22.04.2022 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. This appeal is filed by the revenue against order o…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -7 vs. Power Links Transmission Ltd

In uncertainty and displacement of settled expectations

ITA/87/2022HC Delhi18 Apr 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA

Section 260ASection 36(1)(iii)

…it has been held that a departure from a finding during the past years would result in a contradictory finding. (See: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sridev Enterprises (1991) 192 ITR 165). In fact, in Commissioner of Income Tax vs Excel Industries Ltd (2014) 13 SCC 457, the Court had observed that it was not appropriate to allow reconsideration of an issue for a subsequent assessment year if the same “fundamental aspect” permeates in different assessment years. 7. The Supreme Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. [2019] 107 taxmann.com 375 (SC) has emphasized the i…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -7 vs. Power Links Transmission Ltd

In uncertainty and displacement of settled expectations

ITA - 90 / 2022HC Delhi18 Apr 2022
Section 260ASection 36(1)(iii)

…it has been held that a departure from a finding during the past years would result in a contradictory finding. (See: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sridev Enterprises (1991) 192 ITR 165). In fact, in Commissioner of Income Tax vs Excel Industries Ltd (2014) 13 SCC 457, the Court had observed that it was not appropriate to allow reconsideration of an issue for a subsequent assessment year if the same “fundamental aspect” permeates in different assessment years. 7. The Supreme Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. [2019] 107 taxmann.com 375 (SC) has emphasized the i…