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 367,154 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.

ACIT(E), Circle-1(1), New Delhi vs. Delhi Bureau of Text Books, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 240/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 240/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 241/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 242/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Acit(E), Vs Delhi Bureau Of Text Books, Circle-1(1), 25/2, Institutional Area, Pankha New Delhi Road, D-Block, Janakpuri, New Delhi-110058 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatd4122G Assessee By : Sh. Amit Kumar Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Jagdish Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.11.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.12.2020

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…ined in Parashuram Pottery Works Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer (1977) 106 ITR 1 (SC), Radhasoami Satsang Saomi Bagh vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (1992) 193 ITR 321 (SC), Hoystead vs. Commissioner of Taxation (1926) AC 155 (PC), CIT vs. Excel Industries (2013) 262 CTR 261 (SC) the Hon'ble High Court held that the Revenue in the absence of any ITA Nos. 240 to 242/Del/2018 9 Delhi Bureau of Text Books change of circumstances cannot take a different view from that taken in the earlier years. Now turning to the case on hand it is not the case of Revenue that any change in the circumstances had taken place. We, theref…

M/S. Veerabhadrappa Sangappa & Company, Sandur vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1054/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Dec 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013–14

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT
Section 145Section 28Section 5

…ion. A.5. In support of his contentions he placed reliance upon following decisions: • ED.Sasoon & CO Ltd vs CIT reported in (1954) 26 ITR 27 (SC) • CIT vs Balbir Singh Maini reported in (2017) 398 ITR 531 (SC) • CIT vs Excel industries Ltd reported in (2013) 358 ITR 295 • Prakashan leasing Ltd vs DCIT reported in (2012) 208 Taxmann 464 (Kar) A.6. Ld.Counsel also relied on CBDT Notification No.9949 (F.NO.132/7/95-TPL)/SO 69(E), Dated 25/01/1996, superseded by Notification No.32/2015 (F.N.134/48/2010-TPL)/S0 892 (E), Dated 31/03/2015, regarding AS-I, relating to disclosure of accounting policies. A.7. Ld.Counsel…

Param Dairy Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 14, New Delhi

In the result, for both the years, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3994/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Shri RohitFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 234BSection 40A(3)Section 69C

…I.T.As. No.3993 & 3994/DEL/2019 subsequent years (AY 2015-16 onwards). In this context, the Ld. AR relied upon the principle of consistency laid down in Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT: [1992] 193 ITR 321 (SC) and reiterated in CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd.: [2013] 358 ITR 295 (SC) and other decisions. 20. As regards the findings/ allegations of the Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A) that purchases were bogus since; (i) assessee failed to produce the farmers (except two); and (ii) farmers produced could not substantiate the capacity to have sold the quantity of milk recorded in the assessee’s books, Mr. Vohra submitted…

Param Dairy Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 14, New Delhi

In the result, for both the years, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3993/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Shri RohitFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 234BSection 40A(3)Section 69C

…I.T.As. No.3993 & 3994/DEL/2019 subsequent years (AY 2015-16 onwards). In this context, the Ld. AR relied upon the principle of consistency laid down in Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT: [1992] 193 ITR 321 (SC) and reiterated in CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd.: [2013] 358 ITR 295 (SC) and other decisions. 20. As regards the findings/ allegations of the Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A) that purchases were bogus since; (i) assessee failed to produce the farmers (except two); and (ii) farmers produced could not substantiate the capacity to have sold the quantity of milk recorded in the assessee’s books, Mr. Vohra submitted…

M/S. Kei Industries Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, Ground No.3

ITA 528/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Satyan Sethi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Parul Singh, Sr. D.R

…). Thus, the Ld. CIT(A) was bound to follow rule of consistency and should not have taken a contrary view in A.Y. 2012- 2013. We rely upon the Judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsung 193 ITR 321 (SC) and Excel Industries Ltd., 358 ITR 295 (SC). The assessee has also followed Companies Rules, 2009 because it has given option to the assessee to do so. The decision of Mumbai Bench in the case of DDIT v. Staubil A.G. India Branch Office (supra), relied upon by the Ld. CIT(A) is on identical facts. Therefore, there is no infirmity in the Order of the Ld. CIT(A) in following the same. I…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. K.E.I. Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, Ground No.3

ITA 1433/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Satyan Sethi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Parul Singh, Sr. D.R

…). Thus, the Ld. CIT(A) was bound to follow rule of consistency and should not have taken a contrary view in A.Y. 2012- 2013. We rely upon the Judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsung 193 ITR 321 (SC) and Excel Industries Ltd., 358 ITR 295 (SC). The assessee has also followed Companies Rules, 2009 because it has given option to the assessee to do so. The decision of Mumbai Bench in the case of DDIT v. Staubil A.G. India Branch Office (supra), relied upon by the Ld. CIT(A) is on identical facts. Therefore, there is no infirmity in the Order of the Ld. CIT(A) in following the same. I…

Sudhir S Mehta, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 7147/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Mr Mitali Gopani, AR
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 234ASection 57Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C. N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA. No. 7147/MUM/2018 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shri Sudhir S. Mehta, v. DCIT-CC-4(1) 32, Madhuli Apartment, Air India Bldg, Nariman Dr. A. B. Road, Worli, Point, Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 018 PAN No. ABAPM4496R (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee by : Mr Mitali Gopani, AR Mr. P. Daniel, DR Department by Date of Hearing : 21.10.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 13.11.2020 O R D E R PER C. N. PRASAD, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appea…

Mehta Equities Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT -4 (2) (2), Mumbai

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

ITA 5850/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2020AY 2012-13
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (JM) I.T.A. No. 5850/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2012-13) Mehta Equities Ltd. DCIT-4(2)(2) Vs. 612, 6th Floor Aayakar Bhavan Arun Chambers M.K. Road Near AC Market Churchgate Tardeo Main Road Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 043. PAN : AAACR4143C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Rajeev Khandelwal Department by Shri Akhtar Ansari Date of Hearing 14.09.2020 Date of Pronouncement 14.10.2020 O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :- The appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Learned Commissioner of…

M/S. Dharampal Satyapal Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1380/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Sh. Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Dharampal Satyapal Ltd. Acit, 1711, S. P. Mukherjee Marg, Vs Central Circle – 29, Delhi-110006 New Delhi Pan No. Aaacd0132H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. R. S. Singhavi, Ca Sh. Satyajeet Goel, Ca Respondent By Sh. Sanjay I. Bara, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28/08/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/10/2020 Order

Section 115JSection 143Section 144CSection 14ASection 14A(2)Section 36Section 43(5)(d)Section 80I

…value of opening and closing stock would be a revenue neutral exercise and no fruitful purpose would be served in undertaking such exercise. In this connection, reference may be made to decision of Supreme Court in case of CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. [2013] 358 ITR 295 where in it is held that Income-Tax department to not to indulge in fruitless litigation where no loss of revenue is involved. In view of factual and legal position clarified above, impugned addition is not sustainable on facts and under law particularly when assessing officer himself has accepted valuation of closing stock AY 2013-14. 18. Learne…

DCIT, Circle- 8(1), New Delhi vs. Ebix Software India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5274/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Nidhi Srivastava, CIT, DR
Section 10ASection 115J

…ore, there was no justification for the AO to hold that such undertakings were not eligible for the deduction in the A.Y. 2013-14. Referring to various decisions including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd., 358 ITR 295 and in the case of CIT vs. JK Charitable Trust, 308 ITR 161, it was argued that following the rule of consistency alone the AO should not have rejected the claim of deduction in respect of Noida and Nagpur units. 21. It was argued that all the four undertakings, i.e., Noida, Nagpur, Coimbatore and Uppal were eligible for the deduction having bee…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dlf Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4793/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Prashant Maharishi & Sh. K. N. Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dlf Limited Jcit Dlf Centre, (9Th Floor) Vs Range-10 Sansad Marg, 404, C. R. Building New Delhi-110001 New Delhi Pan No.Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit Vs. Dlf Ltd. Circle –7 (1) Sansad Marg New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 80I

…reshold of 30% limit of the total project cost estimated then to delete the addition of ₹ 1,02,84,93,509/-. While deciding this issue AO may however keep in mind the principle laid down by honorable Supreme court in case of CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. [2013] 358 ITR 295, if AO is satisfied that issue is revenue neutral the matter may be set at rest. Therefore, ground no.8 of the appeal is allowed with above direction.” 87. Thus, following the earlier year precedence, we decide the issue in favour of the assessee and revenue’s appeal is consequently, dismissed.” In absence of any contrary decision pointed out bef…

Dlf Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

ITA 4187/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Prashant Maharishi & Sh. K. N. Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dlf Limited Jcit Dlf Centre, (9Th Floor) Vs Range-10 Sansad Marg, 404, C. R. Building New Delhi-110001 New Delhi Pan No.Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit Vs. Dlf Ltd. Circle –7 (1) Sansad Marg New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 80I

…reshold of 30% limit of the total project cost estimated then to delete the addition of ₹ 1,02,84,93,509/-. While deciding this issue AO may however keep in mind the principle laid down by honorable Supreme court in case of CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. [2013] 358 ITR 295, if AO is satisfied that issue is revenue neutral the matter may be set at rest. Therefore, ground no.8 of the appeal is allowed with above direction.” 87. Thus, following the earlier year precedence, we decide the issue in favour of the assessee and revenue’s appeal is consequently, dismissed.” In absence of any contrary decision pointed out bef…

Steria (India) Ltd., Noida vs. Addl. CIT, Spl. Range- 8, New Delhi

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

ITA 5745/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…n law, as compared to the earlier and subsequent years, the position accepted/ determined by the Department needs to be followed even on the principle of consistency. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd.: 358 ITR 295 (SC) - Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT: 193 ITR 321 (SC) - DIT (E) v. Apparel Export Promotion Council: 244 ITR 734 - (Del) CIT v. Neo Polypack (P) Ltd: 245 ITR 492 (Del.) - CIT v. Dalmia Promoters Developers (P) Ltd: 281 ITR 346 - (Del.) DIT v. Escorts Cardiac Diseases Hospital: 300 ITR 75 (Del.) - CIT v. P. KhrishnaWarrier: 208 ITR 823 (Ker) - CIT v…

M/S Steria Ndia Ltd., Noida vs. Addl CIT, New Delhi

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

ITA 741/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…n law, as compared to the earlier and subsequent years, the position accepted/ determined by the Department needs to be followed even on the principle of consistency. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd.: 358 ITR 295 (SC) - Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT: 193 ITR 321 (SC) - DIT (E) v. Apparel Export Promotion Council: 244 ITR 734 - (Del) CIT v. Neo Polypack (P) Ltd: 245 ITR 492 (Del.) - CIT v. Dalmia Promoters Developers (P) Ltd: 281 ITR 346 - (Del.) DIT v. Escorts Cardiac Diseases Hospital: 300 ITR 75 (Del.) - CIT v. P. KhrishnaWarrier: 208 ITR 823 (Ker) - CIT v…

Steria India Ltd., Noida vs. Addl.CIT, Speciaql Range-8, New Delhi

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

ITA 3992/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…n law, as compared to the earlier and subsequent years, the position accepted/ determined by the Department needs to be followed even on the principle of consistency. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd.: 358 ITR 295 (SC) - Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT: 193 ITR 321 (SC) - DIT (E) v. Apparel Export Promotion Council: 244 ITR 734 - (Del) CIT v. Neo Polypack (P) Ltd: 245 ITR 492 (Del.) - CIT v. Dalmia Promoters Developers (P) Ltd: 281 ITR 346 - (Del.) DIT v. Escorts Cardiac Diseases Hospital: 300 ITR 75 (Del.) - CIT v. P. KhrishnaWarrier: 208 ITR 823 (Ker) - CIT v…

DCIT-1(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Hdfc Sales Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result Ground No.1 of appeal is dismissed

ITA 852/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumardcit- 1(1)(2) M/S Hdfc Sales Pvt. Ltd. 579, Aayakar Bhavan, 169, Raman House, H.T. Parekh M.K. Road, Vs. Marg, Backbay Reclamation, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400020. Pan: Aabch4278H Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Nikhil Chaudhary (Cit-Dr) Assessee By : Shri Niraj Sheth (Ar)

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Sheth (AR)For Respondent: Shri Nikhil Chaudhary (CIT-DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 37Section 40

…Engineering and Industries Ltd. [2011] Taxman 94 (Delhi HC), " Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. Vs CIT 245 ITR 428 (SC), " Rotrock Controls India (P.) Ltd. Vs. CIT (314 ITR 62 (SC), " CIT Vs Hindtron Services Ltd. (328 ITR 263 (SC) and " CIT Vs Excel Industries Ltd. (358 ITR 295 (SC). 7. We have considered the rival submission of both the parties and carefully gone through the orders of lower authorities. We have also deliberated on various case laws cited by ld. Representative of the parties. The AO disallowed the provision of expenses by taking view that the provisions made by assessee are adhoc provisions made at the…

M/S Jewels Emporium, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed whereas appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 303/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2020AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)

…essee has not claimed any benefit by increase in valuation of stock in subsequent year. Hence, the addition becomes revenue neutral. Consequently, respectfully following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Excel Industries Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 295, the addition being tax neutral and the assessee having not derived any benefit, the addition is deleted" Also in case of Paras Mal JaM vs ACIT (1TA No.916/JP/ 12 dated 17-10-2015 has held that: "Assuming an addition on account of closing stock is somehow made, the same is to be allowed to the assessee in the next year as opening stock which wil…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs. M/S Jewels Emporium, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed whereas appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 234/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2020AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)

…essee has not claimed any benefit by increase in valuation of stock in subsequent year. Hence, the addition becomes revenue neutral. Consequently, respectfully following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Excel Industries Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 295, the addition being tax neutral and the assessee having not derived any benefit, the addition is deleted" Also in case of Paras Mal JaM vs ACIT (1TA No.916/JP/ 12 dated 17-10-2015 has held that: "Assuming an addition on account of closing stock is somehow made, the same is to be allowed to the assessee in the next year as opening stock which wil…

Harsh Estates Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT - CC- 4(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6957/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Dharmesh Shah (AR)For Respondent: Dr. P. Daniel Special Counsel
Section 14ASection 234ASection 254(1)

…tified in holding that the income derived by the Radhasoami Satsang was entitled to exemption under Sections 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act of 1961." The aforesaid dictum of law was reiterated recently by the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd. : 358 ITR 295. "It appears from the record that in several assessment years, the Revenue accepted the order of the Tribunal in favour of the Assessee and did not pursue the matter any further but in respect of some assessment years the matter was taken up in appeal before the Bombay High Court but without any success. That being so, the Revenue cannot be allow…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sindhu Trade Links Ltd., New Delhi

The appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2652/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblesindhu Trade Links Ltd. Vs Addl. Cit(A) 129, Transport Centre, New Range-8 Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Dcit Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Central Circle-21 129, Transport Centre, New New Delhi Rohtak Road (Appellant) Punjabi Bagh New Delhi Aaacs0447A (Respondent) Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Dcit 129, Transport Centre, New Circle-8(1) Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv Respondent By Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.07.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 11.09.2020 Orders Dated 21/2/2014 For Assessment Year 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively Passed By Cit(A)’S-Xi, New Delhi.

Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 69

…1 ITA No. 2428, 2652 & 2429/Del/2014 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Vs Addl. CIT(A) 129, Transport Centre, New Range-8 Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (RESPONDENT) AAACS0447A (APPELLANT) DCIT Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Central Circle-21 129, Transport Centre, New New Delhi Rohtak Road (APPELLANT) Punjabi Bagh New Delhi AAACS0447A (RESPONDENT) Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. DCIT 129, Transport Centre, New Circle-8(1) Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (…