How many judgments cite CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd.?

935 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. (358 ITR 295), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 37(1), Section 147, Section 14A, Section 132, Section 153A.

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 147 Section 14A Section 132 Section 153A Section 1961 Section 148

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

right to receive mercantile system of accounting rule of consistency section 35 profits and gains of business or profession revenue expenditure liable to tax section 80i section 37(1)section 28 section 32 capital expenditure

Judgments citing CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd.

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

The appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2429/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

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 (…

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

The appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2428/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 69

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

ITA 4436/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Prashant Maharishi & Sh. K. Narashimha Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dlf Limited Addl. Cit Dlf Centre, (9Th Floor) Vs Range-10 Sansad Marg, 404, C. R. Building New Delhi-110001 New Delhi Pan No.Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit Vs. Dlf Ltd. Circle –7 (1) Sansad Marg New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 23(1)

…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.” 18. Therefore, respectfully following the decision…

Dlf Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 4061/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Section 14ASection 23(1)

Carlyle India Advisors Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 14 (1)(2), Mumbai

In the result this appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7515/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Sept 2020AY 2015-16

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…sence of any change in the facts the principle of consistency has to be followed finds support from the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of (i). Radhsoami Satsang Vs. CIT (1992) 193 ITR 321 (SC) and (ii). CIT Vs. Excel Industries ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 295 (SC) and the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Quest Investments Advisory Pvt. ltd. (ITA No. 280 of 2016) (Bom). Apart therefrom, we find that Crisil Risk and Infrastructure Solutions Ltd. was in itself accepted by the TPO as a comparable in the case of certain assesses which were providing investment advisor…

Vodafone India Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 8, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3327/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shriramlal Negi, Jm Vodafone India Ltd., Principal Commissioner Of Income Peninsula Corporate Park, Tax-8, Vs. Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Room No. 611, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Parel, Mumbai-400013. Road, Mumbai, Maharastra, Pin- 400020. Pan: Aaach 5332 B Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 263Section 32(1)Section 35ASection 37

…n is to be allowed thereon as depreciation u/s. 32 of the Act over a period of time, or whether the same has to spread over the years as per section 35ABB of the Act. Examined in light of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Excel Industries Ltd. (358 ITR 295) too, the invocation of section 263 of the Act ought to be struck down since this merely results in academic litigation. 25. With regard to argument of the ld. DR relying on the decision of Hon’be Bombay High Court that the AO has not examined the issue of applicability of the provisions of Section 35ABB of the Act, we observe that the AO had a s…

Ejaz Akhtar, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6639/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Aug 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Ejaz Akhtar Vs. Ito, F-34, 2Nd Floor, Ward – 22(2), 6/4, Joga Bai Extn., Okhla New Delhi New Delhi – 110 025 Pan No. Afopa 3121 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rajiv Saxena, Advocate Respondent By Shri Rakesh Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 29/07/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 05/08/2020 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 11.09.2015 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)- 10, [Cit(A)] New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under: Ejaz Akhtar Vs. Ito 3. Assessee Is An Individual Stated To Be Engaged In The Business Of Trading In Steel Tubes & Pipes In The Name Of “Nav Bharat Steel Tubes”. Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For A.Y. 2011-12 On 28.09.2011 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.3,27,553/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & Thereafter, The Assessment Was Framed U/S 143(3) Vide Order Dated 31.12.2013 & The Total Taxable Income Was Determined At Rs.61,79,610/-. Aggrieved By The Order Of Ao, Assessee Carried The Matter Before The Cit(A) Who Vide Order Dated 11.09.2015 In Appeal No.287/13-14 Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee. Aggrieved By The Order Of Cit(A), Assessee Is Now Before Us & Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…in the bank. He submitted that Revenue cannot be allowed to flip flop on an issue and be allowed to take a contrary view and for this proposition, he placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd [2013] 358 ITR 295 (SC). He therefore, submitted that following the principle of consistency only the addition of peak deposits be made. He pointed to the working of the peak deposits which is placed in the paper book. 7. Learned DR on the other hand pointed to the findings of CIT(A) and submitted that considering the totality of the facts the AO was fully justifi…

M/S. Rajasthan State Mines & Minerals Ltd., Jaipur vs. Addl.CIT, Range-6, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 213/JPR/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Aug 2020AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri K.C. Gupta (JCIT)

…11-12. He has further submitted that even the AO in the set aside proceedings of assessment year 1995-96 allowed the claim of prior period expenses. He has also relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd., 358 ITR 295 (SC) and submitted that when the rate of tax remained the same in the year under consideration and in the preceding 6 ITA No. 213/JP/2020. Rajasthan State Mines & Minerals Ltd., Jaipur. year, then there is no revenue effect. He has also relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble 386 ITR 267 (Raj.). 4. On the other hand, the ld. D/R has submitted th…

Hi-Tech Estates & Promoters Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. Principal CIT-1, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 391/CTK/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack20 Jul 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri B.D.Ojha , ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT, DR

Section 143(3)Section 263

…yed by assessee has not been viewed adversely by courts so long as the method is regularly and P a g e 34 | 39 ITA No.3 91/CTK/201 8 Assessm ent Y ear : 20 13- 14 consistently employed as held by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Excel Industries Ltd (2013) 358 ITR 295. 42. Before parting of with adjudication of this issue it would be relevant to take note of the amendment brought in statute with retrospective effect w.e.f. 1.4.2017 by way of insertion of Section 43CB for the purpose of computation of income from construction and service contract. The relevant provision of Section 43CB of the Act reads as follo…

Carlyle India Advisors P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 14(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 7277/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh(Virtual Hearing In Vc No.Ii) M/S. Carlyle India Advisors P. Ltd. D C I T - 14(1)(2) 1St Floor, Quadrant-A, The Il&Fs Room No. 470, 4Th Floor Financial Centre Plot-C Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 22, G-Block, Bkc, Bandra Mumbai 400020 (E)Mumbai 400051 Pan – Aabcc4522F Appellant Respondent Appellant By: Shri Mukesh Butani-Ar Respondent By: Shri Anand Mohan-Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.07.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.07.2020 O R D E R Per Pawan Singh, Jm This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 30.10.2018 Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter "The Act") Passed In Pursuance Of The Direction Of Drp Dated 10.09.2018 For A.Y. 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: -

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Butani-ARFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan-CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "K" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Pawan Singh, Judicial Member and Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member (Virtual hearing in VC No.II) M/s. Carlyle India Advisors P. Ltd. D C I T - 14(1)(2) 1st Floor, Quadrant-A, The IL&FS Room No. 470, 4th Floor Financial Centre Plot-C Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 22, G-Block, BKC, Bandra Mumbai 400020 (E)Mumbai 400051 PAN – AABCC4522F Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Mukesh Butani-AR Respondent by: Shri Anand Mohan-CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 08.07.2020 Date of Pronouncement: 15.07.2020 O R D E R PER PAWAN SINGH, JM This appeal by the assess…

DCIT-1(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Kumar Properties Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 605/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 605/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dcit 1(2)(1), M/S Kumar Properties Pvt. R. No. 535, Ltd. बिधम/ Aayakarbhavan, 21, Woundboy Road, M. K. Road, Hazarimalsomani Marg, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Opp-Mumbai Gymkhana, Fort, Mubmai-400 001 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan No. Aabck8464E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : &

For Appellant: ShriDrop Singh MeenaFor Respondent: ShriRajanVora/Shri

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 145(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 605/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) DCIT 1(2)(1), M/s Kumar Properties Pvt. R. No. 535, Ltd. बिधम/ AayakarBhavan, 21, Woundboy Road, M. K. Road, HazarimalSomani Marg, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Opp-Mumbai Gymkhana, Fort, Mubmai-400 001 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN No. AABCK8464E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & C.O. No. 14/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/s Kumar Properties Pvt. DCIT 1(2)(1), Ltd. R. No. 535, बिधम/ 21, Woundboy Road,…

Gaursons Sportswood Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-11(3), New Delhi

Accordingly direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of Rs.17,32,78,878/-. The appeal is accordingly allowed

ITA 9017/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vice– & Shri N. K. Billaiyaassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Gaursons Sportswood Income Tax Officer, Private Limited, Vs. Ward : 11 (3), D–25, Vivek Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi – 110 095. Pan : Aaacx0984F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishnan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh [CIT]–DR

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI ] [THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING] BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, VICE–PRESIDENT AND SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s Gaursons Sportswood Income Tax Officer, Private Limited, Vs. Ward : 11 (3), D–25, Vivek Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi – 110 095. PAN : AAACX0984F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri S. Krishnan, Adv.; Department by : Ms. Sunita Singh [CIT]–DR; 23/06/2020 Date of Hearing Date of pronouncement 30/06/2020 O R D E R PER N. K. BILLAIYA, A. M. : This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Asea Brown Boveri Ltd

ITA/420/2012HC Karnataka24 Jun 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.NAGAPRASANNA

Section 143(1)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 260Section 260ASection 40Section 43BSection 80H

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA I.T.A. NO.420 OF 2012 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX LTU, JSS TOWERS, BSK III STAGE BANGALORE. 2. THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX RANGE-8(1), MUMBAI. 3. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX LTU, JSS TOWERS, BSK III STAGE, BANGALORE. ... APPELLANTS (By Sri K V ARAVIND ADV.,) AND: M/S. ASEA BROWN BOVERI LTD., 22A, SHAH INDUSTRIAL ESTATE OFF VEERA DESAI ROAD ANDHERI, MUMBAI…

M/S Fastway Transmission (P) Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

ITA 140/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Apr 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT (DR) on 4.12.2019

Section 250(6)

…w, 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 Fastway Transmission (P) Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

ITA 139/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Apr 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT (DR) on 4.12.2019

Section 250(6)

M/S Fastway Transmission (P) Ltd., Chandigarh vs. ACIT, Chandigarh

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

ITA 547/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Apr 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT (DR) on 4.12.2019

Section 250(6)

Afcons Infrastructure Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr.CIT 9, Mumbai

The appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 3159/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.3159/Mum/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2014-15) Afcons Infrastructure Limited Pr. Cit-9 16, Afcons House Room No.214, Aaykar Bhavan बनाम/ 2Nd Floor, M.K. Road Shah Industrial Estate Vs. Veera Desai Road, Andheri West Mumbai. Mumbai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaca-9067-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : S/Shri J.D. Mistry & Nitesh Joshi-Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Anadi Varma-Ld.Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 05/09/2019 & 19/12/2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 17/03/2020 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: S/Shri J.D. Mistry & Nitesh Joshi-Ld. ArsFor Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma-Ld.CIT-DR

Section 263

…rders shall continue to be governed by the erstwhile Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.The assessee placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in Shoorji Ballabhdas & Co. (46 ITR 144) and also on the decision of Excel Industries Ltd. (358 ITR 295) for the submissions that tax was to be levied only on real income. The interest on awards was hypothetical income and assessee did not have any right over such income and therefore, no real income accrued to the assessee on grant of arbitration award in favor of the assessee. The income would be offered to tax only when the matter reaches finali…

The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Arvind Smartspaces Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and CO filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1507/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Mar 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1507/Ahd/2018 With C.O. 79/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 D.C.I.T, Arvind Smartspaces Ltd., Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. 24, Government Sevant’S Society, Ahmedabad. Nr. Municpal Market, Off. C.G. Road, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan: Aahca5001H

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi, A.R

Section 14ASection 199Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’A’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT And SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1507/AHD/2018 With C.O. 79/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 D.C.I.T, Arvind Smartspaces Ltd., Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. 24, Government Sevant’s Society, Ahmedabad. Nr. Municpal Market, Off. C.G. Road, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009. PAN: AAHCA5001H (Applicant) (Respondent) : Revenue by Shri D.P Gupta, CIT. D.R Assessee by : Shri Vartik Chokshi, A.R सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 10/01/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /D…

Essar Shipping Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT-5(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, ground No.10 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7371/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm Essar Shipping Ltd., Vs. A.C.I.T.-5(1)(2), 11, K.K. Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai. Mumbai-400034. Pan/Gir No.Aacce 3707 D (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 115VSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…y, the interest income received by the 32 Essar Shiping Ltd. Vs ACIT assessee should be taxed as business income. In order to support the said contention reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries (358 ITR 295). Accordingly, we do not find any justification in the order of AO for treating interest income as “income from other sources”. 44. In view of the above discussion, we direct the AO to treat interest income as “income from business” and to allow interest expenditure u/s.36(1)(iii) of the I.T. Act. We direct accordingly. 45. The last grievan…

Universal Medicare P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 3(2), Mumbai

In the result this ground of appeal is allowed for

ITA 4418/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanuniversal Medicare Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, Central Cricle-3(2), Capsulation Premises, Mumbai (Erstwhile Asst. Sion Trombay Road, Deonar, Vs. Commissioner Of Income Mumbai-400088. Tax, Cc-20, Mumbai), Room No. 1923, 19Th Floor, Pan: Aaacu0717B Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Appellant Respondent C.O. No. 268/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year 2012-13) Dcit, Central Cricle-3(2), Universal Medicare Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai (Erstwhile Asst. Capsulation Premises, Commissioner Of Income Vs. Sion Trombay Road, Deonar, Tax, Cc-20, Mumbai), Room Mumbai-400088. No. 1923, 19Th Floor, Air Pan: Aaacu0717B India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri J.D. Mistry Senior Advocate With Shri Manish Shah Advocate Respondent By : Mrs. S. Padmaja (Cit-Dr)

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry Senior Advocate with Shri Manish Shah AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. S. Padmaja (CIT-DR)

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 254(1)Section 50B

…ion, the ld. AR of the assessee also relied on the following decisions:  CIT vs. Mrs. Hemal Raju Shete (239 Taxmann 176 (Bom. HC).  CIT vs. Balbir Singh Maini (398 ITR 531(SC).  E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (AIR 1954 SC 470).  CIT vs. Excel Industries (358 ITR 295 SC).  Morvi Industries Ltd. vs. CIT (82 ITR 835 SC).  Late Shri Gordhandas S. Garodia (Through LR’s vs. DCIT (ITA No. 5097/Mum/2015.  CIT vs. M/s Nagarjuna Fertiliser (ITTA No. 100 of 2003 (AP High Court.  DCIT vs. Rohan Projects (113 taxmann.com 339 Bom.) 23. The assessee has placed following documents on record;  (i) LTCG working statement…