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.

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 295)

The ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Bodal Chemical Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 597/AHD/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R

Section 32Section 43(1)

…efore, we are of the view that claim of the assessee should be allowed on the basis of principles of consistency. In this regard we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT versus Excel Industries Ltd reported in 358 ITR 295 wherein it was held as under: “28. Secondly, as noted by the Tribunal, a consistent view has been taken in favour of the assessee on the questions raised, starting with the assessment year 1992-93, that the benefits under the advance licences or under the duty entitlement pass book do not represent the real income of the assessee. Consequently, t…

M/S. Bodal Chemical Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Add.CIT., Range-1, Ahmedabad

ITA 42/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R

Section 32Section 43(1)

…efore, we are of the view that claim of the assessee should be allowed on the basis of principles of consistency. In this regard we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT versus Excel Industries Ltd reported in 358 ITR 295 wherein it was held as under: “28. Secondly, as noted by the Tribunal, a consistent view has been taken in favour of the assessee on the questions raised, starting with the assessment year 1992-93, that the benefits under the advance licences or under the duty entitlement pass book do not represent the real income of the assessee. Consequently, t…

Bodal Chemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Addl.CIT., Range-1, Ahmedabad

ITA 1439/AHD/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R

Section 32Section 43(1)

…efore, we are of the view that claim of the assessee should be allowed on the basis of principles of consistency. In this regard we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT versus Excel Industries Ltd reported in 358 ITR 295 wherein it was held as under: “28. Secondly, as noted by the Tribunal, a consistent view has been taken in favour of the assessee on the questions raised, starting with the assessment year 1992-93, that the benefits under the advance licences or under the duty entitlement pass book do not represent the real income of the assessee. Consequently, t…

Odisha State Beverages Corporation Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 130/CTK/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack04 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Before Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicialmember Member & Laxmi Prasad Sahulaxmi Prasad Sahulaxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year :2014-2015 Odisha State Beverage Corpn Odisha State Beverage Corpn Vs. Acit, Acit, Corporate Corporate Circle Circle-1(2), Ltd., 2Nd Floor, Fortune Towers, Floor, Fortune Towers, Chandrasekharpur, Chandrasekharpur, Chandrasekharpur Chandrasekharpur Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No.Aaaco 6507 H Aaaco 6507 H (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Ar Revenue By : Shris.M.Keshkamat, Cit, Dr , Dr Date Of Hearing : 20 /08/ 2019 Date Of Pronouncement :04/10/ 201 / 2019 O R D E R Per C.M.Garg,Jm C.M.Garg,Jm This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A),1, Bhubaneswar Cit(A),1, Bhubaneswar Dated 8.1.2018 For The Assessment Year For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised Are As Under: Grounds Of Appeal Raised Are As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, ARFor Respondent: ShriS.M.Keshkamat, CIT, DR

Section 22Section 40

…crystalisation occurred during the year, no disallowance is to be made. Ld AR also submitted that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the following decisions: i) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. Excel Industries Ltd ,358 ITR 295 (SC) ii) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs Dinesh Kumar Goel, 331 ITR 10(Del) iii) Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs Nagri Mills Co. Ltd, 33 ITR 681 (Bom) iv) Delhi High Court in CIT vs M/s. Vishnu Industrial Gases Pvt Ltd in ITA No.229/1988 P a g e 12 | 15 Assessment Year : 2014-2015 v) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs Shri Ram Pistons &…

ACIT-17(2), Mumbai vs. M/S.Meghji Thoban & Co., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1994/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 1994/Mum/2018 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2013-14) The Asst. Commissioner Of Meghji Thoban & Co. Income Tax, Circle 17(2), 2Nd Floor, Ntc House Nm Marg, बनाम/ Room No. 134A, Aayakar Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 038 Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-20 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaffm8121M अपीलार्थी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Suman Kumar, Dr प्रत्यर्थी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri Fenil Bhatt & Ms. Sonalkshi Jhunjhunwala, Ars’ ुिवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 10.07.2019 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 04.10.2019

For Appellant: Shri Suman Kumar, DRFor Respondent: Shri Fenil Bhatt &

Section 143(3)Section 44A

…un Exports Pvt. Ltd. and the balance amount of Rs.57,83,006/- was deleted as assessee has not received any payment and the income has not accrued. For this, the CIT(A) followed the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Excel Industries Ltd., 358 ITR 295 (SC) and observed in para 3.2 (viii) and (ix) as under: - 6 | P a g e ITA No.1994 /Mum/2018 “viii) The stand of the respondents is that if the right to receive a sum by the assessee does not accrue till such time the claims are accepted by the Government, it would amount to giving a complete go-by the rule of law and would tantamount to allegin…

M/S. Trust Marketing, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 742/JPR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Oct 2019AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain (CA)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)

Section 27(1)(a)Section 41(1)

…ly on the basis of refund claimed by the assessee more so when the said claim was denied by the Customs Department as well as Appellate Authority. He has referred to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd. and Another, 358 ITR 295 (SC) and submitted that the income cannot be assessed to tax on hypothetical basis but only when the income is accrued or assessee gets the right to receive the income, the same is assessable to tax. 4. On the other hand, the ld. D/R has submitted that the assessee itself has computed the net profit by considering the said amount as not a liabi…

M/S.Sree Narayanan Dharma Paripalana Yuvajana Samithy, Thrissur vs. The ITO ( Exemptions), Kochi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 436/COCH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 11Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 263

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE S/SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, AM & GEORGE GEORGE K., JM I.T.A. Nos. 435 & 436/Coch/2019 Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2015-16 Sree Narayana Dharma Vs. The Income Tax Officer Paripalana Yuvajana Samithy, (Exemption), kochi. Azhikode Post, Kodungallur, Thrissur-680 666. [PAN: AABAS 2078J] (Assessee -Appellant) (Revenue-Respondent) Assessee by None (Argument Notes filed) Revenue by Shri Shantam Bose, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 24/09/2019 Date of pronouncement 25/09/2019 O R D E R Per CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: These two appeal by the assessee are di…

M/S.Sree Narayanan Dharma Paripalana Yuvajana Samithy, Thrissur vs. The ITO ( Exemptions), Kochi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 435/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 11Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 263

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE S/SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, AM & GEORGE GEORGE K., JM I.T.A. Nos. 435 & 436/Coch/2019 Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2015-16 Sree Narayana Dharma Vs. The Income Tax Officer Paripalana Yuvajana Samithy, (Exemption), kochi. Azhikode Post, Kodungallur, Thrissur-680 666. [PAN: AABAS 2078J] (Assessee -Appellant) (Revenue-Respondent) Assessee by None (Argument Notes filed) Revenue by Shri Shantam Bose, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 24/09/2019 Date of pronouncement 25/09/2019 O R D E R Per CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: These two appeal by the assessee are di…

M/S. Surendranagar District Co-Op. Milk Producers Union Ltd., Surendranagar vs. The DCIT, Surendranagr Circle, Surendranagar

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 262/RJT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot20 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.262-263/Rjt/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) बनाम/ M/S.Surendranagar District D.C.I.T, Co-Op. Milk Producers Surendranagar Circle, Vs. Union Ltd. Surendranagar. Wadhwan City, Surendranagar "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaas8375B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.R ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Jitender Kumar, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 17/09/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 20/09/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Ahmedabad [Ld. Cit(A) In Short] Of Even Dated 12/01/2018, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 26/03/2015 Relevant To Assessment Years (A.Ys) 20012-13 & 2013-14. Ita Nos.262-263/Rjt/2018 A.Y.S 2012-13 To 2013-14 First, We Take Up Ita No. 262/Rjt/2018 For A.Y. 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Kumar, DR

Section 194JSection 36Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 43BSection 48Section 80P(2)(b)Section 80P(2)(d)

…refore we are of the view that claim of the assessee should be allowed on the basis of principles of consistency. In this regard we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT versus Excel Industries Ltd reported in 358 ITR 295 wherein it was held as under: 28. Secondly, as noted by the Tribunal, a consistent view has been taken in favour of the assessee on the questions raised, starting with the assessment year 1992-93, that the benefits under the advance licences or under the duty entitlement pass book do not represent the real income of the assessee. Consequently, t…

The ITO, Ward-2(2), Jamnagar vs. Smt. Shitalben Saurabh Vora, Jamnagar

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 651/RJT/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot20 Sept 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.262-263/Rjt/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) बनाम/ M/S.Surendranagar District D.C.I.T, Co-Op. Milk Producers Surendranagar Circle, Vs. Union Ltd. Surendranagar. Wadhwan City, Surendranagar "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaas8375B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.R ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Jitender Kumar, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 17/09/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 20/09/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Ahmedabad [Ld. Cit(A) In Short] Of Even Dated 12/01/2018, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 26/03/2015 Relevant To Assessment Years (A.Ys) 20012-13 & 2013-14. Ita Nos.262-263/Rjt/2018 A.Y.S 2012-13 To 2013-14 First, We Take Up Ita No. 262/Rjt/2018 For A.Y. 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Kumar, DR

Section 194JSection 36Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 43BSection 48Section 80P(2)(b)Section 80P(2)(d)

…refore we are of the view that claim of the assessee should be allowed on the basis of principles of consistency. In this regard we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT versus Excel Industries Ltd reported in 358 ITR 295 wherein it was held as under: 28. Secondly, as noted by the Tribunal, a consistent view has been taken in favour of the assessee on the questions raised, starting with the assessment year 1992-93, that the benefits under the advance licences or under the duty entitlement pass book do not represent the real income of the assessee. Consequently, t…

M/S Rites Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1125/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Rites Ltd. Dcit Rites Bhawan Plot No.-1 Vs Circle – 15 (1) Sector-29, Gurgaon-122001 New Delhi Haryana Pan No.Aaacr0830Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

…income had accrued or received. (ii) That in the absence of any legal or statutory right or acceptance of claim by other party, there is no case of any such income in the light of principle laid down by Supreme Court in the case of Excel Industries Ltd.(2013)358 ITR 295. (iii) That alleged claims is of contingent nature and there is no justification for any addition on factual or legal basis. (iv) That in any case, if such addition is considered as income, deduction should be allowed in respect of counter claim by other party. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a company engaged in the bu…

M/S Ginni Filaments Ltd., Mathura vs. A.C.I.T., Range-3, Mathura

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

ITA 173/AGR/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra02 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 234BSection 44A

…ed that the above said amount received by the assessee 21 was used by the assessee for reducing the block of asset in the assessment year 2010-11. 17.3 The ld. AR relies on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd., 358 ITR 295 (SC) and also in the matter of CIT vs. Goyal MG Gases (P) Ltd. 303 ITR 159 (Delhi). 18. On the other hand, the ld. DR has submitted that the assessee was following mercantile method of accounting and hence, the rent is required to be shown on accrual basis in the books of account. 19. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record…

Addl CIT -- 10(1), Mumbai vs. Agc Network Ltd ( Formerly Known As Avaya Global Connect Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5157/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

…itimate tax dues and there is only a timing difference. Therefore, no disallowance should be made in the impugned assessment year. In support of such contention, he relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v/s Excel Industries Ltd., [2013] 358 ITR 295 (SC). 12. We have considered rival submissions and perused the material on record. We have also applied our mind to the decisions relied upon by the parties. There is no dispute between the parties with regard to 14 AGC Network Ltd. (Formerly known as Avaya Global Connect Ltd.) the basic facts relating to the disputed addition. The core issue,…

Morarjee Realities Ltd. (Now Known As Peninsula Land Ltd.), Mumbai vs. Dy.C.I.T. Circle 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee as well as of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 2135/MUM/2009[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2019AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Gosain: A.Y : 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri Sushilkumar Poddar

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 45

…riod and hence, the same be allowed in the year under consideration. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT v. Nagri Mills, 33 ITR 681 (Bom.) and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT v. Excel Industries Limited (2013) 358 ITR 295 (SC) for the proposition that if the tax rate has remained same for present and subsequent assessment year, then an expense which was otherwise allowable, ought to be allowed as the entire issue regarding year of tax becomes academic in absence of tax effect. 18. It was submitted that in view of the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal i…

The ACIT, Ernakulam vs. M/S.Nitta Gelatine India Ltd, Cochin

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

ITA 301/COCH/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 253(1)Section 32Section 40A(3)

…e basis of amounts credited to Profit & Loss A/c. However, the Assessing Officer denied the claim of the assessee as there cannot be two opinions on the judgment of the Supreme court in the case of CIT Vs Excel Industries Ltd and Mafatlal Industries P Ltd (358 ITR 295), but in the assessee's case the claim cannot be entertained mainly because the assessee’s case pertains to the financial year 2009-10 relevant to the assessment year 2010-11. But, according to the Assessing Officer, the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd and Mafatlal Industries Ltd (358 ITR 295) came onl…

Landbase India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 is allowed

ITA 4999/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)

…, it does not mean that it is open for the assessing officer to come to a different conclusion on similar facts and circumstances. He relied up on Radhasoami Satsang vs. CIT: 193 ITR 321 CIT vs. Neo Polypack (P) Ltd: 245 ITR 492, CIT vs Excel Industries Ltd.: 358 ITR 295 (SC) , DIT (E) V. Apparel Export Promotion Council: 244 ITR 734 (Del), CIT V. Dalmial Promoters Developers (P) Ltd: 281 ITR 346 (Del.), DIT(E) v. Escorts Cardiac Diseases Hospital: 300 ITR 75 (Del.) CIT V. Girish. Mohan Ganeriwala: 260 ITR 417 (P&H) CIT vs. Sewa Bharti Haryana Pradesh: 325 ITR 599 (P&H) CIT vs. P. Khrishna Warrier: 208 ITR 823 (K…

Landbase India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 is allowed

ITA 4998/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)

…, it does not mean that it is open for the assessing officer to come to a different conclusion on similar facts and circumstances. He relied up on Radhasoami Satsang vs. CIT: 193 ITR 321 CIT vs. Neo Polypack (P) Ltd: 245 ITR 492, CIT vs Excel Industries Ltd.: 358 ITR 295 (SC) , DIT (E) V. Apparel Export Promotion Council: 244 ITR 734 (Del), CIT V. Dalmial Promoters Developers (P) Ltd: 281 ITR 346 (Del.), DIT(E) v. Escorts Cardiac Diseases Hospital: 300 ITR 75 (Del.) CIT V. Girish. Mohan Ganeriwala: 260 ITR 417 (P&H) CIT vs. Sewa Bharti Haryana Pradesh: 325 ITR 599 (P&H) CIT vs. P. Khrishna Warrier: 208 ITR 823 (K…

Landbase India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 is allowed

ITA 4560/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)

…, it does not mean that it is open for the assessing officer to come to a different conclusion on similar facts and circumstances. He relied up on Radhasoami Satsang vs. CIT: 193 ITR 321 CIT vs. Neo Polypack (P) Ltd: 245 ITR 492, CIT vs Excel Industries Ltd.: 358 ITR 295 (SC) , DIT (E) V. Apparel Export Promotion Council: 244 ITR 734 (Del), CIT V. Dalmial Promoters Developers (P) Ltd: 281 ITR 346 (Del.), DIT(E) v. Escorts Cardiac Diseases Hospital: 300 ITR 75 (Del.) CIT V. Girish. Mohan Ganeriwala: 260 ITR 417 (P&H) CIT vs. Sewa Bharti Haryana Pradesh: 325 ITR 599 (P&H) CIT vs. P. Khrishna Warrier: 208 ITR 823 (K…

M/S Landbase India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 is allowed

ITA 138/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)

…, it does not mean that it is open for the assessing officer to come to a different conclusion on similar facts and circumstances. He relied up on Radhasoami Satsang vs. CIT: 193 ITR 321 CIT vs. Neo Polypack (P) Ltd: 245 ITR 492, CIT vs Excel Industries Ltd.: 358 ITR 295 (SC) , DIT (E) V. Apparel Export Promotion Council: 244 ITR 734 (Del), CIT V. Dalmial Promoters Developers (P) Ltd: 281 ITR 346 (Del.), DIT(E) v. Escorts Cardiac Diseases Hospital: 300 ITR 75 (Del.) CIT V. Girish. Mohan Ganeriwala: 260 ITR 417 (P&H) CIT vs. Sewa Bharti Haryana Pradesh: 325 ITR 599 (P&H) CIT vs. P. Khrishna Warrier: 208 ITR 823 (K…

Landbase India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 is allowed

ITA 653/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)

…, it does not mean that it is open for the assessing officer to come to a different conclusion on similar facts and circumstances. He relied up on Radhasoami Satsang vs. CIT: 193 ITR 321 CIT vs. Neo Polypack (P) Ltd: 245 ITR 492, CIT vs Excel Industries Ltd.: 358 ITR 295 (SC) , DIT (E) V. Apparel Export Promotion Council: 244 ITR 734 (Del), CIT V. Dalmial Promoters Developers (P) Ltd: 281 ITR 346 (Del.), DIT(E) v. Escorts Cardiac Diseases Hospital: 300 ITR 75 (Del.) CIT V. Girish. Mohan Ganeriwala: 260 ITR 417 (P&H) CIT vs. Sewa Bharti Haryana Pradesh: 325 ITR 599 (P&H) CIT vs. P. Khrishna Warrier: 208 ITR 823 (K…

CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd.

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

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd.

The ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Bodal Chemical Ltd., Ahmedabad

M/S. Bodal Chemical Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Add.CIT., Range-1, Ahmedabad

Bodal Chemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Addl.CIT., Range-1, Ahmedabad

Odisha State Beverages Corporation Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar

ACIT-17(2), Mumbai vs. M/S.Meghji Thoban & Co., Mumbai

M/S. Trust Marketing, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Jaipur

M/S.Sree Narayanan Dharma Paripalana Yuvajana Samithy, Thrissur vs. The ITO ( Exemptions), Kochi

M/S.Sree Narayanan Dharma Paripalana Yuvajana Samithy, Thrissur vs. The ITO ( Exemptions), Kochi

M/S. Surendranagar District Co-Op. Milk Producers Union Ltd., Surendranagar vs. The DCIT, Surendranagr Circle, Surendranagar

The ITO, Ward-2(2), Jamnagar vs. Smt. Shitalben Saurabh Vora, Jamnagar

M/S Rites Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

M/S Ginni Filaments Ltd., Mathura vs. A.C.I.T., Range-3, Mathura

Addl CIT -- 10(1), Mumbai vs. Agc Network Ltd ( Formerly Known As Avaya Global Connect Ltd), Mumbai

Morarjee Realities Ltd. (Now Known As Peninsula Land Ltd.), Mumbai vs. Dy.C.I.T. Circle 6(3), Mumbai

The ACIT, Ernakulam vs. M/S.Nitta Gelatine India Ltd, Cochin

Landbase India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Landbase India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Landbase India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

M/S Landbase India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Landbase India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi