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 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 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.

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

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

ITA 4849/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…

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

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

ITA 303/COCH/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

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…

Kec International Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

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

ITA 929/CHNY/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Aug 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy

For Appellant: Mr.Vana Srinivasa Rao, JCITFor Respondent: 17.07.2019

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 148

…us in the present appeal. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that the duty :- 3 -: drawback is taxable in the year of actual receipt in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd., reported in 358 ITR 295, as regards, the addition of provision of contingent liability of Rs.15,60,00,000/- to the book profit for the purpose of tax liability u/s.115JB, it is submitted that it is not a provision for unascertained liability since the liability is ascertained and the liability is credited and the provisions had been made. It is submitted that the detai…

The DCIT (Exemptions), Cir.-1., Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Gujarat Council of Vocational Training, Gandhinagar

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

ITA 2692/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royअपील सं./Ita No.2692/Ahd/2017 &"नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2013-2014

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, &For Respondent: Shri Surendra Kumar, CIT.D.R

Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 143(3)Section 2

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’B’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND Ms MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER अपील सं./ITA No.2692/Ahd/2017 &"नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2013-2014 D.C.I.T,(Exemption) M/s Gujarat Council of Vocational Circle 1, Training, Vs. Ahmedabad. Block No.8, 3rd Floor, Dr.Jivraj Mehta Bhavan, Gandhinagar-382010. PAN: AABTG3148A (Applicant) (Responent) Revenue by : Shri Surendra Kumar, CIT.D.R, Assessee by : Shri Tushar Hemani, & Shri P.B. Parmar, A.Rs सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 12/07/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Prono…

Manish Gandhi, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-61(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 5097/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri V. Raja Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR

Section 69A

…uestion was advance which is now tendered for taxation in AY 2020-21. Therefore, it is merely a tax neutral exercise. It is not a case as if the Revenue has been deprived of any tax. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries Limited 358 ITR 295 held that “there is no dispute that in subsequent accounting year, the assessee did made import and did derive benefits under the advance license and duties entitlement pass book and paid the tax, therefore, it is not as if the Revenue has been deprived of any tax. We are told that rate of 7 ITA.No.5097/Del./2018 tax remain the same in presen…

DCIT- 14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Commtel Networks Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3427/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negidcit-14(1)(2) Vs. M/S Commtel Networks Room No.470, 4Th Floor Private Limited Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road 23, White Castle, 34-35 Mumbai-400 020 Union Park, Chembur Mumbai-400 071 Pan/Gir No.Aaacc8966G Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 211

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT-14(1)(2) Vs. M/s Commtel Networks Room No.470, 4th Floor Private Limited Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road 23, White Castle, 34-35 Mumbai-400 020 Union Park, Chembur Mumbai-400 071 PAN/GIR No.AAACC8966G Appellant) .. Respondent) Assessee by V.G.Ginde & Kumar Kale Revenue by Abi Rama Kartikeyan Date of Hearing 23/07/2019 Date of Pronouncement 23/07/2019 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश PER G.MANJUNATHA (A.M): This appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order of the…

Shree Chalthan Vibhag Khand Udyog Sahakari Mandli Ltd., Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Surat

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

ITA 1205/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri O. P. Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.1205/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रणवष"/A.Y.:2013-14 Shree Chalthan Vibhag Khand Vs. Income Tax Officer, Udyogsahkari Mandli Ltd., At & Post Ward-1, Bardoli Chalthan, Taluka- Palsana, District- Surat Pan: Aaaac 0477A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143Section 28Section 37Section 37(1)

…y various Assessing Officers of the Appellate Authorities, and therefore, there was no justification on the part of The Assessing Officer to decide to the contrary, and thus, offend the law laid down by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. [2013] 358 ITR 295 (SC) holding that Revenue must be consistent and not flip-flop on the same issue in different assessment years. The above four grounds of appeal raised by the Assesseeare against the 3. common issue of confirmation of addition on account of excess price paid on purchase of sugarcane amounting to Rs. to Rs.106,15,63,160/- Hence, being considered…

M/S Global Entropolis (Vizag) Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2927/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Ananthan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Nagendra Prasad, CIT

Section 10ASection 56

…d to have accrued to the assessee, when the right to receive the same has not obtained by the assessee. In support of this proposition, the Ld A.R placed his reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Excel Industries Ltd (2013)(358 ITR 295)(SC). The Ld A.R also submitted that the change in the method of accounting has been made on account of proper reasons, which has also been accepted by the auditors of the assessee company. 19. On the contrary, the Ld D.R placed his reliance on the order passed by Ld CIT(A). 20. Having heard rival contentions, we are of the view that there is m…

Vishwa Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT (OSD), Circle-8, Ahmedabad

Appeal is dismissed and the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 704/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, P. B. Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ssee and the same is also scientific. Apart from that the closing stock in question has been sold in the subsequent assessment year. In this respect, the Learned Counsel relied upon the judgment passed in the matter of CIT-vs-Excel Industries Ltd. reported in 358 ITR 295. On the other hand, Learned Representative of the Revenue relied upon the order passed by the Learned AO. 4. Heard the respective parties, perused the relevant materials available on record. The dispute before us whether valuation is to be done of all units or the total sales. The object of this method is to ascertain the cost per unit of output…

The DCIT, (OSD), Circle-8, Ahmedabad vs. Vishwa Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

Appeal is dismissed and the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1229/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, P. B. Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

M/S. Cbre South Asia (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3527/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 36Section 36(1)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. CBRE South Asia (P) Deputy Commissioner of Ltd., Ground Floor, PTI Vs Income Tax, Circle – 3 (1) Building,4 Parliament Street, New Delhi New Delhi-110005 PAN No. AAACC9308A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Gautam Jain, Advocate Sh. Lalit Mohan, Advocate Respondent by Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT(DR) Date of hearing: 06/05/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 28/06/2019 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed a…

The DCIT (Exemptions), Circle.-1., Ahmedabad vs. Gujarat Council of Vocational Training, Gandhinagar

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 650/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alok Singh, CIT-D.R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 15Section 2Section 2(15)

…ment year then on the same ground no appeal by the Revenue can be preferred to the Hon'ble ITAT in other years. In this regard, we draw support and guidance from the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Excel Industries Limited reported in 358 ITR 295 wherein it was held as under: "31. 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 bein…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Indus Towers Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2242/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 37(1)Section 44A

…sions:- i) CIT vs. Reliance Industrial Infrastructure Ltd. (2015) 234 Taxman 256 ii) CIT vs. Bilahari Investment (P.) Ltd. (2008) 299 ITR 1 (SC) iii) CIT vs. Realest Builders & Services Ltd. (2008) 307 ITR 202 (SC) iv) CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 295 (SC) v) CIT vs. Vishnu Industrial Gases Pvt. Ltd. (ITR No. 229/1988 [Del. Tri.]) vi) CIT vs. Dinesh Kumar Goel (2011) 331 ITR 10 (Del) vii) CIT vs. Nagri Mills Co. Ltd. (1958) 33 ITR 681 (Bom) 10. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. From the perusal of records it can be seen that the assess…

Indus Towers Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1040/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 37(1)Section 44A

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

ITA 2749/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi & Shri SatyajeetFor Respondent: Shri Puneet Rai, Adv. Special counsel

Section 10Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 43B

…eshold of 30% limit of the total project cost estimated then to delete the addition of Rs.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. I.T.A. No.2126 & 2749/DEL/2013 102 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. 88. The next…

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

ITA 2126/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi & Shri SatyajeetFor Respondent: Shri Puneet Rai, Adv. Special counsel

Section 10Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 43B

Matoshree Realtors, Mumbai vs. ITO 21(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 951/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.951/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. Matoshree Realtors बिधम/ Ito-21(2)(2) Piramal Chambers, 1St Floor, B/202, Matoshree Tower, Vs. Padmabai Thakkar Marg, Lal Baugh, Parel, Mumbai- Mahim, Mumbai-400016. 400012. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aamfm5625M (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Dr. K. Shivram/ Ms. Neelam C. Jadhav Revenue By: सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/05/2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/05/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 14.12.2016 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -33, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2010- 11. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Sustaining The Addition Of Rs.110,38,680/- Made By The Ao On Account Of Undisclosed Interest Income. A.Y.2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Dr. K. Shivram/ Ms. Neelam

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147

…nothing was received at that time. The Ld. Representative of the assessee has argued that his case is fully covered in view of the law settled in the case of Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 746 (SC) and CIT Vs. Excel Industries Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 295 (SC). The copy of letter of the bank concerned dated 05.03.2014 is on record which lies at page no. 14 of the paper book in which on 01.04.2010, the term deposit has been shown to the tune of Rs.11,78,06,159/-including accrued interest to the tune of Rs.1,78,06,159/- on 31.03.2011. The loan on dated 01.04.2010 was to the tune of Rs.11,78,06,159/-…

Valsad District Co.Op .Bank Ltd., Surat vs. Dy.CIT, Valsad Range, Valsad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for this assessment year

ITA 827/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O. P. Meena

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(v)Section 37Section 37(1)

…f circumstances, the authorities will not depart from previous decision at their sweet will in the absence of material circumstances or reasons for such departure. The learned counsel for the assessee further relied in the case of Excel Industries Ltd. [2013] 358 ITR 295 (SC) in support of this contention. The learned counsel for the assessee further supported his view by placing reliance in the case of CIT v. Textool Co. Ltd. [2013] 35 taxmann.com 639 (SC) and other as per his written submissions placed on records. 6. On the other hand, the ld. Sr. D.R. vehemently supported the order of lower authorities and sub…

Valsad District Co.Op .Bank Ltd., Surat vs. Dy.CIT, Valsad Range, Valsad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for this assessment year

ITA 826/AHD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O. P. Meena

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(v)Section 37Section 37(1)

Valsad District Co.Op .Bank Ltd., Surat vs. Dy.CIT, Valsad Circle, Valsad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for this assessment year

ITA 842/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O. P. Meena

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(v)Section 37Section 37(1)