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 366,339 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.

Jagdish Prasad Gupta

ITA/695/2010HC Delhi18 Aug 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Section 260A

…ecisions in CIT, Bombay City-I v. M/s. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. [1962] 46 ITR 144 (SC); Morvi Industries Ltd. v. CIT (Central), Calcutta [1971] 82 ITR 835 (SC); Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 746 (SC); CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 295 (SC) and E.D. ITA 711/2011 & batch matters Page 25 of 39 Sassoon & Company Ltd. and Ors. v. CIT, Bombay City [1954] 26 ITR 27 (SC). 36. In support of his plea that, when there is a mercantile basis of maintenance of book…

DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. Paradeep Phosphates Limited, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and that of

ITA 289/CTK/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack04 Aug 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri B.K.MohapatraFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CIT DR

Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195(2)Section 197Section 263Section 40Section 92

…he CIT(A) could be pointed out by ld D.R. Further, ld D.R. could not point out whether the order of the CIT(A) passed in assessment year 2009-2010 was varied in appeal by any higher forum. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd, 358 ITR 295(SC) has held that where a consistent view had been taken in favour of the assessee on the question raised, there was no reason for the court to take a different view unless there were very convincing reasons, which there were not. 10. Therefore, respectfully following the above decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court and keeping in view the fact no…

Noble Consolidated Glazings Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 26/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Jul 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Nagendra Kumar, Dy. CITFor Respondent: 22.06.2017

Section 143(3)

…counting Standards, mandated by law, suggests – and strongly at that, that income has accrued. This gets further reinforced by the deduction of tax at source, so that the payee admits to the liability having accrued (refer: CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. [2013] 358 ITR 295 6 Noble Consolidated Glazings Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (SC)). The issue at hand therefore boils down to, so that we refer to the question arising as, whether any adjustment is to be made to the revenue reckoned in the assessee’s books qua retention money in the facts and circumstances of its case? As aforesaid, the relevant agreements are not before us.…

ACIT, Jaipur vs. R.F. Properties Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, appeal of Assessee in ITA No

ITA 565/JPR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Rajive Sahai & Shri Ashish SharmaFor Respondent: Smt. Roshanta Meena (Addl. CIT)

Section 201Section 201(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh dqy Hkkjr] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 483/JP/2015 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2010-11. cuke M/s R.F. Properties Pvt. Ltd., The ACIT (TDS), Vs. (Now known as World Trade Park Jaipur. Ltd), Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. JPRR 04161 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 565/JP/2015 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2010-11. cuke The ACIT (TDS), M/s R.F. Prope…

R.F. Properties Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of Assessee in ITA No

ITA 483/JPR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Rajive Sahai & Shri Ashish SharmaFor Respondent: Smt. Roshanta Meena (Addl. CIT)

Section 201Section 201(1)

M/S Infrasoft Technologies Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal assessee is dismissed

ITA 4415/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Ita No. 4415/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Acit, Vs Rational Builders & Developers, Dlf Centre, 9Th Floor, Sansad Circle-31(1), New Delhi Marg, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaffr2590B Assessee By : Sh. R. S. Singhvi, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Shravan Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.06.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 22.05.2014 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xxvi, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. R. S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Shravan Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 68

…he second issue concerns the addition of Rs. 90,50,000/- on account of notional interest on interest free loans/advances. The ITAT has rightly observed that there is no provision for taxing notional income as explained by the Supreme Court in Excel Industries 358 ITR 295 (SC). Consequently, no substantial question of law arises as regards this issue as well. The appeal is dismissed.” 5. On the basis of above, we are inclined to hold that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the order of High Court dated 11.8.2015 (supra) and sole ground of Revenue devoid of merits is not sustainable and thus…

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

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4358/DEL/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Smt Suchitra Kamble

Section 36(1)Section 36(2)Section 92CSection 92F

…laced on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Radhasoami Satsang Saomi Bagh vs CIT [1992] 193 ITR 321 (SC), wherein, principle of consistency has been upheld. Reliance is further placed on the following decisions: " CIT vs Excel Industries: [2013] 358 ITR 295 (SC) " Brintons Carpets Asia P. Ltd. vs DCIT (2011) 46 SOT 289 (Pune) " Clariant Chemicals (India) Ltd. vs JCIT: ITA No. 2328 & 2393 Mum/2011 " VIHI, LLC vs Addl. DIT: ITA No. 17/MDS/2012 " KTC Ferro Alloys (P.) Ltd vs Addl. CIT: [2014] 161 TTJ 228 (Visakhapatnam - Trib.) " Hosley India (P.) Ltd. vs DCIT (ITA. No. 5904/Del/2010 (If aggregation p…

M/S. Hari Udyog Pvt. Ltd., Balasore vs. JCIT, Balasore Range, Balasore

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

ITA 435/CTK/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2009-2010

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.N. Das, DR

Section 131

…that position to be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not be at all appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. To the same effect is the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Excel Industries Ltd. 358 ITR 295(SC), wherein, it has been held as under: “That a consistent view had 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 did not represent the real income of the assessee. There was no reason for the court t…

Addl CIT 2(1), Mumbai vs. Gtl Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 5419/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 10BSection 143(1)

…ion was invited to page 364 to 369 of the paper book for Assessment Year 2007-08 to 2009-10. It was contended that rule of consistency has to be followed, for which, reliance was placed upon the decision from Hon'ble Apex Court in CIT vs Excel Industries Ltd. 358 ITR 295 (SC), order dated 08/10/2013 and CIT vs Translam Ltd. 231 taxman 901 (All.). The crux of the argument is that the assessee maintains separate books of accounts for each unit. 4 M/s GTL Ltd. ITA Nos.5245 & 5419/Mum/2010 2.2. Before adverting further, we find that the Hon'ble High Court, vide order dated 04/12/2014 (ITA No.1675 of 2012) held as u…

Sailent Business Solutions Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, reversing the order of the Ld

ITA 6297/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2017AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri PC Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri N K Bansal

Section 143Section 143(3)

…solutions Limited V DCIT Circle 7(1) New Delhi A Y 2007-08 against the principle of consistency. It is submitted that this principle has been recently appreciated by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Grain U.K 359 ITR 268(Del) and Excell Industries 358 ITR 295(SC). In yet another case Hon'ble Punjab and Harayana High Court in the case of Reita. Biscuts reported in 309 ITR 154(P&H) has held that once a_claim is accepted in subsequent year then no disallowance is permissible in impugned year if there is no change in facts. 20. The relevant observation of the Hon'ble High Court in Grain U.K (Supra) is as…

Mackinnon Mackenzie & Co.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2392/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Hariom TulsyanFor Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 28Section 41(1)

…, argued that there has been no inquiry and no subsequent development which required different stand therefore the principle of resjudicatta, the additions u/s 41(1) were unwarranted. The ld. AR relied upon the following decision CIT V/s Excel Industries Ltd (358 ITR 295), Radhasoamy Satsang V/s CIT (193 ITR 321 (SC), CIT V/s Gopal Purohit (34 17 DTR 52). The ld. AR submitted that these credit balances have been existing for several preceding years and after making due inquiries the revenue has accepted in assessment year 2003-04 and subsequent years. Since there was no development in the current assessment year…

Data Infosys Limited, Alwar vs. DCIT, Alwar

In the result, revenue’s ground no

ITA 58/JPR/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 May 2017AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri R.A.Verma (Addl. CIT)

Section 10ASection 35D

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh dqy Hkkjr] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 58/JP/2014 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2008-2009 cuke M/s Data Infosys Ltd. DCIT (Hqrs.), Alwar Vs. Plot No.20,21,22, Old Industrial Area, Alwar (Raj.) LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAACD 5376 M vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 137/JP/2014 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2008-2009 cuke The ACIT, Circle-2, M/s Data Info…

Delhi Bureau of Text Books vs. Director of Income Tax(E)

The appeals are allowed but, in the circumstances, with no orders as to costs

ITA/807/2015HC Delhi03 May 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

Section 12ASection 2Section 260

…een granted to the Appellant and with absolutely no change of circumstances there was no occasion for a different approach to be taken for the AYs in question. She also placed reliance on the decisions of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Excel Industries (2013) 262 CTR 261 (SC) and Radhasoami Satsang Saomi Bagh, Agra v. Commissioner of Income Tax (1992) 193 ITR 321 (SC) Submissions on behalf of the Revenue 17. Countering the above submissions, Mr. Rahul Kaushik, learned Senior standing counsel for the Revenue, sought to support the impugned order of the ITAT by pointing out that the level of profits earne…

Delhi Bureau of Text Books vs. Director of Income Tax(E)

The appeals are allowed but, in the circumstances, with no orders as to costs

ITA/812/2015HC Delhi03 May 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

Section 12ASection 2Section 260

Delhi Bureau of Text Books vs. Director of Income Tax (E)

The appeals are allowed but, in the circumstances, with no orders as to costs

ITA/811/2015HC Delhi03 May 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

Section 12ASection 2Section 260

Delhi Bureau of Text Books vs. Director of Income Tax (E)

The appeals are allowed but, in the circumstances, with no orders as to costs

ITA/810/2015HC Delhi03 May 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

Section 12ASection 2Section 260

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Cornell Overseas (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 2166/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 2166/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Dcit, Vs Cornell Overseas (P) Ltd., Circle-3(1), B-235, Okhla Indl. Area, Phase-I, New Delhi New Delhi-110020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacc0034F Assessee By : Ms. Vandana Bhandari, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Neeraj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.05.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 28.02.2011 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xx, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Ms. Vandana Bhandari, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Neeraj Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 28Section 32Section 80HSection 90C

…O year on year. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Radhasoami Satsang Vs CIT (1992) 193 ITR 321 (SC) " Hoystead Vs CIT (1926) AC 155 (PC) " Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. Vs ITO (1977) 106 ITR 1 (SC) " CIT Vs Excel Industries Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 295 (SC) " Dalmia Promoters Developers (P) Ltd. (2006) 151 Taxman 202 (Del.) 40. It was contended that the agreement with PRC, USA was for licensing of technical know-how, trade names and trade- marks by PRC, USA to assessee and not a contract manufacturing agreement. Therefore, the TPO sought to re- write the agreement which is not permissible in la…

M/S. Perfetti Van Melle India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

In the result, this appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 789/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Smt Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 43(1)Section 80Section 80ISection 92C

…Hon'ble Apex Court in Distributors (Baroda) (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [1985] 155 ITR 120/22 Taxman 49 (SC) has held that to perpetuate an error is no heroism and to rectify it is the compulsion of the judicial conscience. In case of CIT v. Excel Industries 358 ITR 295 the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that when the Revenue accepted the order of the Tribunal in favour of the assessee and did not pursue the matter any further, it cannot be allowed to flip-flop on the issue and it ought let the matter rest rather than spend the tax payers’ money in pursuing litigation for the sake of it. This is not the case here t…

Blue Star Infotech Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 6(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7187/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Blue Star Infotech Pvt. Ltd., Acit, Circle-6(1), 4Th Floor, Band Box House, Room No. 506, 5Th Floor, Dr. A.B. Road, Worli, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400018. Mumbai-400020. Pan: Aaacb6385J (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Circle-6(1), M/S Blue Star Infotech Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 506, 5Th Floor, 4Th Floor, Band Box House, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Dr. A.B. Road, Worli, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400018. Pan: Aaacb6385J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Sh. N.P. Singh (Sr.CIT-DR)

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 145ASection 147Section 148Section 253Section 254(1)Section 46A

…s offered for taxation for AY 2007-08. The same AO taxed the Sale tax collected in earlier year in the AY 2007-08. As per our considered opinion the Revenue is not entitled to tax the same amount twice. The Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd. [358 ITR 295 (SC)] held that when the rate of tax remain the same and the assessee has paid the tax in the subsequent accounting year then the dispute raised by the Revenue is entirely academic and therefore, there is no need for Revenue to continue with the litigation when it is quite clear that not only it was fruitless but also that it meaning have added a…

Bhupati Investments & Finance Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - 5(1), Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed

ITA 5167/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5167/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) Bhupati Investments & Deputy Commissioner Of Finance Private Limited Income Tax-5(1) B-34/35, 3Rd Floor Aayakar Bhavan बनाम/ Paragon Condominium M.K.Road Vs. P.B.Marg Mumbai – 400 020 Worli Mumbai – 400 018 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacb-0441-P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Arati Vissanji, Ld. Ar ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M.C.Omi Ninghsen, Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / : 10/04/2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 24 /04/2017 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Ms. Arati Vissanji, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M.C.Omi Ninghsen, Ld. DR

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 254Section 57

…f the fact that the principles of res judicata do not apply to Income Tax proceedings, yet rule of consistency demands that similar view is taken in similar circumstances as upheld by Apex court in CIT Vs. Excel Industries Ltd. / Mafatlal Industries Pvt. Ltd. 358 ITR 295 judgment dated 08/10/2013 and also by jurisdictional Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Gopal Purohit 336 ITR 287 judgment dated 06/01/2010. Further, advancing of money to sister concern per se does not alter the character of income in the hands of the assessee particularly when the assessee was subjected to terms and conditions imposed by the…