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 366,314 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.

Gautam Premises P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 2(1)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 2748/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 263

…ugh a revision order was 4 Gautam Premises P.L. passed u/s 263, but the same was subsequently quashed by the tribunal. Reliance was placed by the Ld. Counsel in this regard upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. 358 ITR 295. Further, reliance was placed on the judgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT v. Rampur Timber & Turnery Co. Ltd. 129 ITR 58 for the proposition that expenditure incurred for retaining the status of the company were to be allowed. Per contra, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the lower authorities. 5.1. We have gone through the…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5720/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs. Additional Cit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Range-6, Vasant Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacm0829Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Neeraj Jain, Rohit Jain, Adv. Romit Katyal & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Cas Department By:Shri Amrendra Kumar, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. NeerajFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT(DR)

…s on the aforesaid issue and examined the allowability of the expense in detail. After the detailed examination, the assessing officer formed a considered view not to disallow the aforesaid expense incurred by the assessee. [Refer CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd: 358 ITR 295]. 26.4 The ld. CIT(DR), on the other hand, tried to justify the order passed by the assessing officer disallowing the provision towards the foreseen price increase. Referring to the assessment order, it was submitted that the assessee has followed a unique method of making provision for the additional price to be charged by the supplier of the m…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Rational Builders & Developers, New Delhi

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 670/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri G.D. Agarwal, Hon’Ble V.P. & Sri C.M.Garg, Jm Ita No. 670/Del./2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. R.S. Singhvi, CRFor Respondent: Mrs. Nandita Kanchan, C.I.T., DR
Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI Before Sri G.D. Agarwal, Hon’ble V.P. And Sri C.M.Garg, JM ITA No. 670/Del./2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 ITO Vs Rational Builders & Developers 9th Floor, DLF Centre Ward-31(1) New Delhi Sansad Marg New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAFFR2590B Assessee by : Sh. R.S. Singhvi, CR Revenue by : Mrs. Nandita Kanchan, C.I.T., DR Date of Hearing : 30.05.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 01.07.2016 ORDER PER C.M.Garg, J.M. This appeal has been filed by the Revenue agaisnt the order of the CIT(A)-XXVI, New Delhi dated 4.11.2013 passed in first app…

M/S Goyal Mg Gases Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 2194/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…so brought on record the order dated 24/01/2013 of the Hon’ble Judicial Magistrate/ACJ (JD), Ghaziabad and which has been placed at pages 36 & 37 of the PB pertaining to AY 2008- 09. We also concur with the assessee’s reliance on CIT vs. Excel Industries, 358 ITR 295 (SC), wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has opined that it is well settled that “Income Tax cannot be levied on hypothetical income and that income accrues when it becomes due. But it must also be ITA Nos. 2192, 2193 & 2194/Del/2013 Page 25 of accompanied by a responding liability of the other party to pay the amount and only then can it be said…

M/S Goyal Mg Gases Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 2193/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…so brought on record the order dated 24/01/2013 of the Hon’ble Judicial Magistrate/ACJ (JD), Ghaziabad and which has been placed at pages 36 & 37 of the PB pertaining to AY 2008- 09. We also concur with the assessee’s reliance on CIT vs. Excel Industries, 358 ITR 295 (SC), wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has opined that it is well settled that “Income Tax cannot be levied on hypothetical income and that income accrues when it becomes due. But it must also be ITA Nos. 2192, 2193 & 2194/Del/2013 Page 25 of accompanied by a responding liability of the other party to pay the amount and only then can it be said…

M/S Goyal Mg Gases Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 2192/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…so brought on record the order dated 24/01/2013 of the Hon’ble Judicial Magistrate/ACJ (JD), Ghaziabad and which has been placed at pages 36 & 37 of the PB pertaining to AY 2008- 09. We also concur with the assessee’s reliance on CIT vs. Excel Industries, 358 ITR 295 (SC), wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has opined that it is well settled that “Income Tax cannot be levied on hypothetical income and that income accrues when it becomes due. But it must also be ITA Nos. 2192, 2193 & 2194/Del/2013 Page 25 of accompanied by a responding liability of the other party to pay the amount and only then can it be said…

Divine Holdings P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 31, Mumbai

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2006–07, 2008–

ITA 104/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta a/wFor Respondent: Dr. P. Daniel
Section 115JSection 143(3)

…t matter; the two being corresponding to each other, is essentially a matter of fact, to be determined on an appreciation of underlying rights and obligations. We may toward this advert to a recent decision by the apex court in CIT vs. Excel Industries [2013] 358 ITR 295, wherein its stands clarified that where the right to receive the payment or, correspondingly, the obligation to make the payment has arisen, even if for a later date, there is accrual of income or, as the case may be, expenditure. Reference in this context may also be made to its decisions in K.C.P. Ltd. vs. CIT [2000] 245 ITR 421 (SC); P. Maria…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Timex Group India Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 259/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 2769/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs M/S Timex Watches Ltd., Circle-16(1), 117, Ground Floor, World Trade New Delhi Centre, Babar Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No. 323/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 M/S Timex Watches Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income 117, Ground Floor, World Trade Tax, Circle-16(1), Centre, Babar Road, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact0773C

For Appellant: Sh. K.M. Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Gautam Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Hemant Gupta, Sr. DR

…2000-01, ITA Nos. 258 & 259/Del/2013 Timex Watches Ltd. 2002-03 and 2005-06. Therefore, on the principle of consistency also the disallowance made by the AO was not justified. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Excel Industries Ltd. 358 ITR 295 (SC) " Radha Saomi Satsang Vs CIT 193 ITR 321 (SC) " CIT Vs J. K. Charitable Trust 308 ITR 161 (SC) 11. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and carefully gone through the material available on the record. It is noticed that an identical issue has been decided by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs Woodward Governor Ind…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Timex Group India Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 258/DEL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 2769/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs M/S Timex Watches Ltd., Circle-16(1), 117, Ground Floor, World Trade New Delhi Centre, Babar Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No. 323/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 M/S Timex Watches Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income 117, Ground Floor, World Trade Tax, Circle-16(1), Centre, Babar Road, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact0773C

For Appellant: Sh. K.M. Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Gautam Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Hemant Gupta, Sr. DR

…2000-01, ITA Nos. 258 & 259/Del/2013 Timex Watches Ltd. 2002-03 and 2005-06. Therefore, on the principle of consistency also the disallowance made by the AO was not justified. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Excel Industries Ltd. 358 ITR 295 (SC) " Radha Saomi Satsang Vs CIT 193 ITR 321 (SC) " CIT Vs J. K. Charitable Trust 308 ITR 161 (SC) 11. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and carefully gone through the material available on the record. It is noticed that an identical issue has been decided by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs Woodward Governor Ind…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Timex Watches Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2769/DEL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 2769/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs M/S Timex Watches Ltd., Circle-16(1), 117, Ground Floor, World Trade New Delhi Centre, Babar Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No. 323/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 M/S Timex Watches Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income 117, Ground Floor, World Trade Tax, Circle-16(1), Centre, Babar Road, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaact0773C

For Appellant: Sh. K.M. Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Gautam Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Hemant Gupta, Sr. DR

…2000-01, ITA Nos. 258 & 259/Del/2013 Timex Watches Ltd. 2002-03 and 2005-06. Therefore, on the principle of consistency also the disallowance made by the AO was not justified. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Excel Industries Ltd. 358 ITR 295 (SC) " Radha Saomi Satsang Vs CIT 193 ITR 321 (SC) " CIT Vs J. K. Charitable Trust 308 ITR 161 (SC) 11. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and carefully gone through the material available on the record. It is noticed that an identical issue has been decided by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs Woodward Governor Ind…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Swatantra Land and Finance Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 568/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Anima Banwal, Sr. DR
Section 145Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2006-07 M/s Swatantara Land & Finance Pvt. Ltd., vs ACIT, M-95, Front Basement, Circle 7(1), Greater Kailash-II, New Delhi. New Delhi. (PAN: AAACS1849N) AY: 2006-07 DCIT, vs M/s Swatantara Land & Finance Pvt. Ltd. Circle 7(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Ms Bhavita Kumar, Adv. Respondent by: Smt. Anima Banwal, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 03.03.2016 Date of pronouncement: 31.05.2016 ORDER…

Swatantra Land & Finance Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 143/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Anima Banwal, Sr. DR
Section 145Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2006-07 M/s Swatantara Land & Finance Pvt. Ltd., vs ACIT, M-95, Front Basement, Circle 7(1), Greater Kailash-II, New Delhi. New Delhi. (PAN: AAACS1849N) AY: 2006-07 DCIT, vs M/s Swatantara Land & Finance Pvt. Ltd. Circle 7(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Ms Bhavita Kumar, Adv. Respondent by: Smt. Anima Banwal, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 03.03.2016 Date of pronouncement: 31.05.2016 ORDER…

M/S. Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishan Estate Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is

ITA 5849/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2009-10 Ay: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Vidharthi, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2009-10 AY: 2008-09 ACIT, vs Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishan Estate Circle 36(1), Developers Pvt. Ltd., D-32, New Delhi. Main Vikas Marg, New Delhi. (PAN: ABGFS9748C) AY: 2009-10 Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishan Estate vs ACIT, Circle 36(1), Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. C.O. No. 20/Del/2015 (In ITA No. 1950/Del/2012) AY: 2008-09 Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishan Estate vs ACIT, Circle 58(1) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Department by…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Shipra Estate Ltd., & Jai Krishna Estate Developers Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is

ITA 5614/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2009-10 Ay: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Vidharthi, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2009-10 AY: 2008-09 ACIT, vs Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishan Estate Circle 36(1), Developers Pvt. Ltd., D-32, New Delhi. Main Vikas Marg, New Delhi. (PAN: ABGFS9748C) AY: 2009-10 Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishan Estate vs ACIT, Circle 36(1), Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. C.O. No. 20/Del/2015 (In ITA No. 1950/Del/2012) AY: 2008-09 Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishan Estate vs ACIT, Circle 58(1) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Department by…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishan Estate Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is

ITA 1950/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2009-10 Ay: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Vidharthi, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2009-10 AY: 2008-09 ACIT, vs Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishan Estate Circle 36(1), Developers Pvt. Ltd., D-32, New Delhi. Main Vikas Marg, New Delhi. (PAN: ABGFS9748C) AY: 2009-10 Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishan Estate vs ACIT, Circle 36(1), Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. C.O. No. 20/Del/2015 (In ITA No. 1950/Del/2012) AY: 2008-09 Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishan Estate vs ACIT, Circle 58(1) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Department by…

E.I. Dupont India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 4774/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 May 2016AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Ajit Tolani, AdvFor Respondent: S/Shri Anand Kumar Kedia &

…ake. The limited role of the TPO is to determine what would have been the arm’s length price for these services. That is what has been done.”  Reliance is placed in the judgment of Apex Court in case of Radhoswami Satsang [193 ITR 321] and Excel Industries [358 ITR 295] that the principle “res judicata” does not apply to Income Tax proceedings by virtue of each tax year being a unit and what is decided in one year may not be applicable to a subsequent year but where fundamental aspect has permeated through different years and there is no change in facts and circumstances of the current year then such propositio…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Salora International Ltd

ITA/12/2003HC Delhi13 May 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

For Appellant: Mr Ashok K. Manchanda, Senior StandingFor Respondent: Mr Salil Kapoor, Mr Sanat Kapoor, Ms Ananya
Section 260ASection 391Section 50

…s Tirathdas (supra) in support of his contention that the part consideration in question did not form a part of the Assessee‟s income. Further, he referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Excel Industries Ltd.: (2013) 358 ITR 295 (SC) in support of his contention that income tax could not be levied on hypothetical income. Reasoning and Conclusion 16. At the outset, it is necessary to notice that this Court is not called upon to consider the question whether any income chargeable under the head 'Capital Gains' could be computed under Section 48 of the Act (given…

Boinchipota Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 1, Hooghly

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 1702/KOL/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 May 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year :2005-06

Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

…ue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in assessee’s own case. In this regard we would like to place reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs Excel Industries 358 ITR 295 wherein the principle of consistency has been reiterated. Hence when the issue has been decided by the Jurisdictional High Court no convincing reason has been pointed to take a different view, any deviation is not permitted. 7.3. Now we come to the case laws relied upon by the ld. CIT(A). As regards the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the c…

M/S Sys-Pro Technologies Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee company in ITA N0

ITA 2526/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2526/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/S Sys-Pro Technologies Dcit (Osd) – 2(3), बनाम/ Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, V. 901, 9 Th Floor, M.K. Road, Umarji House, Mumbai – 400 020. Teli Gulli, Andheri (East), Mumbai – 400 069. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacb4501E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Premanand (D.R.)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “E” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2526/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/s Sys-Pro Technologies DCIT (OSD) – 2(3), बनाम/ Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, v. 901, 9 th Floor, M.K. Road, Umarji House, Mumbai – 400 020. Teli Gulli, Andheri (East), Mumbai – 400 069. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : AAACB4501E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee by Dr. K.Shivram & Shri Rahul Hakani Revenue by : Shri Premanand (D.R.) सुनवाई क" ता…

Asst CIT CC 38, Mumbai vs. Anshul Speciality Molecules Ltd ( Formerly Knwon As Anshul Chemicals Ltd), Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed accordingly

ITA 6369/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran & Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6369/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S. Anshul Speciality बनाम/ Income Tax Cent. Cir. 38 Molecules Ltd. (Formerly Vs. R.No.32(1), Ground Floor, Known As Anshul Chemicals Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Ltd.) Mumbai - 400020 13, Aradhana Industrial Developers Corporation, Near Virwani Industrial Estate, Goregaon (East), Mumbai - 400063 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabca4003N .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kirit KamdarFor Respondent: Shri Somanath S. Ukkali
Section 143(2)Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

…not find any infirmity in the order of the learned CIT(A) and therefore, dismiss the appeal filed by the revenue. “ 5.1 Moreover this issue has duly been decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Excel Industries Limited (358 ITR 295) nothing contrary to this law has been produced by the department. Therefore, in the said circumstances we are of the view that the learned CIT(A) has decided this issue judiciously and correctly which does not require to be interfere with at this appellate stage. Accordingly this issue is decided in favour of the assessee and against the revenue…