CIT v. Exxon Mobil Lubricants P. Ltd.

328 ITR 17High Court2010#2335 most cited
49

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Exxon Mobil Lubricants P. Ltd. · 328 ITR 17 · section 2(22)(e) · deemed dividend · closely held company · accumulated profits · resulting company · related party transaction · section 40(a)(ia) · short deduction of TDS · advance tax interest · consistency principle

Sections most often in play

Section 142(2A)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(3)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 40(3)section 2(19aa)short deduction of tdsinterest on interestsection 209closely held companysection 210short deduction of taxsection 211accumulated profitsrelated party transactionresulting company

Judgments citing CIT v. Exxon Mobil Lubricants P. Ltd.

M/S. T & T Motors Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 6499/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shrik. Narasimha Chary & Shri O. P. Meena

Section 143

…the assessee during the year M/s. T& T Motors Ltd. v. Addl. CIT Range- 16, New Delhi /I.T.A. No.6499/Del/2014/A.Y.10-11 Page 8 of 14 under consideration. Reliance was also placed on the decision in the case of CIT v. Exxon Mobile Lubricants Pvt. Ltd. [2010] 328 ITR 17 (Delhi) wherein it was held that where the liability for payment was determined and crystallized in the year under question and therefore, allowable and it cannot be held to be prior period merely because the expenses related to a transaction of earlier years. However, the CIT (A) upheld that disallowance by holding that the assessee has not follo…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Eco Cane Energy Ltd, Kolhapur

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 122/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Vp & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das
Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…sessee. The appeal of the assessee is accepted to the extent of Rs.2,33,30,414 paid towards additional cost for procurement of sugarcane." The Hon'ble ITAT has followed the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Exxon Mobil Lubricants (P) Ltd 328 ITR 17 (Del). From the above, it is evident that the addition itself having being deleted, the penalty on the said addition has no legs to stand. I am also constrained to point out the cursory approach of the AO. A plain reading of the penalty order reveals that no finding of even the quantum of income, for which inaccurate particulars have been filed, i…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Eco Cane Energy Ltd, Kolhapur

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 121/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Vp & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das
Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…sessee. The appeal of the assessee is accepted to the extent of Rs.2,33,30,414 paid towards additional cost for procurement of sugarcane." The Hon'ble ITAT has followed the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Exxon Mobil Lubricants (P) Ltd 328 ITR 17 (Del). From the above, it is evident that the addition itself having being deleted, the penalty on the said addition has no legs to stand. I am also constrained to point out the cursory approach of the AO. A plain reading of the penalty order reveals that no finding of even the quantum of income, for which inaccurate particulars have been filed, i…

Fouress Engg (I) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(1), Mumbai

In the result the ground No

ITA 754/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarm/S Fouress Engg (I) Ltd. Dcit Range-5(1) 22, Bhulabhai Desai Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mahalaxmi Chamber, Vs. Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400026 Pan:Aaacf5897K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Dr.K. Shivram With : Ms Nilam Jadhav -Advocates Revenue By : Ms. Pooja Swaroop ( Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing : 19.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.03.2018 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Under Section 253 Of Income Tax Act (‘The Act’) Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-10

For Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop ( Sr. DR)
Section 137(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 253Section 254(1)Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s Fouress Engg (I) Ltd. DCIT Range-5(1) 22, Bhulabhai Desai Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mahalaxmi Chamber, Vs. Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400026 PAN:AAACF5897K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Dr.K. Shivram with : Ms Nilam Jadhav -Advocates Revenue by : Ms. Pooja Swaroop ( Sr. DR) Date of hearing : 19.03.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 23.03.2018 Order Under Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by assessee under section 253 of Income Tax…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Acalmar Oils & Fats Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 2055/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Feb 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar] Assessment Year : 2011-12

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)

…after 31st March of the relevant accounting period. Case law (2014) 221 TAXMANN 80 (Bom) CIT vs. Mahanagar Gas Ltd supports assessee's case that prior period expenditure crystallize during the year on receipt of bills is allowable. This is followed by (2010) 328 ITR 17 (Del) CIT vs. Exxon Mobil Lubricants Pvt. Ltd upholding CIT(A)'s and tribunal's view that if the assesses admits prior period income which was not excluded while working out relevant previous year income, it is unreasonable to allow one part of prior period adjustment i.e. prior period expenditure. We come to Revenue's case law now. The first one…

Lakshmi Builder & Developers, Mumbai vs. ACIT 31(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2997/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Vyas, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Manjunatha Swamy, CIT

…same tax rate. In support of such contention, the learned Sr. Counsel relied upon the following decisions:– i) CIT v/s Excel Industries Ltd., 358 ITR 295 (SC); ii) CIT v/s Nagri Mills Co. Ltd., 33 ITR 681 (Bom.); iii) CIT v/s ExxonMobil Lubricants Pvt. Ltd., 328 ITR 17 (Del.); iv) CIT v/s Mahanagar Gas Ltd., 221 Taxman 80 (Bom.); and v) CIT v/s Jagatjit Industries Ltd., 339 ITR 382 (Del.). 17. Finally, learned Sr. Counsel submitted, though, the assessee is following similar method of accounting with regard to prior period income and expenditure, no such disallowance has been made either in the preceding or succ…

ACIT (OSD) - 2(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Tata Finance Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2997/MUM/2006[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2018AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Vyas, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Manjunatha Swamy, CIT

…t of such contention, the learned Sr. Counsel relied upon the following decisions:– i) CIT v/s Excel Industries Ltd., 358 ITR 295 (SC); ii) CIT v/s Nagri Mills Co. Ltd., 33 ITR 681 (Bom.); 9 M/s. Tata Motors Ltd. iii) CIT v/s ExxonMobil Lubricants Pvt. Ltd., 328 ITR 17 (Del.); iv) CIT v/s Mahanagar Gas Ltd., 221 Taxman 80 (Bom.); and v) CIT v/s Jagatjit Industries Ltd., 339 ITR 382 (Del.). 17. Finally, learned Sr. Counsel submitted, though, the assessee is following similar method of accounting with regard to prior period income and expenditure, no such disallowance has been made either in the preceding or succ…

Asst CIT CC 47, Mumbai vs. Ruby Mills Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5547/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Mr. Vijay Mehta,ARFor Respondent: Mr. Love Kumar,DR
Section 143(3)

…ITR 523, it has been held by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court that though the expenditure relates to prior period, if the liability has accrued during the year, then the expenditure has to be allowed as deduction. Also in CIT vs. Exxon Mobil Lubricants P. Ltd. 328 ITR 17, it has been held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court that when prior period income is taxed prior period expenditure cannot be disallowed. In view of the above decisions, we uphold the order passed by the learned CIT(A) on the above issue and dismiss the above ground of appeal filed by the revenue. 4. The second ground relates to the claim of forex…

The Ruby Mills Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 7(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5387/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Mr. Vijay Mehta,ARFor Respondent: Mr. Love Kumar,DR
Section 143(3)

…ITR 523, it has been held by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court that though the expenditure relates to prior period, if the liability has accrued during the year, then the expenditure has to be allowed as deduction. Also in CIT vs. Exxon Mobil Lubricants P. Ltd. 328 ITR 17, it has been held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court that when prior period income is taxed prior period expenditure cannot be disallowed. In view of the above decisions, we uphold the order passed by the learned CIT(A) on the above issue and dismiss the above ground of appeal filed by the revenue. 4. The second ground relates to the claim of forex…