CIT v. Hewlett Packard India

314 ITR 55High Court2009#3274 most cited

What is CIT v. Hewlett Packard India authority for?

A provision for gratuity made on an actuarial basis is a revenue expenditure and not an unascertained liability, therefore, it cannot be added back to book profits under Section 115JB.

37

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Hewlett Packard India · Section 115JB · provision for gratuity · actuarial valuation · unascertained liability · revenue expenditure · book profits · MAT

Also reported as

202 Taxmann 262

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 142(1)Section 115BBESection 144BSection 14ASection 154Section 1961: Section 250(4)

Issues it is cited on

admission of additional evidencerule 46acapital expendituregenuineness of the transactioncommissioner (appeals)income-tax officersection 115unexplained cash creditsection 68scrutiny assessmentprevious yearsection 25

Judgments citing CIT v. Hewlett Packard India

HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 5465/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2026AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 10ASection 143Section 144Section 144C(13)

…larly been held in the following decisions  CIT v Chittosho Motors: ITA 741 of 2010: 11 taxmann.com 81 (P&H.  Atlas Cycle Industries Ltd vs CIT: 133 ITR 231 (P&H) CIT v. Virgin Securities & Credits (P) Ltd 332 ITR 396 (Del)  CIT vs. Hewlett Packard India: 314 ITR 55 (Del)  -CIT vs. Chandra Kant Sahu Bhai: 202 Taxman 262 (Del)  CIT vs. Betterways Finance: ITA 995 of 2009 (Del)  Jatia Investment Co vs. CIT: 206 ITR 718 (Cal)  Electra (Jaipur) Ltd vs. IAC. 26 ITD 236 (Del Trib.)  Y. W. C. A. of India vs. IAC: 29 ITD 620 (Del Trib.) It would be appreciated that this is the first appeal before the Hon'ble Tri…

HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 5624/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 10ASection 143Section 144Section 144C(13)

…larly been held in the following decisions  CIT v Chittosho Motors: ITA 741 of 2010: 11 taxmann.com 81 (P&H.  Atlas Cycle Industries Ltd vs CIT: 133 ITR 231 (P&H) CIT v. Virgin Securities & Credits (P) Ltd 332 ITR 396 (Del)  CIT vs. Hewlett Packard India: 314 ITR 55 (Del)  -CIT vs. Chandra Kant Sahu Bhai: 202 Taxman 262 (Del)  CIT vs. Betterways Finance: ITA 995 of 2009 (Del)  Jatia Investment Co vs. CIT: 206 ITR 718 (Cal)  Electra (Jaipur) Ltd vs. IAC. 26 ITD 236 (Del Trib.)  Y. W. C. A. of India vs. IAC: 29 ITD 620 (Del Trib.) It would be appreciated that this is the first appeal before the Hon'ble Tri…

DCIT-1(1),BHILAI, BHILAI vs. SALIGRAM TRIPATHI, DURG

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

ITA 582/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.582/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.)

For Appellant: None (Petition filed)For Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari, CIT-DR
Section 69

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.582/RPR/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Saligram Tripathi 32/32 Bunglow, Bhilai Dist. Durg (C.G.)-490 006 PAN: ADEPT2799J ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : None (Petition filed) Revenue by : Shri Ram Tiwari, CIT-DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 18.11.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date of P…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. GOLDENDUNES HEIGHTS LLP, JAIPUR

ITA 1352/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Him.

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR a
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 1352/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2018-19 cuke Income Tax Officer, Goldendunes Heights LLP Vs. Jaipur. C-6, Vashisht Marg, Hamuman Nagar Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAOFG4799C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Tarun Mittal, C.A. jktLo…

ABDUL AZIZ,DUDU vs. ITO WARD 7(3), LAL KOTHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1025/JPR/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2025AY 2012-2013
For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 50C

…{ "clean_text": "आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR\nडा० एस. सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री गगन गोयल, लेखा सदस्य, के समक्ष\nBEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 1025/JPR/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2012-13\nAbdul Aziz\nthrough L/H Abdul Hakim,\nKarim Manzil\nOpp.-Rangmanch, Dudu\nबनाम\nVs.\nThe ITO,\nWard-7(3),\nJaipur\nस्थायीलेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: DBKPA4053F\nअपीलार्थी / Appellant\nप्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nनिर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, Adv.\nर…

JIWAN ABASAN PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 12(2), , KOLKATA

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

ITA 2089/KOL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Mar 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “बी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सट"य एवं "ी "द"प कुमार चौबे, "या"यक सद"य के सम" [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member &Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 2089/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Jiwan Abasan Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward-12(2), Kolkata (PAN: AABCJ 8859 N) ( अपीलाथ" ) Respondent / ""यथ" Appellant / Date of Hearing / सुनवाई 11.02.2025 क" "त"थ Date of Pronouncement/ 10.03.2025 आदेश उ"घोषणा क" "त"थ For the assessee / Shri Manish Bajoria, FCA "नधा"रती क" ओर से For the revenue / राज"व Shri…

NISHA BHRADWAJ,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 3 (3), JAIPUR

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

ITA 617/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Oct 2024AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Anil Kaushik (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh (Addl.CIT)
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR डा० एस. सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री राठौड़ कमलेश जयन्तभाई, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA. No. 617/JPR/2023 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Nisha Bhradwaj 56 Riddhi Siddhi Enclave, Jaipur. बनाम Vs. The ITO, Ward-3(3), Jaipur. स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: ALSPB7918D अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Shri Anil Kaushik (C.A.) राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : S…

DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, NCRB, JAIPUR vs. PARADISE PROPERTIES, SAROJNI MARG, JAIPUR

In the result appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 324/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A).

For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 324/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2017-18 cuke DCIT, Paradise Properties, Circle-06, Vs. Sarojni Marg, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAIFP 8247 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent CO No. 12/JP/2024 (Arising out of ITA No. 324/JP/2024) fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2017-18 cuke Paradise Prope…

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 NASSHIK, NASHIK vs. HARSH CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, NASHIK

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

ITA 302/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15 Dcit, Circle – 1, Harsh Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Nashik Sanskruti, Murkute Colony, Vs. New Pandit Colony, Sharanpur Road, Nashik – 422002 Pan: Aacch2277H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dhiraj S. Dandgaval Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 03-07-2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 10-07-2024 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.12.2023 Of The Cit(A) / Nfac, Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Revenue In The Grounds Of Appeal Has Challenged The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Restricting The Disallowance To Rs.2,24,191/- As Against Rs.1,25,51,607/- Proposed By The Assessing Officer In The Remand Report As Against Rs.4,38,96,880/- Added By Him In The Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’).

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj S. DandgavalFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 133Section 133(5)Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2014-15 DCIT, Circle – 1, Harsh Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Nashik Sanskruti, Murkute Colony, Vs. New Pandit Colony, Sharanpur Road, Nashik – 422002 PAN: AACCH2277H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Dhiraj S. Dandgaval Department by : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing : 03-07-2024 Date of pronouncement : 10-07-2024 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, VP : This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 20.12.2023 of the CIT(A) / NFAC, De…

KALASA LAKSHMANASHETTY MAHESH,CHIKKAMAGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX

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

ITA 792/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Manish Golyan, CA
Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC-‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/s. Kalasa Lakshmanashetty Mahesh, The Income Tax Rama Krupa, Officer, Canara Bank Road, Ward – 2, Chikmagalur – 577 101. Chikmagalur. Vs. PAN: ACUPM2583Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Manish Golyan, CA : Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Revenue by Counsel for Department Date of Hearing : 28-05-2024 Date of Pronouncement : 10-06-2024 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal arises out of the order passed by NFAC d…

SAPTARSHI REALTORS PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD 8 (1)(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 3291/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Saptarshi Realtors Private The Income Tax Officer Limited Ward 8(1)(1) Room No.651, 6Th Floor, 5, 40-45 Kamar Mansion, Aaykar Bhavan, Nanabhai Raralkar Marg, Vs. M.K. Road, Paral Village, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 012 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm6828M Saptarshi Realtors Private The Income Tax Officer Limited Ward 8(1)(1) Room No.651, 6Th Floor, 5, 40-45 Kamar Mansion, Nanabhai Raralkar Marg, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Paral Village, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 012 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Advocate Devendra Jain, Ar Revenue By : Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024

For Appellant: Shri Advocate Devendra JainFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, SR DR
Section 143Section 250

…ITA No. 3291 & 3293/Mum/2022 M/s Saptarshi Relators Pvt. Ltd; A.Y. 13-14 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JM Saptarshi Realtors Private The Income Tax Officer Limited Ward 8(1)(1) Room No.651, 6th Floor, 5, 40-45 Kamar mansion, Aaykar Bhavan, Nanabhai Raralkar Marg, Vs. M.K. Road, Paral village, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 012 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AAACM6828M Saptarshi Realtors Private The Income Tax Officer Limited Ward 8(1)(1) Room No.651, 6th Floor, 5, 40-45 Kamar mansion, Nanabhai Raralkar Marg, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 7, NEW DELHI vs. PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD., GURGAON

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

ITA 3231/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2009-10 Dcit, Central Vs. Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Circle-7, Level 3-6, Pioneer Square, New Delhi. Sector-62, Near Golf Course Pin 110 055 Extension Road, Gurgaon, Haryana Pin 122 001. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K.M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…added the impugned provision for gratuity to the income of the assessee under section 115JB of the Act holding that it is not an ascertained liability. On appeal, relying on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Hewlatt Packard Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 314 ITR 55 (Del.) and the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the point for AY 2008-09, the Ld. CIT(A) decided in favour of the assessee. The Revenue, being aggrieved is before the Tribunal. 6.2. It has been brought to our notice by the parties that the Tribunal vide order dated 14.01.2020 in ITA No. 4102/Del/2015 for AY 2008-09 (copy at page 353-355 of Paper Book)…

ACIT CENT. CIRCLE-4, THANE vs. M/S. ECA INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1523/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 37

…tific basis for meeting its future liabilities, then such provision is allowable as a deduction: a) Bharat Earth Movers vs. CIT (2000) 245 ITR 428 (S.C) b) Rotork Controls India (P) Ltd vs. CIT (2009) 314 ITR 62 (S.C) c) CIT vs. Hewelett Packard India (P) Ltd 314 ITR 55 (Delhi) d) Aggarwal ad Modi Enterprises (Cinema Project) Co. (P) Ltd vs. CIT (2016) 381 ITR 469 (Del.) e) DCIT vs. Vs. First Solutions Ltd (2018) 168 DTR (Mumbai) (Trib.) 161 14. The learned DR, on the other hand placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Southern Technologies Ltd, reported in (2019) 187 Taxmann.…

ACIT, CIRCLE- 19(1), NEW DELHI vs. ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE, GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1812/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1581/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1582/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 1583/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 1199/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Oriental Bank Of Commerce, Vs Addl. Cit, Central Accounts Office, Plot No. 5, Range-13 (Present Range-19) Sector-32, Institutional Area, New Delhi Gurgaon-122001 Dcit/Acit, Circle-19(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco0191M

For Appellant: Sh. KVSR Krishna, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR
Section 14A

…ovision been made on the actuarial basis, and could not be stated to be an unascertained liability so as to be added back in terms of clause (c) to Explanation 1 to section 115 JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961." 3. CIT vs. Hewlett Packard India (P) Ltd. [2009] 314 ITR 55 (Del)(HC) “That the tribunal had found that the provision for gratuity was made on the basis of actuarial valuation. Though the actual payment of the gratuity was deferred to a later date on the happening of a certain event, namely, death or voluntary retirement of the employee, these were not uncertain events. Therefore, the provision made by th…

ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 19(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1199/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1581/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1582/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 1583/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 1199/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Oriental Bank Of Commerce, Vs Addl. Cit, Central Accounts Office, Plot No. 5, Range-13 (Present Range-19) Sector-32, Institutional Area, New Delhi Gurgaon-122001 Dcit/Acit, Circle-19(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco0191M

For Appellant: Sh. KVSR Krishna, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR
Section 14A

…ovision been made on the actuarial basis, and could not be stated to be an unascertained liability so as to be added back in terms of clause (c) to Explanation 1 to section 115 JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961." 3. CIT vs. Hewlett Packard India (P) Ltd. [2009] 314 ITR 55 (Del)(HC) “That the tribunal had found that the provision for gratuity was made on the basis of actuarial valuation. Though the actual payment of the gratuity was deferred to a later date on the happening of a certain event, namely, death or voluntary retirement of the employee, these were not uncertain events. Therefore, the provision made by th…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE, GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2174/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1581/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1582/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 1583/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 1199/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Oriental Bank Of Commerce, Vs Addl. Cit, Central Accounts Office, Plot No. 5, Range-13 (Present Range-19) Sector-32, Institutional Area, New Delhi Gurgaon-122001 Dcit/Acit, Circle-19(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco0191M

For Appellant: Sh. KVSR Krishna, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR
Section 14A

…ovision been made on the actuarial basis, and could not be stated to be an unascertained liability so as to be added back in terms of clause (c) to Explanation 1 to section 115 JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961." 3. CIT vs. Hewlett Packard India (P) Ltd. [2009] 314 ITR 55 (Del)(HC) “That the tribunal had found that the provision for gratuity was made on the basis of actuarial valuation. Though the actual payment of the gratuity was deferred to a later date on the happening of a certain event, namely, death or voluntary retirement of the employee, these were not uncertain events. Therefore, the provision made by th…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE, GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2173/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1581/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1582/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 1583/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 1199/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Oriental Bank Of Commerce, Vs Addl. Cit, Central Accounts Office, Plot No. 5, Range-13 (Present Range-19) Sector-32, Institutional Area, New Delhi Gurgaon-122001 Dcit/Acit, Circle-19(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco0191M

For Appellant: Sh. KVSR Krishna, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR
Section 14A

…ovision been made on the actuarial basis, and could not be stated to be an unascertained liability so as to be added back in terms of clause (c) to Explanation 1 to section 115 JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961." 3. CIT vs. Hewlett Packard India (P) Ltd. [2009] 314 ITR 55 (Del)(HC) “That the tribunal had found that the provision for gratuity was made on the basis of actuarial valuation. Though the actual payment of the gratuity was deferred to a later date on the happening of a certain event, namely, death or voluntary retirement of the employee, these were not uncertain events. Therefore, the provision made by th…

ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1583/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1581/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1582/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 1583/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 1199/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Oriental Bank Of Commerce, Vs Addl. Cit, Central Accounts Office, Plot No. 5, Range-13 (Present Range-19) Sector-32, Institutional Area, New Delhi Gurgaon-122001 Dcit/Acit, Circle-19(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco0191M

For Appellant: Sh. KVSR Krishna, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR
Section 14A

…ovision been made on the actuarial basis, and could not be stated to be an unascertained liability so as to be added back in terms of clause (c) to Explanation 1 to section 115 JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961." 3. CIT vs. Hewlett Packard India (P) Ltd. [2009] 314 ITR 55 (Del)(HC) “That the tribunal had found that the provision for gratuity was made on the basis of actuarial valuation. Though the actual payment of the gratuity was deferred to a later date on the happening of a certain event, namely, death or voluntary retirement of the employee, these were not uncertain events. Therefore, the provision made by th…

ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1582/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1581/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1582/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 1583/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 1199/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Oriental Bank Of Commerce, Vs Addl. Cit, Central Accounts Office, Plot No. 5, Range-13 (Present Range-19) Sector-32, Institutional Area, New Delhi Gurgaon-122001 Dcit/Acit, Circle-19(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco0191M

For Appellant: Sh. KVSR Krishna, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR
Section 14A

…ovision been made on the actuarial basis, and could not be stated to be an unascertained liability so as to be added back in terms of clause (c) to Explanation 1 to section 115 JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961." 3. CIT vs. Hewlett Packard India (P) Ltd. [2009] 314 ITR 55 (Del)(HC) “That the tribunal had found that the provision for gratuity was made on the basis of actuarial valuation. Though the actual payment of the gratuity was deferred to a later date on the happening of a certain event, namely, death or voluntary retirement of the employee, these were not uncertain events. Therefore, the provision made by th…

ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1581/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1581/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1582/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 1583/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 1199/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Oriental Bank Of Commerce, Vs Addl. Cit, Central Accounts Office, Plot No. 5, Range-13 (Present Range-19) Sector-32, Institutional Area, New Delhi Gurgaon-122001 Dcit/Acit, Circle-19(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco0191M

For Appellant: Sh. KVSR Krishna, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR
Section 14A

…ovision been made on the actuarial basis, and could not be stated to be an unascertained liability so as to be added back in terms of clause (c) to Explanation 1 to section 115 JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961." 3. CIT vs. Hewlett Packard India (P) Ltd. [2009] 314 ITR 55 (Del)(HC) “That the tribunal had found that the provision for gratuity was made on the basis of actuarial valuation. Though the actual payment of the gratuity was deferred to a later date on the happening of a certain event, namely, death or voluntary retirement of the employee, these were not uncertain events. Therefore, the provision made by th…

Showing 1–20 of 37 · Page 1 of 2