CIT v. Jagatjit Industries Ltd.

339 ITR 382High Court2011#2605 most cited

What is CIT v. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. authority for?

An assessee's consistently followed accounting method, if previously accepted by the Department, cannot be rejected by the tax authorities unless they establish that it distorts the true profits. The doctrine of consistency applies.

45

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. · 339 ITR 382 · Section 145 · method of accounting · doctrine of consistency · accounting system acceptance · rejection of accounting method · distortion of profits · Assessing Officer power · business expediency

Sections most often in play

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 199Section 203Section 234BSection 234DSection 244ASection 254
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 145(2)business expediencyrule of consistencysection 36(1)(iii)commercial expediencysection 145revenue expendituresection 36(1)section 36section 37section 14aindia

Judgments citing CIT v. Jagatjit Industries Ltd.

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(4), GUWAHATI vs. M/S. S.R.K.M. STEELS (P) LTD, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 274/GTY/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati18 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(4) M/S S.R.K.M Steels (P) Ltd. Room No.707, 7Th Floor, Aayakar M/S Srkm Steels (P) Ltd. Lokhra Bhawan Poorva, G.S. Road, Road, P.O. Sawkuchi, Guwahati- Vs. Guwahati-781005, Assam 781034, Assam (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aalcs5046E Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar karnani, DR
Section 133(6)

…s only in those cases where the Department records a finding that the method adopted by the assessee results in distortion of profits that the Department can insist on substitution of the existing method." In the case ofCIT vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd.((2011) 399 ITR 382 (Del.)], the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held as follows: "If a particular accounting system has been followed and accepted and there is no acceptable reason to differ with it, the doctrine of consistency would come into play. The method of accounting cannot be rejected." Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Berger Paints India Ltd. vs.…

SOLUTIONS INTEGRATED MARKETING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2852/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2011-12]

Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 234DSection 244ASection 271(1)(c)

…is completed. However, the client deducts the tax on provision basis. This in-turn result in timing difference of TDS credit claimed in the return of income and income accounted by the appellant. He further relied on the judgments of Jagatjit Industries Ltd (339 ITR 382) and pleaded that he is consistently followed the same accounting contracts which was accepted by the department. I am not agreed with the arguments of the Ld. AR of the appellant. From the facts given by the Ld. AR of the appellant, it is clear that the sales as per TDS Certificates are required to be reconciled because in one case, 2 times TDS…

ACIT, CIRCLE- 26(2) , NEW DELHI vs. VINEY CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6471/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. B.S. Anant, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37

…omain of capital and was not allowable inasmuch as the borrowing was for the purchase of share capital of a foreign company. Ld. Assessing Officer pleases reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Jagatjit Industries Limited, 337 ITR 21 (Del). Learned CIT(A) agreed with the view expressed by the Assessing Officer and upheld this addition. 6. Arguments of the ld. AR are two-fold. Firstly, according to him this expense is allowable u/s. 37 of the Act because the borrowing was for the business purpose to have control over Vimercati SPA in order to expand their business, as has been…

VINEY CORPORATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 26(2) , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6028/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. B.S. Anant, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37

…omain of capital and was not allowable inasmuch as the borrowing was for the purchase of share capital of a foreign company. Ld. Assessing Officer pleases reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Jagatjit Industries Limited, 337 ITR 21 (Del). Learned CIT(A) agreed with the view expressed by the Assessing Officer and upheld this addition. 6. Arguments of the ld. AR are two-fold. Firstly, according to him this expense is allowable u/s. 37 of the Act because the borrowing was for the business purpose to have control over Vimercati SPA in order to expand their business, as has been…

SOMA TECH PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. PR. CIT-2, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 344/SRT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat07 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Shri Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.344/Srt/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Soma Tech Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Principal 301, Soham House, Commissioner Of Income Opp. St. Xavier’S School, Tax-2, Surat. Ghod Dod Road, Surat. [Pan: Aakcs 5265 N] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओर से /Assessee By Shri Hiren Vepari – Ca राज"वक"ओर से /Revenue By Shri Ritesh Mishra – Cit-Dr

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…enue receipt’ will also serve to distinguish between capital disbursement and revenue disbursement. 17. We find that the issue involve in the present case is directly covered by the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs Jagatjit Industries Ltd (2011) 337 ITR 21 Delhi. The fact of the said case are that assessee in that case is a multi-product company engaged in the business of alcoholic beverages, malted milk foods, dairy products, etc. During the relevant assessment year, the said assessee company issued certain equity shares overseas by way of GDR and collected the money in the US Dollars as share capi…

HERO MOTOCROP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 9187/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 145ASection 80ISection 92C

…in those cases where the Department records a finding that the method adopted by the assessee results in distortion of profits that the Department can insist on substitution of the existing method.” 7.21 In the case of CIT vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. (2011) 399 ITR 382 (Del.), the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court has held as follows: “If a particular accounting system has been followed and accepted and there is no acceptable reason to differ with it, the doctrine of consistency would come into play. The method of accounting cannot be rejected. The assessee was following the mercantile system of accounting. Acc…

DEEP JYOTI COMPANY,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 134/JPR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Feb 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: The Hearing Of This Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 44A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCH ‘A’,(VC) JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSIAN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 134/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2016-17. cuke Deep Jyoti Company, Assistant Commissioner of Vs. B-219, Janta Colony, Income Tax, Circle-5, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. AAAFD 7795 H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri S.L. Poddar (Advocate) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue…

HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1351/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Amount of Proposed international
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘I-1’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1351/DEL/2018 (A.Y 2009-10) M/s Hero Moto Corp Ltd. Vs DCIT 34, Basant Lok, Circle-11(1) Vasant Vihar C. R. Building New Delhi – 110 034. New Delhi. PAN : AAACH0812J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assesssee by Sh. Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate and Sh. Gaurav Jain, Ms. Deepika Agarwal, Adv Respondent by Sh. Sanjay. I. Bara, CIT-DR & Sh. B. Ramanjaneyula, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 25.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement 23.04.2019 ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM…

HINDUSTAN SHIPYARD LTD,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

ITA 451/VIZ/2017[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Jan 2019AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.451/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S Hindustan Shipyard Ltd., Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Gandhigram Income Tax Visakhapatnam Circle-3(1) Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaach4275P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 18.01.2019 01.02.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री िी. दुगाा राि,न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री धड.एस. सुन्दर धसंह, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.451/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/s Hindustan Shipyard Ltd., Vs. Dy.Commissioner of Gandhigram Income Tax Visakhapatnam Circle-3(1) Visakhapatnam [PAN : AAACH4275P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri G.V.N.Hari, AR प्रत्यधथी की ओर से/ Re…

THE INDIAN STEEL & WIRE PRODUCTS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-3, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1033/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1033/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2006-07 The Indian Steel & Wire Products Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-3, Kolkata [Pan: Aabct 1067 C ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Robin Chowdhury, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…re by the revenue. Hence, the same cannot be disallowed ignoring the bona fide contentions of the assessee. In this regard, we would like to place reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. reported in 339 ITR 382 (Del); CIT vs. Modipan Ltd. reported in 334 ITR 102 (Del). We also find that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal had also held this issue in favour of the assessee in the case of Hindusthan Gum and Chemical Industries Ltd. vs. ITO reported in 23 SOT 143. In view of the aforesaid facts and respectfully following the judicial precedent relied up…

M/S THE KESHAB JEWELLERS,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, R-50, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1225/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Aug 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1225/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S The Keshab Jewellers -Vs- Jcit, Range-50, Kolkata [Pan: Aabft 5144 R ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kr. Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…page 366. We find that the following decisions also support the case of the assessee:- CIT v. Sant Ram Mangat Ram reported in (2005) 275 ITR 312 (P&H) CIT v. Ema India Ltd reported in (2006) 296 ITR 510 (All) CIT v. Jagatjit Industries Ltd reported in (2011) 339 ITR 382 (Del) CIT v. Shah Doshi & Co reported in (1982) 133 ITR 23 (Guj) 7.5. In view of the aforesaid findings in the facts and circumstances of the case and respectfully following the various judicial precedents relied upon hereinabove, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Learned CITA. Accordingly the grounds raised by the reve…

BLUE STAR CIVIL ENGINEERING COMPANY PVT. LTD.,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. ACIT, CIR-27, HALDIA, PURBA MEDINIPUR

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

ITA 1434/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jul 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1434/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Blue Star Civil Engineering Company -Vs- Acit, Circle-Haldia [Pan: Aaccb 2247 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M. Ghosh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…Gum and Chemicals Ltd. vs. ITO reported in 23 SOT143 had allowed the claim of prior period expenses in similar circumstances. Our view is further endorsed by the following decisions of Hon’ble Delhi High Court: a) CIT vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. reported in 339 ITR 382 (Delhi) b) CIT vs. Modipon Ltd. reported in 334 ITR 102 Respectfully following the aforesaid decisions and applying the same to the facts of the instant case, we allow the claim of prior period expenses of Rs. 3,04,500/- for assessment year 2011-12 and accordingly, ground no. 2 raised by the assessee is allowed. 5. The last issue to be decided…

DCIT, CIR-6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT BANK OF INDIA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 894/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A Nos. 1870, 1871 & 894/Kol/2017 Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Dcit, Circle-6(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Industrial Investment Bank Of India [Pan: Aabci 0324 D] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Md. Usman, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, FCA
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44A

…e with Accounting Standard – 5 issued by ICAI, cannot be deprived of the deduction from its total income. Our views also draw support from the following decisions :- a) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Jagatjit Industries Ltd reported in (2011) 339 ITR 382 (Del) b) Co-ordinate Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Sony India (P) Ltd vs DCIT reported in (2008) 118 TTJ 865 (Del Trib) c) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Modipon Ltd reported in 334 ITR 102 (Del) d)Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Gum & Chemicals Ltd vs ITO reported in 23 SOT 143 for Asst Yea…

DCIT, CIR-6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT BANK OF INDIA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1871/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A Nos. 1870, 1871 & 894/Kol/2017 Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Dcit, Circle-6(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Industrial Investment Bank Of India [Pan: Aabci 0324 D] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Md. Usman, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, FCA
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44A

…e with Accounting Standard – 5 issued by ICAI, cannot be deprived of the deduction from its total income. Our views also draw support from the following decisions :- a) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Jagatjit Industries Ltd reported in (2011) 339 ITR 382 (Del) b) Co-ordinate Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Sony India (P) Ltd vs DCIT reported in (2008) 118 TTJ 865 (Del Trib) c) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Modipon Ltd reported in 334 ITR 102 (Del) d)Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Gum & Chemicals Ltd vs ITO reported in 23 SOT 143 for Asst Yea…

DCIT, CIR-6(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT BANK OF INDIA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1870/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A Nos. 1870, 1871 & 894/Kol/2017 Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Dcit, Circle-6(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Industrial Investment Bank Of India [Pan: Aabci 0324 D] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Md. Usman, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, FCA
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44A

…e with Accounting Standard – 5 issued by ICAI, cannot be deprived of the deduction from its total income. Our views also draw support from the following decisions :- a) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Jagatjit Industries Ltd reported in (2011) 339 ITR 382 (Del) b) Co-ordinate Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Sony India (P) Ltd vs DCIT reported in (2008) 118 TTJ 865 (Del Trib) c) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Modipon Ltd reported in 334 ITR 102 (Del) d)Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Gum & Chemicals Ltd vs ITO reported in 23 SOT 143 for Asst Yea…

HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-11, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No

ITA 6990/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No. 6990/Del/2017 (A.Y 2013-14)

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…the method of accounting, which the Department has earlier accepted. It is only in those cases where the Department records a finding that the method adopted by substitution of the existing method.” 7.21 In the case of CIT vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. (2011) 399 ITR 382 (Del.), the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court has held as follows: “If a particular accounting system has been followed and accepted and there is no acceptable reason to differ with it, the doctrine of consistency would come into play. The method of accounting cannot be rejected. The assessee was following the mercantile system of accounting. A…

ITO 9(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. KEM LIQUORS & BEVERAGES P. LTD, THANE

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 686/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G Manjunathaassessment Year : 2010-11 Ito 9(2)(2), M/S. Kem Liquors & Beverages P Ltd., Mumbai A/47, Road No.11, Wagle Indl. Estate, Vs. Thane (W), Thane 400 604

For Appellant: Shri Ram TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 4Section 5Section 56(1)Section 61

…such presumption cannot be sustained. Appellant further gets support from various decisions of the case of – a) Padmaraje R Kadambande vs CIT 195 ITR 877 (1992)(SC) b) CIT vs Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. 216 CTR 195 (2008) (SC) c) CIT vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. 337 ITR 21 (Delhi) (2010) (SC) d) Niyati B Yodh vs. ACIT, 4 SOT 941 (Mumbai) (2004)” 5. The learned DR submitted that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the additions made by the Assessing Officer towards share capital including share premium as unexplained income u/s. 56(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961…

HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal No. 2424/Del/ 2015 filed by the revenue in assessment year 2010-11 is partly allowed

ITA 1616/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…in those cases where the Department records a finding that the method adopted by the assessee results in distortion of profits that the Department can insist on substitution of the existing method.” 7.21 In the case of CIT vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. (2011) 399 ITR 382 (Del.), the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court has held as follows: “If a particular accounting system has been followed and accepted and there is no acceptable reason to differ with it, the doctrine of consistency would come into play. The method of accounting cannot be rejected. The assessee was following the mercantile system of accounting. A…

ITO, WD-9(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ROOPSHREE JEWELLERS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

ITA 828/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Apr 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 442/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S Roopshree Jewellers (P) Ltd. -Vs- Ito, Ward-9(3), Kolkata [Pan: Aabcr 2241 N] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 828/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Ito, Ward-9(3), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Roopshree Jewellers (P) Ltd. [Pan: Aabcr 2241 N] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Srihari, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 145A

…page 366. We find that the following decisions also support the case of the assessee:- CIT vs Sant Ram Mangat Ram reported in (2005) 275 ITR 312 (P&H) CIT vs Ema India Ltd reported in (2006) 296 ITR 510 (All) CIT vs Jagatjit Industries Ltd reported in (2011) 339 ITR 382 (Del) CIT vs Shah Doshi & Co reported in (1982) 133 ITR 23 (Guj) 7.5. In view of the aforesaid findings in the facts and circumstances of the case and respectfully following the various judicial precedents relied upon hereinabove, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Learned CITA. Accordingly the grounds raised by the rev…

M/S ROOPSHREE JEWELLERS (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-9(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 442/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Apr 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 442/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S Roopshree Jewellers (P) Ltd. -Vs- Ito, Ward-9(3), Kolkata [Pan: Aabcr 2241 N] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 828/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Ito, Ward-9(3), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Roopshree Jewellers (P) Ltd. [Pan: Aabcr 2241 N] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Srihari, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 145A

…page 366. We find that the following decisions also support the case of the assessee:- CIT vs Sant Ram Mangat Ram reported in (2005) 275 ITR 312 (P&H) CIT vs Ema India Ltd reported in (2006) 296 ITR 510 (All) CIT vs Jagatjit Industries Ltd reported in (2011) 339 ITR 382 (Del) CIT vs Shah Doshi & Co reported in (1982) 133 ITR 23 (Guj) 7.5. In view of the aforesaid findings in the facts and circumstances of the case and respectfully following the various judicial precedents relied upon hereinabove, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Learned CITA. Accordingly the grounds raised by the rev…

Showing 1–20 of 45 · Page 1 of 3

CIT v. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. (339 ITR 382) — Cited in 45 Judgments | BharatTax