CIT v. Mahavir Alluminium Ltd.

297 ITR 77High Court2008#1961 most cited

What is CIT v. Mahavir Alluminium Ltd. authority for?

When the Assessing Officer revalues the closing stock, the opening stock must also be revalued on the same basis to ensure consistency in the method of accounting and proper computation of business income.

58

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Mahavir Alluminium Ltd. · 297 ITR 77 · Section 145 · Section 145A · opening stock revaluation · closing stock revaluation · inventory valuation · consistency in accounting · business income · profits and gains of business

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 120(4)(b)Section 124(3)Section 127Section 145Section 2(7A)Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 145asection 38r&d expenditureopening wdvsection 80hsection 80hhcsection 80hhwritten down valueblock of assetssection 145section 50section 92ca(3)

Judgments citing CIT v. Mahavir Alluminium Ltd.

Triton Valves Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

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

ITA 1629/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri G. Venkatesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

…to be valued on the same basis as the closing stock is valued in the inclusive method of accounting. For this purpose, he relied on the following case laws:- 1. CIT v Indo Nippon Chemical Co. Ltd [2000] 245 ITR 384 (Bom.) 2. CIT v Mahavir Aluminum Ltd [2008] 297 ITR 77 (Del.) 3. ACIT v Kunkel Wagner (I) (P.) Ltd., [2011] 11 taxmann.com 405 (Mum.) 4. Clariant (India) Ltd. V ITO-6(2)(2) [2011] 9 taxmann.com 221 (Mum.) 5. R.R. Kabel Ltd., v ACIT, 7(2), Mumbai [2012] 25 taxmann.com 559 (Mum.) 6. Ciba India Ltd., v DCIT, [2015] 59 taxmann.com 29 (Mum. - Trib.) 7. Sunshield Chemicals (P.) Ltd v ITO 7(2)(3) [2015] 64 t…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Dharampal Satyapal Ltd., Delhi

ITA 3883/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I Bara, CIT DR
Section 142Section 147Section 153Section 153ASection 201(1)Section 36Section 40Section 40A(3)

…Dharampal Satyapal Ltd Vs, DCIT ITA No. 3738, 3739/Del/2016 (A) & ITA No. 3882 & 3883/Del/2016(R) Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―I-1‖: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H. S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3738, 3739/Del/2016 (Assessment Year: 2010-11, 2011-12) Dharampal Satyapal Ltd, Vs. DCIT, 1711, S. P. Mukherjee Marg, Central Circle-29, Delhi New Delhi PAN: AAACD0132H (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 3882 & 3883/Del/2016 (Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12) DCIT, Vs. Dharampal Satyapal Ltd, Central Circle-29, 1711, S. P. Mukh…

Habibullah A. Choudhary, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2009-10 is

ITA 188/PUN/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Oct 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.186 To 188/Pun/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06 To 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Doshi
Section 132Section 153ASection 69

…d. The alternate contention of the appellant is that if the closing stock is adjusted for VAT, the opening stock should also similarly be adjusted. This contention of the appellant is acceptable in view of the decisions in CIT Vs. Mahavir Aluminium Ltd.(2008) 297 ITR 77 ( Del.) and CIT Vs. Ahmadabad New Cotton Mills Ltd. AIR 1930 PC 56 et al. Accordingly, this ground of appeal is partly allowed with a directed to the AO to adjust the amount of opening stock also for VAT after giving the appellant an opportunity to present the requisite details and documents in this regard.” From the above, it is evident, althoug…

Habibullah A. Choudhary, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2009-10 is

ITA 187/PUN/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Oct 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.186 To 188/Pun/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06 To 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Doshi
Section 132Section 153ASection 69

…d. The alternate contention of the appellant is that if the closing stock is adjusted for VAT, the opening stock should also similarly be adjusted. This contention of the appellant is acceptable in view of the decisions in CIT Vs. Mahavir Aluminium Ltd.(2008) 297 ITR 77 ( Del.) and CIT Vs. Ahmadabad New Cotton Mills Ltd. AIR 1930 PC 56 et al. Accordingly, this ground of appeal is partly allowed with a directed to the AO to adjust the amount of opening stock also for VAT after giving the appellant an opportunity to present the requisite details and documents in this regard.” From the above, it is evident, althoug…

Habibullah A. Choudhary, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2009-10 is

ITA 186/PUN/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Oct 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.186 To 188/Pun/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06 To 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Doshi
Section 132Section 153ASection 69

…d. The alternate contention of the appellant is that if the closing stock is adjusted for VAT, the opening stock should also similarly be adjusted. This contention of the appellant is acceptable in view of the decisions in CIT Vs. Mahavir Aluminium Ltd.(2008) 297 ITR 77 ( Del.) and CIT Vs. Ahmadabad New Cotton Mills Ltd. AIR 1930 PC 56 et al. Accordingly, this ground of appeal is partly allowed with a directed to the AO to adjust the amount of opening stock also for VAT after giving the appellant an opportunity to present the requisite details and documents in this regard.” From the above, it is evident, althoug…

Habibullah Abbasali Chaudhary, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2009-10 is

ITA 498/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.186 To 188/Pun/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06 To 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Doshi
Section 132Section 153ASection 69

…d. The alternate contention of the appellant is that if the closing stock is adjusted for VAT, the opening stock should also similarly be adjusted. This contention of the appellant is acceptable in view of the decisions in CIT Vs. Mahavir Aluminium Ltd.(2008) 297 ITR 77 ( Del.) and CIT Vs. Ahmadabad New Cotton Mills Ltd. AIR 1930 PC 56 et al. Accordingly, this ground of appeal is partly allowed with a directed to the AO to adjust the amount of opening stock also for VAT after giving the appellant an opportunity to present the requisite details and documents in this regard.” From the above, it is evident, althoug…

Essel Propack Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT RG 6(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1397/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2007-08 Essel Propack Ltd. Top Asst. Commissioner Of Floor, Times Tower, Vs. Income Tax, Range- Kamala City, Senapati 6(2)(2), Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Aayakarbhavan Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace1568L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Niraj Sheth, Ar Revenue By : Mr. D.W. Pansari, Dr Date Of Hearing : 25/09/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/09/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Niraj Sheth, ARFor Respondent: Mr. D.W. Pansari, DR
Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Essel Propack Ltd. Top Asst. Commissioner of Floor, Times Tower, Vs. Income Tax, Range- Kamala City, Senapati 6(2)(2), Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, AayakarBhavan Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAACE1568L Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Niraj Sheth, AR Revenue by : Mr. D.W. Pansari, DR Date of Hearing : 25/09/2018 Date of pronouncement : 28/09/2018 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant ass…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Meroform India Pvt Ltd., Noida

In the result appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4635/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan CAFor Respondent: Smt. Shafali Swaroop, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 40A

…e contrary to settled position in favour of assessee by the judgment of Hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT v. Mahalaxmi Glass Works (P) Ltd., 318 ITR 116 (Bom) and also the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Maha veer Aluminium Ltd, 297 ITR 77 , wherein, it has been held that if there is change in valuation of closing stock in one end, it must necessarily be a corresponding change at the other end, otherwise, the true profit would not be reflected. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mahaveer Almn Ltd (supra) have held after considering the decision in the case of CIT v. Ahmedabad N…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Meroform India Pvt Ltd., Noida

In the result appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4634/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan CAFor Respondent: Smt. Shafali Swaroop, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 40A

…e contrary to settled position in favour of assessee by the judgment of Hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT v. Mahalaxmi Glass Works (P) Ltd., 318 ITR 116 (Bom) and also the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Maha veer Aluminium Ltd, 297 ITR 77 , wherein, it has been held that if there is change in valuation of closing stock in one end, it must necessarily be a corresponding change at the other end, otherwise, the true profit would not be reflected. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mahaveer Almn Ltd (supra) have held after considering the decision in the case of CIT v. Ahmedabad N…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Meroform India Pvt Ltd., Noida

In the result appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4633/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan CAFor Respondent: Smt. Shafali Swaroop, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 40A

…e contrary to settled position in favour of assessee by the judgment of Hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT v. Mahalaxmi Glass Works (P) Ltd., 318 ITR 116 (Bom) and also the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Maha veer Aluminium Ltd, 297 ITR 77 , wherein, it has been held that if there is change in valuation of closing stock in one end, it must necessarily be a corresponding change at the other end, otherwise, the true profit would not be reflected. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mahaveer Almn Ltd (supra) have held after considering the decision in the case of CIT v. Ahmedabad N…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Meroform India Pvt Ltd., Noida

In the result appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4632/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan CAFor Respondent: Smt. Shafali Swaroop, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 40A

…e contrary to settled position in favour of assessee by the judgment of Hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT v. Mahalaxmi Glass Works (P) Ltd., 318 ITR 116 (Bom) and also the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Maha veer Aluminium Ltd, 297 ITR 77 , wherein, it has been held that if there is change in valuation of closing stock in one end, it must necessarily be a corresponding change at the other end, otherwise, the true profit would not be reflected. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mahaveer Almn Ltd (supra) have held after considering the decision in the case of CIT v. Ahmedabad N…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Meroform India Pvt Ltd., Noida

In the result appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4631/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan CAFor Respondent: Smt. Shafali Swaroop, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 40A

…e contrary to settled position in favour of assessee by the judgment of Hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT v. Mahalaxmi Glass Works (P) Ltd., 318 ITR 116 (Bom) and also the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Maha veer Aluminium Ltd, 297 ITR 77 , wherein, it has been held that if there is change in valuation of closing stock in one end, it must necessarily be a corresponding change at the other end, otherwise, the true profit would not be reflected. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mahaveer Almn Ltd (supra) have held after considering the decision in the case of CIT v. Ahmedabad N…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Meroform India Pvt Ltd., Noida

In the result appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4630/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan CAFor Respondent: Smt. Shafali Swaroop, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 40A

…e contrary to settled position in favour of assessee by the judgment of Hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT v. Mahalaxmi Glass Works (P) Ltd., 318 ITR 116 (Bom) and also the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Maha veer Aluminium Ltd, 297 ITR 77 , wherein, it has been held that if there is change in valuation of closing stock in one end, it must necessarily be a corresponding change at the other end, otherwise, the true profit would not be reflected. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mahaveer Almn Ltd (supra) have held after considering the decision in the case of CIT v. Ahmedabad N…

M/S. Meroform (India) Pvt. Ltd., Uttar Pradesh vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4494/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan CAFor Respondent: Smt. Shafali Swaroop, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 40A

…e contrary to settled position in favour of assessee by the judgment of Hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT v. Mahalaxmi Glass Works (P) Ltd., 318 ITR 116 (Bom) and also the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Maha veer Aluminium Ltd, 297 ITR 77 , wherein, it has been held that if there is change in valuation of closing stock in one end, it must necessarily be a corresponding change at the other end, otherwise, the true profit would not be reflected. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mahaveer Almn Ltd (supra) have held after considering the decision in the case of CIT v. Ahmedabad N…

Asst CIT (Ltu) -1, Mumbai vs. Johnson & Johnson Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue as well as cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1776/MUM/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jun 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Lohia, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande, D.R
Section 40A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1776 & 1777/M/2017 Assessment Years: 2003-04 & 2004-05 Asst. Commissioner of M/s. Johnson & Johnson Income Tax, Ltd., (Large Taxpayer Unit)-1, 501, Arena Space, World Trade Centre, Vs. Off JVLR, Centre 1, 29th Floor, Opp: Majas Bus Depot, Cuffe Parade, Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai – 400 005 Mumbai-400 060 PAN: AAACJ 0866E (Appellant) (Respondent) CO No.242/M/2017 (Arising out of ITA No.1777/M/2017) Assessment Year: 2004-05 M/s. Johnson & Johnson Asst. CIT (LTU)-…

DCIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Koch Chemical Technology Group India P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 150/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2013-14 Dcit-14(2)(1), M/S Koch Chemical Room No.432, 4Th Floor, Technology Group India Pvt. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd. Vs. M. K. Road, 10Th Floor, Corporate Park-Ii Mumbai-400020 Sion Trombay Road Chembur, Mumbai-400071 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aabck3688G

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 145A

…mical Technology 2.1. On appeal before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), the CBDT Circular, relied upon by the Ld. Assessing Officer along with the decision like Chainrup Sampatram vs CIT (24 ITR 481)(Supreme Court), Mahavir Aluminum Pvt. Ltd. (297 ITR 77)(Del.), Hawkins Cooker Ltd. vs Income Tax Officer (ITA No.505/Mum/2014) and CBDT Circular No. 772 dated 23/12/1998 were considered along with the decision from Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Mahalaxmi Glass Works Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 318 ITR 116 (Bom.) and granted relief to the assessee. The Revenue is aggrieved and is in appeal before this…

Amar Jewellers, Thane vs. Asst CIT Cir 2, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 5631/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Amar Jewellers Acit, Circle-2 1, Zenda Naka, Bazar Peth, Vs. Kalyan. Murbad, Dist. Thane-421402 Pan No. Aaofa7485M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Mr. Ajay R. Singh, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Pooja Swaroop, Dr Date Of Hearing : 17/04/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 26/04/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Ajay R. Singh, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, DR
Section 143(3)

…he Ld. counsel submits that the method regularly followed by the assessee while valuing closing stock be accepted. Otherwise, corresponding change in opening stock also be made. Reliance is placed by him on the decision in CIT v. Mahavir Aluminium Ltd. (2008) 297 ITR 77 (Del), Veera Exports v. ACIT (2017) 82 taxmann.com 448 (Guj). 6. On the other hand, the Ld. DR relies on the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. The reasons for our decisions are given below. A perusal of the tax audit report at Serial No. 12 in Form No. 3CD[(Rule 6G(…

DCIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Koch Chemical Technology Group India P.Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal are allowed

ITA 7307/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Am & Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 7307/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Suman KumarFor Respondent: None
Section 143(3)Section 145A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G. S. PANNU, AM & SH. SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 7307/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Koch Chemical DCIT 14(2)(1) Technology Group R. No. 432, Aayakar India Pvt. Ltd. Bhavan, M. k. Road, बिधम/ 10th Floor, Coporative Mumbai-400020 Vs. Park II sion Trambey Rd, Chembur, Mumbai-400071 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN No. AABCK3688G (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri Suman Kumar प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : None सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 26/02/2018 Date of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / 28/0…

Larsen & Toubro Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 6257/MUM/2011[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2018AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 1999-00 Larsen & Toubro Ltd. Dcit-2(2) Taxation Department L&T Room No. 577, 5Th Vs. House, N.M. Ballard Estate, Floor, Aayakar Mumbai-400001 Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacl0140P Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 1999-00 Dcit-2(2) Larsen & Toubro Ltd. Room No. 577, 5Th Floor, Taxation Department Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. L&T House, N.M. Road Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400001 Pan No. Aaacl0140P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. J.D. Mistry & Mr. Madhur Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Anadi Varma, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 14/02/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2018

For Appellant: Mr. J.D. Mistry &For Respondent: Mr. Anadi Varma, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 145A

…to recompute the profits after making adjustments accordingly.” 2.3 Before us, the Ld. counsels of the assessee submit that the same is profit neutral. There is no impact on profit. Reliance is placed by them on the decision in CIT v. Mahavir Alluminium Ltd. (297 ITR 77) (Del.), CIT v. Mahalaxmi Glass Work (P) Ltd. (318 ITR 116) (Bom.) and Bayer Crop Science Ltd. (62 SOT 109) (ITAT- Mumbai). On the other hand, the Ld. DR relies on the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). 2.4 We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. As the provisions of section 145A have been inserted w.e.f. 01.…

M/S. Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd ( Erstwhile Known As Goodlass Nerolac Paints Ltd), Mumbai vs. The DCIT RG 6(3)

In the result, the appeal for the AY 2005-06 is partly allowed

ITA 212/MUM/2008[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2018AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2004-05 Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd. Dcit, Range 6(3) (Erstwhile Known As Room No. 576, Vs. Goodlass Nerolac Paints Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Nerolac House, G.K. Marg, Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacg1376N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 & Assessment Year: 2006-07 Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd. Addl. Cit, Range 6(2) (Erstwhile Known As Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Vs. Goodlass Nerolac Paints Ltd.) Marg, Nerolac House, G.K. Marg, Mumbai-400020. Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacg1376N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Mrs. Arati Vissanji, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Pooja Swaroop, Dr Date Of Hearing : 02/02/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/03/2018

For Appellant: Mrs. Arati Vissanji, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, DR
Section 143(3)

…- made by the AO. 6.3 Before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee submits that the appellant follows exclusive method of accounting for MODVAT. Reliance is placed by her on the decision in Indo Nippon Chemical Co. Ltd. 261 ITR 275 (SC), Mahavir Alluminium Ltd. 297 ITR 77 (Del), Mahalaxmi Glass Works Pvt. Ltd. 318 ITR 116 (Bom) and DCIT v. Hitech Plast Containers (I) Ltd. 2009 31 SOT 112 (Mum). The Ld. counsel further drew our attention to a recent decision dated 07.07.2017 by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT v. M/s Diamond Dye Chem Ltd. (ITA No. 146 of 2015). 6.4 On the other hand, the Ld. DR relies on the ord…