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.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Mahavir Alluminium Ltd.?

58 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Mahavir Alluminium Ltd. (297 ITR 77), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Mahavir Alluminium Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 145A, Section 120(4)(b), Section 124(3), Section 127, Section 145.

CIT v. Mahavir Alluminium Ltd. (297 ITR 77)

M/S. Mahendra Chemicals, Ahmedabad vs. The Jt.CIT, Range-3, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1424/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Respondent: Shri V. K. Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 250

…ngly addition of Rs.18,98,517/- was made. 2.3 Against the said order appellant preferred first statutory appeal before ld.CIT(A) who has directed AO to make adjustment to the valuation of stock in accordance with the decision of Mahavir Aluminum Corporation (297 ITR 77) i.e. both the opening stock and closing stock. 3. We have gone through the relevant record and impugned order. The appellant is a partnership firm and engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of drugs. It filed its return of income for AY. 2011-12 declaring total income of Rs.60,81,210/-. AO conclude that the provisions of section 145A…

DCIT, Ghaziabad vs. M/S. Supreme Ceremics Ltd., Ghaziabad

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 431/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2011-12] The D.C.I.T Vs. M/S Supreme Ceramics Ltd Circle 2 C – 154, B.S. Road, Ghaziabad Bulandshahar Road, Industrial Area Ghaziabad Pan : Aaccs 6095 C [Assessment Year: 2011-12] M/S Supreme Ceramics Ltd Vs. The D.C.I.T C – 154, B.S. Road, Circle 2 Bulandshahar Road, Ghaziabad Industrial Area Ghaziabad Pan : Aaccs 6095 C [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 06.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.11.2017 Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Tanena, Adv Shri Acrhit Rehan, Adv

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Tanena, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jain, Sr. DR

Section 2

…will be given to both i.e. Opening as well as Closing stock. Further, Excise duty paid on sale of finished goods would also require adjustment. Reliance was also placed on the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Mahavir Aluminium Ltd. 297 ITR 77 (Delhi). 25. We have carefully gone through submissions made and material brought before us by both the sides. It is firstly noted that assessee has clarified complete facts with detailed working before AO as well as CIT(A) showing that no further adjustment would be needed u/s 145A even if accounts are prepared on Inclusive basis. We find it con…

M/S. Supreme Ceramics Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 414/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2011-12] The D.C.I.T Vs. M/S Supreme Ceramics Ltd Circle 2 C – 154, B.S. Road, Ghaziabad Bulandshahar Road, Industrial Area Ghaziabad Pan : Aaccs 6095 C [Assessment Year: 2011-12] M/S Supreme Ceramics Ltd Vs. The D.C.I.T C – 154, B.S. Road, Circle 2 Bulandshahar Road, Ghaziabad Industrial Area Ghaziabad Pan : Aaccs 6095 C [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 06.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.11.2017 Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Tanena, Adv Shri Acrhit Rehan, Adv

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Tanena, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jain, Sr. DR

Section 2

…will be given to both i.e. Opening as well as Closing stock. Further, Excise duty paid on sale of finished goods would also require adjustment. Reliance was also placed on the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Mahavir Aluminium Ltd. 297 ITR 77 (Delhi). 25. We have carefully gone through submissions made and material brought before us by both the sides. It is firstly noted that assessee has clarified complete facts with detailed working before AO as well as CIT(A) showing that no further adjustment would be needed u/s 145A even if accounts are prepared on Inclusive basis. We find it con…

Grohe India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 958/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Kanchun Kaushal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT DR

…sales, opening and closing stock. It is not appropriate to include the figure of SAD only in the figure of closing stock without modifying the figures of purchases, sales and opening stock. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Mahavir Alluminium (2008) 297 ITR 77 (Del.) and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Mahalaxmi Glass Works Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 318 ITR 116 (Bom.) have held to this extent. As the AO has not adjusted all the relevant figures with the amount of tax, duty, cess etc., we set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of A.O. for deciding it afresh in accordance with…

M/S. Grohe India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 479/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Kanchun Kaushal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT DR

…sales, opening and closing stock. It is not appropriate to include the figure of SAD only in the figure of closing stock without modifying the figures of purchases, sales and opening stock. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Mahavir Alluminium (2008) 297 ITR 77 (Del.) and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Mahalaxmi Glass Works Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 318 ITR 116 (Bom.) have held to this extent. As the AO has not adjusted all the relevant figures with the amount of tax, duty, cess etc., we set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of A.O. for deciding it afresh in accordance with…

Syngenta India Ltd, Pune vs. Asst CIT RG 1(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 147/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Amit Shuklait(Tp)A No.: 1373/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year 2009-10) ससिंगएनता इिंडिमा प्राइवेट सरसभटेि Vs Dy. Cit- 1(3), Room No.564, Syngenta India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, S No. 110/11/3, Amar Paradigm M K Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Baner Road, Pune -411 045 स्थमी रेखा सिं. Pan: Aaecs 9424 P अऩीराथी (Appellant) प्रत्मथी (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri N K Chand

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 253(1)Section 92C(2)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “के” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI श्री आर सी शमाा, लेखा सदस्य एवुं श्री अधमत श क्ला, न्याधयक सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI R. C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.: 1373/Mum/2014 (Assessment year 2009-10) ससिंगएनता इिंडिमा प्राइवेट सरसभटेि Vs Dy. CIT- 1(3), Room No.564, Syngenta India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, S No. 110/11/3, Amar Paradigm M K Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Baner Road, Pune -411 045 स्थमी रेखा सिं. PAN: AAECS 9424 P अऩीराथी (Appellant) प्रत्मथी (Respondent) ITA No.: 1926/Mum/2014 (Assessment year…

Syngenta India Ltd, Pune vs. Addl CIT RG 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 560/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Amit Shuklait(Tp)A No.: 1373/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year 2009-10) ससिंगएनता इिंडिमा प्राइवेट सरसभटेि Vs Dy. Cit- 1(3), Room No.564, Syngenta India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, S No. 110/11/3, Amar Paradigm M K Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Baner Road, Pune -411 045 स्थमी रेखा सिं. Pan: Aaecs 9424 P अऩीराथी (Appellant) प्रत्मथी (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri N K Chand

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 253(1)Section 92C(2)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “के” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI श्री आर सी शमाा, लेखा सदस्य एवुं श्री अधमत श क्ला, न्याधयक सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI R. C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.: 1373/Mum/2014 (Assessment year 2009-10) ससिंगएनता इिंडिमा प्राइवेट सरसभटेि Vs Dy. CIT- 1(3), Room No.564, Syngenta India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, S No. 110/11/3, Amar Paradigm M K Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Baner Road, Pune -411 045 स्थमी रेखा सिं. PAN: AAECS 9424 P अऩीराथी (Appellant) प्रत्मथी (Respondent) ITA No.: 1926/Mum/2014 (Assessment year…

DCIT 1(3), Mumbai vs. Syngenta India Ltd, Pune

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1926/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Amit Shuklait(Tp)A No.: 1373/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year 2009-10) ससिंगएनता इिंडिमा प्राइवेट सरसभटेि Vs Dy. Cit- 1(3), Room No.564, Syngenta India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, S No. 110/11/3, Amar Paradigm M K Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Baner Road, Pune -411 045 स्थमी रेखा सिं. Pan: Aaecs 9424 P अऩीराथी (Appellant) प्रत्मथी (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri N K Chand

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 253(1)Section 92C(2)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “के” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI श्री आर सी शमाा, लेखा सदस्य एवुं श्री अधमत श क्ला, न्याधयक सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI R. C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.: 1373/Mum/2014 (Assessment year 2009-10) ससिंगएनता इिंडिमा प्राइवेट सरसभटेि Vs Dy. CIT- 1(3), Room No.564, Syngenta India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, S No. 110/11/3, Amar Paradigm M K Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Baner Road, Pune -411 045 स्थमी रेखा सिं. PAN: AAECS 9424 P अऩीराथी (Appellant) प्रत्मथी (Respondent) ITA No.: 1926/Mum/2014 (Assessment year…

Raychem Rpg P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 7(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4780/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Nabin Kumar Pradhan

For Appellant: Shri Manish ShahFor Respondent: Shri Prakash R. Mane

Section 10BSection 145ASection 71

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NABIN KUMAR PRADHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.4780/Mum./2013 (Assessment Year : 2007–08) M/s. Raychem RPG Pvt. Ltd. RPG House, 463 Dr. A.B. Road ……………. Appellant Worli, Mumbai 400 030 PAN – AAACR8032L v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Range–7(2), Aayakar Bhawan ……………. Respondent 101, M.K. Road, Mumbai 400 020 ITA no.5064/Mum./2013 (Assessment Year : 2007–08) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Range–7(2), Aayakar Bhawan ……………. Appellant 101, M.K. Road, Mumbai 400 020 v/s M/s. Raychem RPG Pvt. Ltd. RPG Hous…

Sayli Iron & Steel Co. P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 10, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 8628/MUM/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Aug 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.8628/Mum/11 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) Sayli Iron & Steel Co. Pvt. Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ Ltd. Income Tax Central Circle Vs. 103, Steel Centre, 10 Ahmedabad Street, Mumbai Masjid Bunder(West) Mumbai - 400009 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs4042F

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Meshram

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 145ASection 2(24)(x)

…at the value of modevat credit unutilized at the close of the accounting period to the extent of Rs.9,20,421/- is not liable to be added in the closing stock in view of the law settled by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case CIT V/s. Mahavir Alluminum Ltd. [2008] 297 ITR 77 and by Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Mahalaxmi Glass Works Pvt. Ltd. [2009] 318 ITR 116 (Bom.). However, on the other hand learned representative of the department has refuted the said contentions and relied upon the finding of the CIT(A) in question. By giving the careful thought to the contention raised by the learned…

Syngenta India Ltd, Pune vs. Addl CIT RG 1(3), Mumbai

Accordingly, we direct the AO to allow the actual expenditure incurred during this year on site restoration cost. Accordingly, ground no. 5 is treated as allowed

ITA 649/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 145ASection 80I

…f its location and conditions as on the date of valuation. Therefore, the addition u/s 145A on account of duty is required to be made both in the valuation of purchase and sales as well as inventories. Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in case of Mahabir Aluminium (297 ITR 77) have held that adjustment o account of duty etc u/s 145A is required to be made to the opening stock. Therefore, adjustment on account of duty u/s 145A is required to be made at all stages including opening stock purchase and sales. We, therefore, set aside the order of CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of AO for passing a fresh order aft…

Syngenta India Ltd, Pune vs. Addl CIT 1(3), Mumbai

Accordingly, we direct the AO to allow the actual expenditure incurred during this year on site restoration cost. Accordingly, ground no. 5 is treated as allowed

ITA 8534/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 145ASection 80I

…f its location and conditions as on the date of valuation. Therefore, the addition u/s 145A on account of duty is required to be made both in the valuation of purchase and sales as well as inventories. Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in case of Mahabir Aluminium (297 ITR 77) have held that adjustment o account of duty etc u/s 145A is required to be made to the opening stock. Therefore, adjustment on account of duty u/s 145A is required to be made at all stages including opening stock purchase and sales. We, therefore, set aside the order of CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of AO for passing a fresh order aft…

Harnam Syntex P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(2)-2, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4459/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Respondent: Ms. Ritika Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 145A

…d of accounting followed by the assessee with regard to adjustment of CENVAT credit neither complies with the provisions of section 145A of the Act nor with the judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Mahavir Aluminum Ltd 297 ITR 77 (Del). 2. The appellant prays that the order of the CIT(A) on the above ground be set aside and that of the A.O. be restored. 3 Harnam Syntex P Ltd. ITA No.4458/ Mum/2011 ITA No.4459/ Mum/2011 3. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any grounds or add a new ground which may be necessary”. 3. Whereas, in the assessee’s appeal, following gr…

Harnam Syntex P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4458/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jan 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Respondent: Ms. Ritika Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 145A

…d of accounting followed by the assessee with regard to adjustment of CENVAT credit neither complies with the provisions of section 145A of the Act nor with the judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Mahavir Aluminum Ltd 297 ITR 77 (Del). 2. The appellant prays that the order of the CIT(A) on the above ground be set aside and that of the A.O. be restored. 3 Harnam Syntex P Ltd. ITA No.4458/ Mum/2011 ITA No.4459/ Mum/2011 3. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any grounds or add a new ground which may be necessary”. 3. Whereas, in the assessee’s appeal, following gr…

DCIT Cir 8(2), Mumbai vs. Harnam Syntex P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4151/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jan 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Respondent: Ms. Ritika Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 145A

…d of accounting followed by the assessee with regard to adjustment of CENVAT credit neither complies with the provisions of section 145A of the Act nor with the judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Mahavir Aluminum Ltd 297 ITR 77 (Del). 2. The appellant prays that the order of the CIT(A) on the above ground be set aside and that of the A.O. be restored. 3 Harnam Syntex P Ltd. ITA No.4458/ Mum/2011 ITA No.4459/ Mum/2011 3. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any grounds or add a new ground which may be necessary”. 3. Whereas, in the assessee’s appeal, following gr…

Raychem Rpg P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 7(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4641/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri D. Karunakar Raoassessment Year: 2006-07 M/S Raychem Rpg Pvt. Additional Commissioner Of Ltd. Income Tax, बनाम/ Rpg House, 463, Range-7(2), Vs. Dr. Annie Beasant Road, 6Th Floor, Worli, Mumbai-400030 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacr8032L

Section 143(3)Section 145A

…counsel for the assessee contended that this ground is covered in favour of the assessee by the order of the Tribunal dated 05/10/2015 (ITA No.1376/Mum/2014), for Assessment year 2005-06. The assessee also placed reliance upon the CIT vs Mahavir Aluminum Ltd.(297 ITR 77) (Del.), Hawkins Cookers Ltd. vs ITO (26 DTR 206)(TMum), Ram Ratan Wires Ltd. vs ACIT (ITA No. 2180/M/2012 & 8503/M/2011)(TMum), DCIT v. M/s Wartsila India Ltd. (ITA No. 7926/M/2004)(TMum), ITO vs M/s Ikon Multipack (ITA No.438/Ahd./2011)(TAhd.) and M/s Alpanil vs. ACIT(ITA No.169 & 170/AHD/2005)(AHD). This factual matrix was not controverted by t…

Sunshield Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 7(2)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 5045/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5045/Mum/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08)

For Respondent: Shri Nitin Waghmode ,DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 29Section 30Section 32Section 32(1)Section 32(2)Section 71

…ration v. CIT(supra) and the impugned assessment year being assessment year 2007-08 cannot be said to be transitional year as the provisions of Section 145A of the Act has come into force w.e.f. 01.04.1998 and hence the judgment of Mahavir Aluminium Limited 297 ITR 77(Del.) is not applicable. Thus, the CIT(A) directed the AO to verify the facts and figures and make additions as per directions. 15. Aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A) , the assessee company is in appeal before the Tribunal. The Ld. Counsel of the assessee company reiterated submissions as made before the authorities below and submitted befo…

Addl CIT RG 1, Mumbai vs. Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd ( Now Merged With Reliance Indl. Ltd), Baroda

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2005-06 is allowed and both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3921/MUM/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran (Am) & Ramlal Negi, (Jm) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.1426/Ahd/2009 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year :2005-06) बनाम/ Indian Petrochemicals Corp.Ltd., The Addl. Commissioner Of Income (Now Merged With Reliance Tax, Range 1, Vs. Industries Ltd) Baroda, P O Petrochemicals, Gujarat Dist-Vadodara -391346 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…red in favour of the assessee by the judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v/s Mahalaxmi Glass Works Pvt. Ltd., [2009] 318 ITR 116 (Bom.) and also by the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v/s Mahavir Alluminium Ltd. [2008] 297 ITR 77 (Del.), wherein it has been held that if there is a change in valuation of closing stock in one end, there must necessarily be a corresponding change at the other end otherwise the true profit would not be reflected. 94. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative relied on the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). 95. We have consi…

CIT v. Mahavir Alluminium Ltd.

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

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Mahavir Alluminium Ltd.

M/S. Mahendra Chemicals, Ahmedabad vs. The Jt.CIT, Range-3, Ahmedabad

DCIT, Ghaziabad vs. M/S. Supreme Ceremics Ltd., Ghaziabad

M/S. Supreme Ceramics Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

Grohe India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

M/S. Grohe India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Syngenta India Ltd, Pune vs. Asst CIT RG 1(3)(1), Mumbai

Syngenta India Ltd, Pune vs. Addl CIT RG 1(3), Mumbai

DCIT 1(3), Mumbai vs. Syngenta India Ltd, Pune

Raychem Rpg P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 7(2), Mumbai

Sayli Iron & Steel Co. P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 10, Mumbai

Syngenta India Ltd, Pune vs. Addl CIT RG 1(3), Mumbai

Syngenta India Ltd, Pune vs. Addl CIT 1(3), Mumbai

Harnam Syntex P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(2)-2, Mumbai

Harnam Syntex P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(2), Mumbai

DCIT Cir 8(2), Mumbai vs. Harnam Syntex P. Ltd, Mumbai

Raychem Rpg P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 7(2), Mumbai

Sunshield Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 7(2)(3), Mumbai

Addl CIT RG 1, Mumbai vs. Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd ( Now Merged With Reliance Indl. Ltd), Baroda