CIT v. Mahendra Mills

243 ITR 56Supreme Court of India2000#1630 most cited

What is CIT v. Mahendra Mills authority for?

Depreciation that is actually allowed as a deduction is considered, not notionally allowed depreciation. The wording of Sections 32 and 34 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is specific and unambiguous.

69

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v Mahendra Mills · 243 ITR 56 SC · Section 32 · Section 34 · Income Tax Act 1961 · depreciation allowed · actually allowed depreciation · notionally allowed depreciation

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 143(3)Section 139(1)Section 147Section 153ASection 139(5)Section 32Section 132
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 153(a)(1)section 11bsection 10b(8)section 2(24)(xviii)section 2(45)convertible foreign exchangesection 153(a)section 158bb(1)section 153a(1)(a)section 139(5)section 153a proceedingssection 10b

Judgments citing CIT v. Mahendra Mills

Ganesh Polychem Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-3(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2145/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Parekh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250

…er the Income- tax Act, 1922 besides referring to various legal citations where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in the return of income by the assessee. 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 3. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 4. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 5. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161 ITR 159 (SC) 6. CIT vs. Bharat General Reinsurance: 81 ITR 303 (Del) (b) It was further submitted by the ld. Counsel that the CIT(A) w…

Leshark Global LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals for A

ITA 3183/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 56Section 69

…der the Income-tax Act, 1922 besides referring to various legal citations where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in the return of income by the assessee. 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 3. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 4. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 5. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161 ITR 159 (SC) 6. CIT vs. Bharat General Reinsurance: 81 ITR 303 (Del) (b) It was further submitted by the ld. Counsel that the CIT(A)…

Leshark Global LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals for A

ITA 3182/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 56Section 69

…der the Income-tax Act, 1922 besides referring to various legal citations where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in the return of income by the assessee. 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 3. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 4. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 5. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161 ITR 159 (SC) 6. CIT vs. Bharat General Reinsurance: 81 ITR 303 (Del) (b) It was further submitted by the ld. Counsel that the CIT(A)…

Leshark Global LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals for A

ITA 3181/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2016-17
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 56Section 69

…der the Income-tax Act, 1922 besides referring to various legal citations where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in the return of income by the assessee. 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 3. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 4. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 5. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161 ITR 159 (SC) 6. CIT vs. Bharat General Reinsurance: 81 ITR 303 (Del) (b) It was further submitted by the ld. Counsel that the CIT(A) w…

Leshark Global LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals for A

ITA 3180/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 56Section 69

…der the Income-tax Act, 1922 besides referring to various legal citations where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in the return of income by the assessee. 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 3. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 4. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 5. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161 ITR 159 (SC) 6. CIT vs. Bharat General Reinsurance: 81 ITR 303 (Del) (b) It was further submitted by the ld. Counsel that the CIT(A) w…

Leshark Global LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals for A

ITA 3179/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 56Section 69

…der the Income-tax Act, 1922 besides referring to various legal citations where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in the return of income by the assessee. 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 3. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 4. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 5. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161 ITR 159 (SC) 6. CIT vs. Bharat General Reinsurance: 81 ITR 303 (Del) (b) It was further submitted by the ld. Counsel that the CIT(A) w…

Leshark Global LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals for A

ITA 3178/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 56Section 69

…der the Income-tax Act, 1922 besides referring to various legal citations where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in the return of income by the assessee. 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 3. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 4. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 5. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161 ITR 159 (SC) 6. CIT vs. Bharat General Reinsurance: 81 ITR 303 (Del) (b) It was further submitted by the ld. Counsel that the CIT(A) w…

Leshark Global LLP, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals for A

ITA 3177/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 56Section 69

…der the Income-tax Act, 1922 besides referring to various legal citations where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in the return of income by the assessee. 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 3. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 4. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 5. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161 ITR 159 (SC) 6. CIT vs. Bharat General Reinsurance: 81 ITR 303 (Del) (b) It was further submitted by the ld. Counsel that the CIT(A) w…

M/S Gujarat Guardian Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 2539/DEL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Bhopal Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 92C

…ns, where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. 20.The ld. counsel for the assessee relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56, which approved the aforesaid Circular.. 52. With respect to the admissibility of the claim of non-taxability of sales tax subsidy for assessment years 2008-09 to 2011-12, in the 2nd category of cases, we find that for the above three years, on the date of search 14.11.2011, the assessment was pending and therefore they were considered as abated…

Gujarat Guardian Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 159/DEL/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 92C

…ns, where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. 20.The ld. counsel for the assessee relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56, which approved the aforesaid Circular.. 52. With respect to the admissibility of the claim of non-taxability of sales tax subsidy for assessment years 2008-09 to 2011-12, in the 2nd category of cases, we find that for the above three years, on the date of search 14.11.2011, the assessment was pending and therefore they were considered as abated…

Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC- 30, New Delhi

ITA 4492/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(5)Section 153A

…The ld AR relied on the following decisions, where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) 3. National Thermal Power Limited vs. CIT: 229 ITR 383(SC) 4. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 5. CIT vs. Aspentech India 6. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 7. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 8. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161…

M/S Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5451/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153A

…e ld AR relied on the following decisions, where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) 3. National Thermal Power Limited vs. CIT: 229 ITR 383(SC) 4. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) Page 16 of 63 ITA No. 5251 to 5257/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2006-07 to A.Y 2012-13] ITA No. 5451/DEL/2016 [A.Y 2013-14]; ITA No. 4492/DEL/2017 [A.Y 2014-15] M/s Jindal Photo LtdVs.The A.C.I.T…

M/S. Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5257/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(5)Section 153A

…The ld AR relied on the following decisions, where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) 3. National Thermal Power Limited vs. CIT: 229 ITR 383(SC) 4. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 5. CIT vs. Aspentech India 6. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 7. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 8. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161…

M/S. Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5256/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(5)Section 153A

…The ld AR relied on the following decisions, where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) 3. National Thermal Power Limited vs. CIT: 229 ITR 383(SC) 4. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 5. CIT vs. Aspentech India 6. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 7. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 8. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161…

M/S. Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5255/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(5)Section 153A

…The ld AR relied on the following decisions, where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) 3. National Thermal Power Limited vs. CIT: 229 ITR 383(SC) 4. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 5. CIT vs. Aspentech India 6. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 7. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 8. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161…

M/S. Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5254/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153A

…e ld AR relied on the following decisions, where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) 3. National Thermal Power Limited vs. CIT: 229 ITR 383(SC) 4. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) Page 16 of 63 ITA No. 5251 to 5257/DEL/2015 [A.Y 2006-07 to A.Y 2012-13] ITA No. 5451/DEL/2016 [A.Y 2013-14]; ITA No. 4492/DEL/2017 [A.Y 2014-15] M/s Jindal Photo LtdVs.The A.C.I.T…

M/S. Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5253/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(5)Section 153A

…The ld AR relied on the following decisions, where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) 3. National Thermal Power Limited vs. CIT: 229 ITR 383(SC) 4. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 5. CIT vs. Aspentech India 6. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 7. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 8. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161…

M/S. Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5252/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(5)Section 153A

…relied on the following decisions, where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 1. 2. 3. 4. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) National Thermal Power Limited vs. CIT: 229 ITR 383(SC) CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. CIT vs. Aspentech India CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 16…

M/S. Jindal Photo Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5251/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(5)Section 153A

…The ld AR relied on the following decisions, where Courts have held that the AO is duty bound to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if not claimed in ROI. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 1. CIT vs. Mahindra Mills: 243 ITR 56 (SC) 2. Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) 3. National Thermal Power Limited vs. CIT: 229 ITR 383(SC) 4. CIT vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd: 306 ITR 42 (Del) 5. CIT vs. Aspentech India 6. CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd.: 105 ITR 212 (SC) 7. CIT vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Lad: 160 ITR 920 (SC) 8. Anchor Pressings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT and Ors 161…

M/S.Bodygear International P. Ltd, Ernakulam vs. The DCIT, Kochi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 274/COCH/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 May 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Sri.Radhesh Bhatt, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Omanakuttan, Senior AR
Section 10BSection 10B(1)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

…is not open to the Assessing Officer to advert to the original return of income. This position of law was approved by Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Mahendra Mills /Arun Textile, Glassgow 5 ITA No.274/Coch/2023. Bodygear International Pvt.Ltd. Consultants, 243 ITR 56 (SC), wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had inter alia approved the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of (i) CIT vs. Mangalore Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd., 191 ITR 156 (Kar.), (ii) CCIT vs. Machine Tool Corpn. of India Ltd., 201 ITR 101 (Kar.) and the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Beco…

CIT v. Mahendra Mills (243 ITR 56) — Cited in 69 Judgments | BharatTax