What is CIT v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. authority for?

The waiver of a loan taken for acquiring capital assets is considered a capital receipt and is not taxable as income under Section 28(iv) of the Income Tax Act. The ruling distinguishes between the waiver of trading liabilities and capital liabilities for tax purposes.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd.?

164 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. (404 ITR 1), spanning 2011 to 2026.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 28(iv), Section 41(1), Section 36(1)(iii), Section 14A, Section 40(a)(ia).

CIT v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. (404 ITR 1)

N.K. Industries Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

ITA 448/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumarms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: NK Industries Ltd (Cross Appeals)

Section 250

…Revenue/appellant. Accordingly, they are answered in favour of the appellant/Revenue and the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed. No costs.” 7. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition relying on the judgments in the case of CIT Vs. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd., 404 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT Vs. Phool Chand Jiwan Ram, 4 Taxman 204 (Del). 8. Before us, the Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and Ld. AR supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 9. We have examined the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras dated 22.04.2016 in the case of CIT Vs. Ramaniyam Homes (P.) Ltd., which held as under: “37. But,…

N.K. Industries Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

ITA 447/AHD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumarms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: NK Industries Ltd (Cross Appeals)

Section 250

…Revenue/appellant. Accordingly, they are answered in favour of the appellant/Revenue and the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed. No costs.” 7. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition relying on the judgments in the case of CIT Vs. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd., 404 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT Vs. Phool Chand Jiwan Ram, 4 Taxman 204 (Del). 8. Before us, the Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and Ld. AR supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 9. We have examined the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras dated 22.04.2016 in the case of CIT Vs. Ramaniyam Homes (P.) Ltd., which held as under: “37. But,…

The Dy.CIT, Circle-3(1)(1)., Ahmedabad vs. N.K. Industries Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

ITA 443/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumarms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: NK Industries Ltd (Cross Appeals)

Section 250

…Revenue/appellant. Accordingly, they are answered in favour of the appellant/Revenue and the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed. No costs.” 7. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition relying on the judgments in the case of CIT Vs. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd., 404 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT Vs. Phool Chand Jiwan Ram, 4 Taxman 204 (Del). 8. Before us, the Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and Ld. AR supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 9. We have examined the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras dated 22.04.2016 in the case of CIT Vs. Ramaniyam Homes (P.) Ltd., which held as under: “37. But,…

The Dy.CIT, Circle-3(1)(1)., Ahmedabad vs. N.K. Industries Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

ITA 442/AHD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumarms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: NK Industries Ltd (Cross Appeals)

Section 250

…Revenue/appellant. Accordingly, they are answered in favour of the appellant/Revenue and the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed. No costs.” 7. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition relying on the judgments in the case of CIT Vs. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd., 404 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT Vs. Phool Chand Jiwan Ram, 4 Taxman 204 (Del). 8. Before us, the Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and Ld. AR supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 9. We have examined the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras dated 22.04.2016 in the case of CIT Vs. Ramaniyam Homes (P.) Ltd., which held as under: “37. But,…

Plr Textiles Ltd., Chennai vs. The ACIT, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 133/CHNY/2021[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 133/Chny/2021 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06 Plr Textiles Ltd., The Acit, 8K, Century Plaza, V. Corporate Circle -5(2), 560-562, Mount Road, Chennai – 641 034. Chennai – 600 018. [Pan: Aaacp-6536-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Anitha, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Filed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Chennai, Vide Ita No.153/Cit(A)-3/2018-19For The Assessment Year 2005-06, Dated 13.03.2020. 2. At The Outset, We Find That There Is A Delay Of 346 Days In Appeal Filed By The Assessee, For Which Petition For Condonation Of Delay Along With Reasons For Delay Has Been Filed. After Considering The Petition Filed By The Assessee, Reason For Delay In Filing The Appeal Was Due To Covid-19 Pandemic & Also Hearing Both The :-2-:

For Appellant: Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…the same has been confirmed by the ld.CIT(A) in his order. Firstly the waiver of loan outstanding shown in the balance sheet of the assessee cannot be brought to tax u/s.41(1) of the Act as held by the Hon’ble Apex court in CIT Vs. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. 404 ITR 1 (SC). Further, the unpaid interest on loan :-18-: ITA. No:133/Chny/2021 waived, if any, cannot be termed as expenditure claimed under the Act, since section 43B of the Act prohibits the deduction of such interest unless it is actually paid in the respective assessment year. Hence, in the present facts and circumstances of the case the waiver of am…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad vs. Amsri Builders, Secunderabad

ITA 1898/HYD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. Hon'Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Chary Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. M. Narmada, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 28

…ued and crystallized on account of Settlement Agreement between the parties dt.13.01.2010. The assessee had also filed additional ground in light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. reported in (2018) 404 ITR 1(SC) and argued that benefit accrued to the assessee by virtue of Settlement Agreement dt.13.01.2010, is not taxable under Section 28(iv) of the Act. 9. The LD.CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and also taking note of provisions of Section 28(iv) of the Act and Section 41(1) of the Act, and also by following the decision of H…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad vs. Amsri Builders, Secunderabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for A

ITA 1897/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. Hon’Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Chary Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. M. Narmada, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 28

…appeal before the LD.CIT(A) and challenged the addition between the parties dt.13.01.2010. The assessee had also filed additional ground in light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. reported in (2018) 404 ITR 1(SC) and argued that benefit accrued to the assessee by virtue of Settlement Agreement dt.13.01.2010, is not taxable under Section 28(iv) of the Act. 9. The LD.CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and also taking note of provisions of Section 28(iv) of the Act and Section 41(1) of the Act, and also by following the decision of…

ITO, Ward-2(1), Ludhiana vs. Ashwani Kumar Jain, Ludihana

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1083/CHANDI/2024[2022]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Mar 2025

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Balbir Khanna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl.CIT Sr.DR

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 69C

…O cannot invoke the provisions of Section 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is a well-established principle that any rejection of evidence must be accompanied by a reasoned order. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in CIT vs. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. [2018] 404 ITR 1 (SC) that orders lacking cogent reasoning are liable to be set aside. In this case, the AO's failure to explain the grounds for rejecting the appellant's evidence indicates a lack of application of mind and procedural fairness. The evidence provided by the appellant, including the retraction of the third-party statement and the financial documents,…

Dsp Adiko Holding Pvt Ltd, Mumba vs. Dy. CIT - Circle 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 177/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 41(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘D’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DSP Adiko Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. CIT-Circle 11th Floor, 2(1)(1), Mafatlal Centre Mumbai Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 PAN/GIR No.AAACA3438M (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Madhur Agarwal Revenue by Shri Rajesh Pardeshi, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 24/02/2025 Date of Pronouncement 28/02/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against order dated 18/12/2024 passed by NFAC, Delhi for the quantum of assessment…

DCIT, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad vs. Prakash Nimmagadda, Hyderabad, Secunderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 974/HYD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.974/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dy.Cit Vs. Shri Prakash Nimmagadda Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Acbpn4246R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/12/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order, Dated 20/03/2017 Of The Learned Cit (A)-9, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2008-09. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, CIT(DR)

Section 17(2)(c)Section 28

…ITA No 974 of 2017 Prakash Nimmagadda आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-President A N D Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.974/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dy.CIT Vs. Shri Prakash Nimmagadda Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:ACBPN4246R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee by: Shri K.C. Devdas, CA राज" व "ारा/Revenue by:: Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, CIT(DR) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 06/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/12/2024 आदेश/ORDER Per Vijay P…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(1), Bangalore vs. Sony India Software Centre Pvt Ltd, Bellandur, Bangalore

ITA 1550/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 28Section 40a

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2017-18 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/s. Sony India Software Centre Pvt. of Income Tax, Ltd., 2nd Floor, South Wing, Circle 6(1)(1), Bangalore. Tower 2, Hibiscus Embassy Tech Village, SEZ, Outer Ring Road, Devara Beesanahalli, Bellandur S.O. Bengaluru – 560 103. PAN: AAQCS 7006K APPELLANT RESPONDENT CO No.43/Bang/2024 [in ITA No.1550/Bang/2024] Assessment year : 2017-18 M/s. Sony India Software Centre Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Pvt. L…

Shivaji Irmali, Thane vs. DCIT Central Circle 2, Thane

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3186/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: The Nclt

Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…TR-V for the said AY and Receipt & payment entry highlighted in the Bank Statement have been attached in the Paperbook." The assessee has also referred to the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. reported in 404 ITR 1 stating that, once assessee has received no benefit on the outstanding loan, there cannot be any cessation of liability. 7. However, the ld. CIT (A) has confirmed the addition holding as under:- 4 Shivaji Irmali 15.0 The facts of the case are that the AO made an addition of Rs. 13,34,000/- on account of cessation of liabilities as the appellant co…

Allcargo Gati Limited(Formally Known As Gati Limited), Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 190/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. K. Haritha, CIT-DR

Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 37(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.190 and 1721/Hyd/2016 Assessment Years: 2010-11 and 2012-13 Allcargo Gati Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (Formerly known as Gati Circle 2(2), Limited), Hyderabad. Mumbai. PAN : AABCG3709Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Madhur Agarwal, Advocate. (appeared through virtual mode) Revenue by: Ms. K. Haritha, CIT-DR Date of hearing: 03.12.2024 10.12.2024 Date of pronouncement: O R D…

Allcargo Gati Limited(Formally Known As Gati Limited), Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-2(2) Hyderabad, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 1721/HYD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. K. Haritha, CIT-DR

Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 37(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.190 and 1721/Hyd/2016 Assessment Years: 2010-11 and 2012-13 Allcargo Gati Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (Formerly known as Gati Circle 2(2), Limited), Hyderabad. Mumbai. PAN : AABCG3709Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Madhur Agarwal, Advocate. (appeared through virtual mode) Revenue by: Ms. K. Haritha, CIT-DR Date of hearing: 03.12.2024 10.12.2024 Date of pronouncement: O R D…