CIT v. McMillan & Co.

33 ITR 182Supreme Court of India1958#629 most cited

What is CIT v. McMillan & Co. authority for?

The Income Tax Officer (ITO), even when accepting the assessee's method of accounting, is not bound by the profit figures shown in the accounts and can still determine the correct profits.

156

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. McMillan & Co. · McMillan & Co. 33 ITR 182 · Section 145 · Section 145(3) · method of accounting · AO not bound by profit figures · assessment of business profits · income tax officer powers · accepted accounting method · profit computation

Sections most often in play

Section 43BSection 115JBSection 147Section 14ASection 153ASection 37Section 143(3)Section 148

Issues it is cited on

section 3asection 31(3)section 120(4)(b)section 4asection 36(1)(v)section 10(20)section 145(1)section 61section 80hhc(3)section 46section 40a(7)section 115ja

Judgments citing CIT v. McMillan & Co.

SANGHI TEXTILES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERBAD vs. ITO., WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1311/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Us:

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 145Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 250Section 37(1)

…cts. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Calcutta Agency Ltd. [(1951) 19 ITR 191 (SC)] has held that the onus to prove expenditure lies with the assessee. Where no evidence is furnished, disallowance is permissible. Similarly, in CIT v. McMillan & Co. [(1958) 33 ITR 182 (SC)], it was held that estimation of disallowance is valid where accounts are not reliable. Hence, the rejection of books of account and the disallowance of Rs. 94,55,889/- are upheld and sustained. Accordingly. relevant grounds of appeal are dismissed and not allowed. 6. In result, the present appeal of the appellant is dismissed and not allowed…

BIMAL KUNJBIHARI GORAI, HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 42/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 145(3)Section 68

…applied a G.P. rate of 26.14%, consistent with the preceding year, after rejecting the books. The law is well established that, once books are rejected, the Assessing Officer is empowered to estimate profits on a reasonable basis—CIT v. McMillan & Co. (1958) 33 ITR 182 (SC) and CIT v. A. Krishnaswamy Mudaliar (1964) 53 ITR 122 (SC). The assessee has brought nothing on record to demonstrate that the G.P. estimation was arbitrary or excessive. Thus, the finding of the CIT(Appeals) sustaining this addition calls for no interference. 12. As regards the assessee’s submission that sales were accepted as part of turno…

SPANDANA SPHOORTY FINANCIAL LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE 3(2), HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the addition of Rs.11,44,51,818/- (supra) made by the\nAO, which, thereafter, had been sustained by the CIT(A), is vacated.\nThe Grounds of appeal Nos.3.1 to 3.4 are allowed in terms o...

ITA 821/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 69A

…ral courts with there respective head notes:\n1. CIT v. Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. (2010) 326 ITR 526 (Raj.) – Held that\nRBI norms cannot be ignored for income recognition.\n2.\nMcDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO (1985) 154 ITR 148 (SC).\na) CIT V. MCMILLAN & CO. (1958) 33 ITR 182 (SC) : ‘The Supreme Court\nheld that a change in accounting method must be bona fide and should\nnot be used as a tool for tax evasion.'\nB) CIT V. PUNJAB STAINLESS STEEL INDUSTRIES (2014) 364 ITR\n144): 'The Court ruled that an assessee cannot adopt an inconsistent\nmethod of accounting if it results in artificial reduction of income.'\n5.4.13 Th…

ACIT,, ALLAHABAD vs. KESARWANI ZARDA BHANDAR,, ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 12/ALLD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Jun 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 153A

…cannot be disturbed in future when the same system of accounting is maintained, deserves to be rejected. The appellate authority can also reject the books of account as per the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of C.I.T. vs. McMillan & Co. (1958) 33 ITR 182. Now, let us examine the fallout and consequences of rejection of books of account. The rejection of the book results is a step-in-aid to the officer to compute the correct income on some reasonable and proper basis. As pointed out in C.I.T. Vs. Pilliah & Sons (Ky.), the estimation of turnover or profit rate or disallowance of claims of expenditur…

M/S KESARWANI ZARDA BHANDAR,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,, ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 379/ALLD/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Jun 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 153A

…cannot be disturbed in future when the same system of accounting is maintained, deserves to be rejected. The appellate authority can also reject the books of account as per the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of C.I.T. vs. McMillan & Co. (1958) 33 ITR 182. Now, let us examine the fallout and consequences of rejection of books of account. The rejection of the book results is a step-in-aid to the officer to compute the correct income on some reasonable and proper basis. As pointed out in C.I.T. Vs. Pilliah & Sons (Ky.), the estimation of turnover or profit rate or disallowance of claims of expenditur…

DEPUTY COMMSSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 103/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.100/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Visakhapatnamportauthority Vs. Theasst.Cit -Circle-1(1) Administrative Office Building 4 Th Floor, Prathyakshkar Bhavan Port Area, Visakhapatnam 530001 Mvp Road, Beside Post Office Andhra Pradesh-530001. Sector-8, Mvp Colony Visakhapatnam – 530017 [Pan:Aaalv0035C] Andhrapradesh (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.103/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) The Dy.Cit Vs. Visakhapatnamportauthority Room No. 412, 4 Th Floor Administrative Office Building Prathyakshkar Bhavan Port Area, Visakhapatnam 530035 Mvp Double Road Andhra Pradesh Opp. Rythubazar Visakhapatnam – 530014 [Pan:Aaalv0035C] Andhrapradesh (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)

…upfront for a period of 30 years over the lease period is in accordance with the accounting policy and also complying with the provisions of section 145 of the Act. On this issue, the Ld. AR relied on the following case laws: (i) CIT vs. McMillan & Co. [1958] 33 ITR 182 (SC). (ii) Investment Ltd vs. CIT [1970] 77 ITR 533 (SC) (iii) MKB Asia (P.) Ltd vs. CIT [2008] 167 Taxman 256 (Gau.) (iv) JuggilalKamlaat Bankers vs. CIT [1975] 101 ITR 40 (All.) (v) CIT vs. Smt. Vimala D. Sonwand [1994] 75 Taxman 335 (Bom.) 32. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee can cancel the agreement and reassume the possession of…

VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 100/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.100/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Visakhapatnamportauthority Vs. Theasst.Cit -Circle-1(1) Administrative Office Building 4 Th Floor, Prathyakshkar Bhavan Port Area, Visakhapatnam 530001 Mvp Road, Beside Post Office Andhra Pradesh-530001. Sector-8, Mvp Colony Visakhapatnam – 530017 [Pan:Aaalv0035C] Andhrapradesh (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.103/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) The Dy.Cit Vs. Visakhapatnamportauthority Room No. 412, 4 Th Floor Administrative Office Building Prathyakshkar Bhavan Port Area, Visakhapatnam 530035 Mvp Double Road Andhra Pradesh Opp. Rythubazar Visakhapatnam – 530014 [Pan:Aaalv0035C] Andhrapradesh (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)

…upfront for a period of 30 years over the lease period is in accordance with the accounting policy and also complying with the provisions of section 145 of the Act. On this issue, the Ld. AR relied on the following case laws: (i) CIT vs. McMillan & Co. [1958] 33 ITR 182 (SC). (ii) Investment Ltd vs. CIT [1970] 77 ITR 533 (SC) (iii) MKB Asia (P.) Ltd vs. CIT [2008] 167 Taxman 256 (Gau.) (iv) JuggilalKamlaat Bankers vs. CIT [1975] 101 ITR 40 (All.) (v) CIT vs. Smt. Vimala D. Sonwand [1994] 75 Taxman 335 (Bom.) 32. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee can cancel the agreement and reassume the possession of…

R.H. AGRO OVERSEAS (P) LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-21(2), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed being devoid of any merit and bereft of any reasoning

ITA 1151/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Royr.H. Agro Overseas (P) Vs. Acit, Circle -21(2) Limited, A-7, 1St Floor, R. No. 222, C.R Bldg. South Exntension, New Delhi – 110002 Part-H, New Delhi – 110049 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcr1069G Appellant .. Respondent Acit, Circle-20(2) Vs. M/S R.H. Agro Overseas New Delhi Pvt.Ltd. A-7, 1St Floor, South Extn. Part-Ii New Delhi- 110049 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcr1069G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 145

…correct profits of the P a g e | 6 ITA No\. 1151/Del/2021 & R.H.Agro Overseas Pvt. Ltd. (AYs. 2013-14 & 2014-15) business are not deductible, the operation of section 145(3) of the Act would be attracted. 7.3 In the case of CIT vs. Mc.Millan and Co. (1958) 33 ITR 182 (SC) it was held that the ITO, even when he accepts the assessee's method of accounting, is not bound by the figure of profits shown in the accounts. 8. The replies of the assessee were general in nature and self-contradictory. The transactions of trading segments with majority of the parties could not be verified. The assessee made no effort to…

ACIT, CIRCLE-20(2), NEW DELHI vs. R.H. AGRO OVERSEAS (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed being devoid of any merit and bereft of any reasoning

ITA 4964/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Royr.H. Agro Overseas (P) Vs. Acit, Circle -21(2) Limited, A-7, 1St Floor, R. No. 222, C.R Bldg. South Exntension, New Delhi – 110002 Part-H, New Delhi – 110049 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcr1069G Appellant .. Respondent Acit, Circle-20(2) Vs. M/S R.H. Agro Overseas New Delhi Pvt.Ltd. A-7, 1St Floor, South Extn. Part-Ii New Delhi- 110049 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcr1069G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 145

…correct profits of the P a g e | 6 ITA No\. 1151/Del/2021 & R.H.Agro Overseas Pvt. Ltd. (AYs. 2013-14 & 2014-15) business are not deductible, the operation of section 145(3) of the Act would be attracted. 7.3 In the case of CIT vs. Mc.Millan and Co. (1958) 33 ITR 182 (SC) it was held that the ITO, even when he accepts the assessee's method of accounting, is not bound by the figure of profits shown in the accounts. 8. The replies of the assessee were general in nature and self-contradictory. The transactions of trading segments with majority of the parties could not be verified. The assessee made no effort to…

OCHHAB LAL JAIN,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 429/JODH/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 May 2025AY 2016-17
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69A

…er of remand to include in the assessment something which ought to have been so included by the Incometax Officer, and a remand in that case was, therefore, proper. The matter also came before this court in Commissioner of Income-tax vs. McMillan & Co. [1958] 33 ITR 182 (SC); but the question, with which we are concerned, was left open. There is, however, a passage in the judgment, approving of the observations of Chagla, C.J., in NarrondasManordass vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [1957] 31 ITR 909 to the following effect: "It is clear that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has been constituted a revising autho…

AJAY BAKLIWAL,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLE, KOTA, KOTA

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

ITA 1277/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Apr 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Rajendra SisodiaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250

…O in ITA No 4903/Del/2021 The arguments of the appellant are considered. The scope of powers of the AAC has been explained by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a number of cases. In particular, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. McMillan & Co. [1958] 33 ITR 182, 193 has quoted, with approval, the observations of Justice Chagla in Narrondas Manordass v. CIT [1957] 31 ITR 909 (Bom.) as under:- x x x x The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Dalmia Dadri Cement Ltd. v. CIT [1973] 90 ITR 297, after referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of McMillan & Co. (supra) held…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. SHRI DULHE RAM MEENA, JAIPUR

ITA 288/JPR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev sogani, C.A. &For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69

…99 taxmann.com 370 (Mumbai- Trib)}. 12. ITAT Delhi Bench "F" {Income tax Officer, Ward-36 (3), New 299-305 Delhi v Pardeepa Rani [2016] 73 taxmann.com 392 (Delhi- Trib)). 13. Supreme Court of India {Commissioner of Income tax v. 306-332 McMillan & Co. [1958] 33 ITR 182 (SC)). 14. Sumati Dayal v Commissioner of Income tax[1995] 80 Taxman 333-338 89 (SC) 15. McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 154 339-354 ITR 148/22 Taxman 11 (SC) 16. Commissioner of Income-tax v. Nipun Builders & Developers 355-362 25 DCIT vs. Shri Dulhe Ram Meena (P.) Ltd [2013] 30 taxmann.com 292 (Delhi) 17. Yadu hari Dalmia…

DCIT-3(2)(1), AAYKAR BHAWAN vs. MARSHALL PRODUCE BROKERS COMPANY PVT LTD, NARIMAN POINT

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5092/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Respondent: Mr. Harsh Kothari

…been recognized or permitted under Section 145 of the Act after the said amendment. or permitted under Section 145 of the Act after the said amendment. or permitted under Section 145 of the Act after the said amendment. Further, in the case of McMillan & Co. (33 ITR 182) (33 ITR 182), the Hon’ble Further, in the case of Supreme Court held that even when the Assessing Officer (AO) Court held that even when the Assessing Officer (AO) Court held that even when the Assessing Officer (AO) accepts the method of accounting followed by the assessee, the AO accepts the method of accounting followed by the assessee, the AO…

MARSHALL PRODUCE BROKERS COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(2)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4918/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Respondent: Mr. Harsh Kothari

…been recognized or permitted under Section 145 of the Act after the said amendment. or permitted under Section 145 of the Act after the said amendment. or permitted under Section 145 of the Act after the said amendment. Further, in the case of McMillan & Co. (33 ITR 182) (33 ITR 182), the Hon’ble Further, in the case of Supreme Court held that even when the Assessing Officer (AO) Court held that even when the Assessing Officer (AO) Court held that even when the Assessing Officer (AO) accepts the method of accounting followed by the assessee, the AO accepts the method of accounting followed by the assessee, the AO…

MARSHALL PRODUCE BROKERS COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(2)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4917/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Respondent: Mr. Harsh Kothari

…been recognized or permitted under Section 145 of the Act after the said amendment. or permitted under Section 145 of the Act after the said amendment. or permitted under Section 145 of the Act after the said amendment. Further, in the case of McMillan & Co. (33 ITR 182) (33 ITR 182), the Hon’ble Further, in the case of Supreme Court held that even when the Assessing Officer (AO) Court held that even when the Assessing Officer (AO) Court held that even when the Assessing Officer (AO) accepts the method of accounting followed by the assessee, the AO accepts the method of accounting followed by the assessee, the AO…

ACIT, RANGE-I, LUCKNOW vs. CI HOSPITALITY WORLDWIDE PRIVATE LIMITED, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is allowed and Cross

ITA 449/LKW/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow29 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 253(3)

…ee whether or not it has been regularly employed, and to determine whether the income, profit and gains of the assessee could properly be deduced therefrom. (E.7) We also take guidance from order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. McMillan & Co. 33 ITR 182 (SC). In this case it was held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that the Assessing Officer does not merely have discretion but statutory duty to examine in every case the method of accounting employed by the assessee and to see whether or not it is regularly employed, and (ii) to determine whether the income, profits and gains of the assessee can properly…

JCIT (OSD) CIRCLE-2, TRICHY vs. THE KARUR VYSYA BANK LTD., KARUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for assessment year

ITA 635/CHNY/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 620/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Karur Vysya Bank, V. Tax, Finance &Control Dept., Circle -2(1), Erode Road, Trichy. Karur – 639 002. [Pan: Aaact-3373-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 635/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Karur Vysya Bank, The Joint Commissioner Of V. Finance &Control Dept., Income Tax, Erode Road, Circle -2, Karur – 639 002. No.44, Williams Road, [Pan: Aaact-3373-J] Contanment, Trichy – 620 001. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Ananthan, Ca & Smt. R. Lalitha, Ca Department By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.09.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha:

For Appellant: Shri. Ananthan, CA & Smt. R. Lalitha, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 145Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(2)(v)

…t of the power of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, referred to a number of cases decided by various High Courts including the Bombay High Court judgment in Narrondas Manordass [1957] 31 ITR 909 and also the decision of this court in McMillan & Co. [1958] 33 ITR 182 and held that, in an appeal filed by the assessed, the AAC has no power to enhance the assessment by discovering new sources of income not considered by the Income Tax Officer in the order appealed against. It was urged on behalf of the revenue that the words 'enhance the assessment' occurring in section 31 were not confined to the assessment reac…

PRAGATI POWER CORPORATION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 20(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1617/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 145(2)Section 32Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 43ASection 46ASection 80I

…hat true and fair profits cannot be deduced therefrom. The assessee is relying upon the following cases:- PCIT vs Panchsheel Colonizers Pvt. Ltd. (2019) 111 Taxmann.com 459 (Raj) Investment Ltd. vs CIT (1970) 77 ITR 533 (SC) CIT vs McMillan & Company (1958) 33 ITR 182 (SC) CIT vs Manish Buildwell (P) Ltd. (2011) 63 DTR 369 (Del), Manu/De/4468/2011 iii) In the assessment orders, the Assessing Officer has number of times stated that assessee Co had to recognize recoverable LPSC as income and could have claim deduction for the same as "bad debts" separately u/s36(1)(viia) of the Act. Pragati Power Corporation vs.…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ULFEX LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 2811/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 37Section 43B

…nal page 33-38 of the order of CIT(Appeals). The Learned CIT(A) is having the co-terminus power as that of the Assessing Officer and for this very purpose the assessee relied on the following judgments:- (i) 53 ITR 225 (SC) CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate (ii) 33 ITR 182 (SC) CIT vs. Mahalakshmi Textile Mills Ltd. (iii) 187 ITR 688 (SC) Jute Corporation of India vs. CIT (iv) 229 ITR 383 (SC) National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (v) 349 ITR 336 (Bom) CIT vs, Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd. 10. Learned authorised representative for department of revenue submitted that Learned CIT(A) rightly upheld disal…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ULFEX LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 2810/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 37Section 43B

…nal page 33-38 of the order of CIT(Appeals). The Learned CIT(A) is having the co-terminus power as that of the Assessing Officer and for this very purpose the assessee relied on the following judgments:- (i) 53 ITR 225 (SC) CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate (ii) 33 ITR 182 (SC) CIT vs. Mahalakshmi Textile Mills Ltd. (iii) 187 ITR 688 (SC) Jute Corporation of India vs. CIT (iv) 229 ITR 383 (SC) National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (v) 349 ITR 336 (Bom) CIT vs, Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd. 10. Learned authorised representative for department of revenue submitted that Learned CIT(A) rightly upheld disal…

Showing 1–20 of 156 · Page 1 of 8

...
CIT v. McMillan & Co. (33 ITR 182) — Cited in 156 Judgments | BharatTax