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.

How many judgments cite CIT v. McMillan & Co.?

156 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. McMillan & Co. (33 ITR 182), spanning 2015 to 2026.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 43B, Section 115JB, Section 147, Section 14A, Section 153A, Section 37.

CIT v. McMillan & Co. (33 ITR 182)

Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 106/VIZ/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

…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…

DCIT Central Circle, Karnal vs. Reliable Realtech Pvt Ltd, Bhiwani

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4808/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Central Circle, Vs. Reliable Realtech Pvt. Ltd. Ayakar Bhawan, C/O Nk Jain Adv. Sec-12, Karnal, Naya Bazar, Bhiwani Haryana Pin 132001 Haryana Pin 127021 Pan Aadcr4203L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…regularly employed by the assessee". The choice of method of accounting is with the assessee and unless conditions prescribed in section 145(3) are satisfied, profits have to be computed in accordance with the method of accounting followed by the assessee: i) 33 ITR 182 (SC) CIT v. McMillan & Co. ii) 53 ITR 122 (SC) CIT v. A. Krishnaswami Mudaliar and Others Section 145(2) of the Act provides that the Central Government may notify in the Official Gazette from time to time accounting standards to be followed by any class of assessees or in respect of any class of income. It is therefore submitted that unless an ac…

Simbhaoli Power Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. Pr.CIT Central, Kanpur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 505/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

For Appellant: Shri Anshul Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Gupta, CIT- DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…evi (1988) 1711TR 686 (Pat.) CfT Vs. United Commercial Bank (1993) 201 ITR 162 (Gal.) Jubilant Organosys Vs. CIT (2004) 2651TR 4201137 Taxman 515 (All.) . Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2000) 109 Taxman 6612431TR 83 (SC) CIT Vs. McMilon and Company (SC) 33 ITR 182 Lajjawati Singhal Vs. CIT (All.) 226 ITR 527 12. In .view of the aforesaid discussion, it is found that the order passed by the A.O. is erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue on the issues discussed in aforesaid paragraphs. Hence, the assessment order passed by the ACIT, Circle-3, Bulandshahr, u/s143(3) of I.T. Act, 1961.…

Simbhaoli Power Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT Ghaziabad, New Delhi

ITA 4620/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

For Appellant: Shri Anshul Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Gupta, CIT- DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)(b)Section 69C

…evi (1988) 1711TR 686 (Pat.) CfT Vs. United Commercial Bank (1993) 201 ITR 162 (Gal.) Jubilant Organosys Vs. CIT (2004) 2651TR 4201137 Taxman 515 (All.) . Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2000) 109 Taxman 6612431TR 83 (SC) CIT Vs. McMilon and Company (SC) 33 ITR 182 Lajjawati Singhal Vs. CIT (All.) 226 ITR 527 12. In view of the aforesaid discussion, it is found that the order passed by the A.O. is erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue on the issues discussed in aforesaid paragraphs. Hence, the assessment order passed by the ACIT, Circle-3, Bulandshahr, u/s143(3) of I.T. Act, 1961.…

DCIT, Circle- 27(1), New Delhi vs. Ufo Moviez India Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3728/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharmadcit, Vs. Ufo Moviez India Ltd. Circle-27(1), 1-B, Sagar Apartments, New Delhi 6, Tilak Marg, New Delhi-110001 Pan : Aabcv8900E Ufo Moviez India Ltd. Vs. Dcit, 1-B, Sagar Apartments, Circle-27(1), 6, Tilak Marg, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 Pan : Aabcv8900E (Appellants) (Respondents) Appellant By : Shri Vishal Kalra, Adv., Shri Ankit Sahni, Adv. & Shri Yishu Goel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.12.2023 Order

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 15JSection 36(1)(va)

…immediate gain. Rather the said change in method has been adopted in the succeeding financial years as per audited accounts. Under these circumstances, when the appellant has freedom to adoptthe method of valuation as held in the case of CIT vs McMillan & Co. 33 ITR 182 (Supreme Court) and also the fact that change of method is not prohibited (Reform Flour Mills pvt. Ltd. vs CIT 114 ITR 227), the change in method of valuation adopted by the appellant in the previous year relevant to the AY 2013-14 and demonstrated to be regularly adopted in future years, the same needs to be presumed to be correct unless or until…

Ufo Moviez India Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl.CIT-27(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1942/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharmadcit, Vs. Ufo Moviez India Ltd. Circle-27(1), 1-B, Sagar Apartments, New Delhi 6, Tilak Marg, New Delhi-110001 Pan : Aabcv8900E Ufo Moviez India Ltd. Vs. Dcit, 1-B, Sagar Apartments, Circle-27(1), 6, Tilak Marg, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 Pan : Aabcv8900E (Appellants) (Respondents) Appellant By : Shri Vishal Kalra, Adv., Shri Ankit Sahni, Adv. & Shri Yishu Goel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.12.2023 Order

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 15JSection 36(1)(va)

…immediate gain. Rather the said change in method has been adopted in the succeeding financial years as per audited accounts. Under these circumstances, when the appellant has freedom to adoptthe method of valuation as held in the case of CIT vs McMillan & Co. 33 ITR 182 (Supreme Court) and also the fact that change of method is not prohibited (Reform Flour Mills pvt. Ltd. vs CIT 114 ITR 227), the change in method of valuation adopted by the appellant in the previous year relevant to the AY 2013-14 and demonstrated to be regularly adopted in future years, the same needs to be presumed to be correct unless or until…

M/S Alpha Reality, Chennai vs. ACIT Non Corporate Circle 3, Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1706/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1706/Chny/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. Alpha Reality Acit No.1-A, 4Th Floor, Jhava Plaza, Non-Corporate Circle-3, बनाम/ Vs. Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aajfa-8210-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri N. Arjunraj (Ca)- Ld.Ar !"थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar (Jcit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01-11-2023 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjunraj (CA)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT)-Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 68

…come was not commented upon. Consequently, the view expressed in Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry's case (supra) and Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria's case (supra) still holds feet. It may be noted that the issue was considered in CIT v. McMillan & Co. [1958] 33 ITR 182 (SC). Referring to a decision of the Bombay High Court in Narrondas Manordass v. CIT [1957] 31 ITR 909 , it was held that the language used in section 31 is wide enough to enable the first appellate authority to correct the ITO not only with regard to a matter which has been raised by the assessee but also with regard to a matter which has been co…

I.T.O vs. M/S Kumar Construcltion

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

ITA 10/PAT/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Patna17 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(b)Section 40A(3)

…rrow sense of revising those matters, which the assessee makes a grievance but the subject-matter of the appeal not only he had the same powers which could be exercised by the ITO. These observations were approved by this Court in CIT v. McMillan & Co. [1958] 33 ITR 182 the AAC on an appeal preferred by the assessee had jurisdiction to invoke, for the first time provisions of rule 33 of the Indian Income-tax Rules, 1922, for the purpose of computing the income of a nonresident even if the ITO had not done so in the assessment proceedings. In CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate [1964] 53 ITR 225 , a three- judge Bench of…