CIT v. Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd.

46 ITR 649Supreme Court of India1962#875 most cited

What is CIT v. Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd. authority for?

When advances extended in the normal course of business operations become irrecoverable and are written off, these amounts are allowable as a business loss or revenue expenditure.

120

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd. · 46 ITR 649 · Section 37(1) · Section 36(1)(vii) · business loss · advances written off · irrecoverable advances · revenue expenditure · allowable deduction · business expenditure

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 32Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 115JBSection 143(3)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 90aconstruction peunexplained jewellerysection 24(b)under-reporting of incomeproject completion methodsection 80cforeign tax creditroyalty incomewithholding taxdisallowance of interest expendituresection 139(4)

Judgments citing CIT v. Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd.

Shri Priyakant Ramanlal Parikh (Ind.), Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Cir. 5(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is rejected

ITA 2596/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2596/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Priyakant Ramanlal Acit, Cir.5(2) Parikh (Ind.) Vs Ahmedabad. 5Th Floor, H.K. House Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. Pan : Abrpp 6335 P अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Divatia, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.K. Dev, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Sr.DR
Section 156(3)Section 36(2)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ - अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD – BENCH ‘A’ BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 2596/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Priyakant Ramanlal ACIT, Cir.5(2) Parikh (Ind.) Vs Ahmedabad. 5th Floor, H.K. House Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. PAN : ABRPP 6335 P अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri S.N. Divatia, AR Revenue by : Shri S.K. Dev, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 01/05/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement : 06/05/20…

ACIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. Tips Industries Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by revenue in ITA no

ITA 6291/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6194 To 6196/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14) बिाम/ M/S. Tips Industries Ltd., Acit 11(1) 601, Durga Chambers, Room No. 439, 6T H Floor, Linking Road, Aayakar Bhawan V. Khar West, M.K.Marg Mumbai 400054 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaact5284A

For Appellant: Shri. Deepak TralshawalaFor Respondent: Shri. O.P Meena (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “E” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6194 to 6196/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14) बिाम/ M/s. Tips Industries Ltd., ACIT 11(1) 601, Durga Chambers, Room No. 439, 6t h Floor, Linking Road, Aayakar Bhawan v. Khar West, M.K.Marg Mumbai 400054 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN : AAACT5284A आयकर अपीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No. 6291/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिाम/ ACIT 16(1) M/s. Tips Industries Lt…

Tips Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 16(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by revenue in ITA no

ITA 6196/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6194 To 6196/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14) बिाम/ M/S. Tips Industries Ltd., Acit 11(1) 601, Durga Chambers, Room No. 439, 6T H Floor, Linking Road, Aayakar Bhawan V. Khar West, M.K.Marg Mumbai 400054 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaact5284A

For Appellant: Shri. Deepak TralshawalaFor Respondent: Shri. O.P Meena (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “E” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6194 to 6196/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14) बिाम/ M/s. Tips Industries Ltd., ACIT 11(1) 601, Durga Chambers, Room No. 439, 6t h Floor, Linking Road, Aayakar Bhawan v. Khar West, M.K.Marg Mumbai 400054 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN : AAACT5284A आयकर अपीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No. 6291/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिाम/ ACIT 16(1) M/s. Tips Industries Lt…

Tips Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 16(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by revenue in ITA no

ITA 6195/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6194 To 6196/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14) बिाम/ M/S. Tips Industries Ltd., Acit 11(1) 601, Durga Chambers, Room No. 439, 6T H Floor, Linking Road, Aayakar Bhawan V. Khar West, M.K.Marg Mumbai 400054 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaact5284A

For Appellant: Shri. Deepak TralshawalaFor Respondent: Shri. O.P Meena (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “E” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6194 to 6196/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14) बिाम/ M/s. Tips Industries Ltd., ACIT 11(1) 601, Durga Chambers, Room No. 439, 6t h Floor, Linking Road, Aayakar Bhawan v. Khar West, M.K.Marg Mumbai 400054 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN : AAACT5284A आयकर अपीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No. 6291/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिाम/ ACIT 16(1) M/s. Tips Industries Lt…

Tips Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 11(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by revenue in ITA no

ITA 6194/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6194 To 6196/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14) बिाम/ M/S. Tips Industries Ltd., Acit 11(1) 601, Durga Chambers, Room No. 439, 6T H Floor, Linking Road, Aayakar Bhawan V. Khar West, M.K.Marg Mumbai 400054 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaact5284A

For Appellant: Shri. Deepak TralshawalaFor Respondent: Shri. O.P Meena (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “E” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6194 to 6196/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14) बिाम/ M/s. Tips Industries Ltd., ACIT 11(1) 601, Durga Chambers, Room No. 439, 6t h Floor, Linking Road, Aayakar Bhawan v. Khar West, M.K.Marg Mumbai 400054 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN : AAACT5284A आयकर अपीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No. 6291/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिाम/ ACIT 16(1) M/s. Tips Industries Lt…

Bhagwati Gases Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-8, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeal of revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 345/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

…ceedings or the appellate proceedings, which meant that there was no transaction with these parties after the "advance" given by the assessee to them. This makes the transactions very doubtful. Hon'ble S.C have held in the case of CIT Vs. Mysore Sugar Co Ltd. 46 ITR 649 that it is very important to find out the nature of transaction, whether it is on capital account or on revenue. Not all losses can be held to be revenue loss. The assessee has to show the purpose for which money was advanced. Was it to acquire an asset of an enduring nature for the benefit of the business or was it an outgoing in the doing of the…

DCIT, Cir-8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Bhagwati Gases Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeal of revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 339/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

…ceedings or the appellate proceedings, which meant that there was no transaction with these parties after the "advance" given by the assessee to them. This makes the transactions very doubtful. Hon'ble S.C have held in the case of CIT Vs. Mysore Sugar Co Ltd. 46 ITR 649 that it is very important to find out the nature of transaction, whether it is on capital account or on revenue. Not all losses can be held to be revenue loss. The assessee has to show the purpose for which money was advanced. Was it to acquire an asset of an enduring nature for the benefit of the business or was it an outgoing in the doing of the…

DCIT, Cir-2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Chloride Power Systems & Solutions Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1326/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Apr 2019AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.) Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Cir-2(1), Kolkata Vs M/S. Chloride Power Systems & Solutions Ltd. Pan: Aabcc1825B Deptt (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Anup Sinha, FCA, ld.AR
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ry course of business, accordingly, any payment in this respect should be treated as revenue expenditure and any loss should be treated as trading loss. For that we rely on the judgment of the Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of Mysore Sugar Company Limited, 46 ITR 649 (SC). Hence, advance written off, even in respect of capital asset, which was not ultimately acquired would be allowed as business loss. For that, we further rely on the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Anjani Kumar Co.Ltd 124 Taxman 429 (Raj). That being so, we decline M/s.Chloride Power Systems & Solutions Ltd. 9 to interfere…

M/S Kalyani Buildwell Private Ltd, Agra vs. ACIT Circle4(1), Agra

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 292/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenam/S Kalyani Buildwell (P) Ltd., Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Kalyani Point, Near Tulsi Income-Tax, Circle-4(1), Agra Cinema, Bye-Pass Road, Agra Pan No: Aacck7095G (Assessee) (Revenue)

Section 133ASection 43B

…owable expenditure u/s 37 of the Act. In support, he placed reliance on the following case laws:- a) CIT vs. Khaitan Chemical & Fertilizers Ltd.326 ITR 114 b) CIT vs. Mahalakshmi Textile Mills Ltd. 66 ITR 710 (SC) c) CIT vs. Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd. reported in 46 ITR 649 SC) d) CIT vs. Nainital Bank Ltd. reported in 55 ITR 707 (SC) 7.2.1 The Ld AR further contented that, in immediately succeeding Assessment Years i.e. 2012-13 and 2013-14, the claim of lease deed expenses was allowed by the Ld AO for 15 years. So, instead of proportionating it in 15 years it should be proportionated in 5 years. Copy of the assessme…

Hiravati Marine Products Pvt. Ltd., Porbandar vs. The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-2, Jamnagar

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 306/RJT/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed"नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2007-2008 Addl. Commissioner Of Hiravati Marine Products Pvt. Income Tax, Vs Ltd. Range-2, Porbandar, Jamnagar. Pan No: Aabch2110C "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2008-2009

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Gokani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Verma, Sr.D.R
Section 37

…sing officer. However, it is only at the time this amount is written off has the assessing officer raised objection and has raised question on whether such advances are bonafide. 9. Appellant further relies on the judgement of:- i. CIT V Mysore Sugars Limited 46 ITR 649 ( Sc) ii. CIT v Abdul Razak & Co 136 ITR 825 ( Gui) 10. Further the facts of the case are identical to the case of Mohan Meakin Ltd. reported in 348 ITR 109 (Delhi) wherein Hon. High Court has held as under:- 6. The facts of Chenab Forest Co. v. CIT [1974] 96 ITR 568 (J&K) are similar to the instant case. In this case, the assessee was engaged in…

The ACIT, Circle-2, Jamnagar vs. M/S Hiravati Marine Products (P) Ltd., Porbandar

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 947/RJT/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed"नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2007-2008 Addl. Commissioner Of Hiravati Marine Products Pvt. Income Tax, Vs Ltd. Range-2, Porbandar, Jamnagar. Pan No: Aabch2110C "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2008-2009

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Gokani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Verma, Sr.D.R
Section 37

…sing officer. However, it is only at the time this amount is written off has the assessing officer raised objection and has raised question on whether such advances are bonafide. 9. Appellant further relies on the judgement of:- i. CIT V Mysore Sugars Limited 46 ITR 649 ( Sc) ii. CIT v Abdul Razak & Co 136 ITR 825 ( Gui) 10. Further the facts of the case are identical to the case of Mohan Meakin Ltd. reported in 348 ITR 109 (Delhi) wherein Hon. High Court has held as under:- 6. The facts of Chenab Forest Co. v. CIT [1974] 96 ITR 568 (J&K) are similar to the instant case. In this case, the assessee was engaged in…

Mahle Behr India Private Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2935/PUN/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jan 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 2935/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri R.D. OnkarFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghei
Section 143(3)Section 28

…e amounted to business loss allowable U/s. 28/37 of the Income Tax Act. Reliance is placed on the decisions of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Mohan Meakins Ltd. reported in 348 ITR 109 ( Copy placed) and Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd. 46 ITR 649.” 6. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee filed appeal before us by raising the grounds as extracted above. 7. On hearing both the parties on this issue, we find that there is no dispute about requirement of the said blower motor of spare parts for manufacturing of the Air-conditioners. Business model of the assessee…

M/S. Thyssenkrupp Elevator (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 987/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri S.D. Kapila, Adv. & Shri R.RFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154

…r.w.s. 28 of the Act, being the loss incurred in carrying out the operation of the business. This principle is covered by the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd., reported 11 I.T.As. No.987, 871 & 4708/DEL/2014 in 46 ITR 649 (SC). Accordingly, grounds no.4 and 4.1 as raised by the assessee is allowed. 15. Similarly, in so far as the disallowance of TDS recoverable written off and rent deposit written off in the books, same reasoning has been given by the Assessing Officer as well as ld. CIT(A). 16. In so far as TDS amount written off on account of its non recoverabi…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Thyssenkrupp Elevator (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 871/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri S.D. Kapila, Adv. & Shri R.RFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154

…r.w.s. 28 of the Act, being the loss incurred in carrying out the operation of the business. This principle is covered by the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd., reported 11 I.T.As. No.987, 871 & 4708/DEL/2014 in 46 ITR 649 (SC). Accordingly, grounds no.4 and 4.1 as raised by the assessee is allowed. 15. Similarly, in so far as the disallowance of TDS recoverable written off and rent deposit written off in the books, same reasoning has been given by the Assessing Officer as well as ld. CIT(A). 16. In so far as TDS amount written off on account of its non recoverabi…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Thyssenkrupp Elevator (I) P. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 4708/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri S.D. Kapila, Adv. & Shri R.RFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154

…r.w.s. 28 of the Act, being the loss incurred in carrying out the operation of the business. This principle is covered by the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd., reported 11 I.T.As. No.987, 871 & 4708/DEL/2014 in 46 ITR 649 (SC). Accordingly, grounds no.4 and 4.1 as raised by the assessee is allowed. 15. Similarly, in so far as the disallowance of TDS recoverable written off and rent deposit written off in the books, same reasoning has been given by the Assessing Officer as well as ld. CIT(A). 16. In so far as TDS amount written off on account of its non recoverabi…

DCIT, Cir-5(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd., Kolkata

496/Kol/2014

ITA 471/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Sept 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 483/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-5, Kolkata [Pan: Aabcb 0984 E ] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 496/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-5, Kolkata -Vs- Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. [Pan: Aabcb 0984 E] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 421/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-5(2), Kolkata [Pan: Aabcb 0984 E ] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 471/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Circle-5(2), Kolkata -Vs- Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. [Pan: Aabcb 0984 E] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)

…aken a call to write off the same during the year under consideration which would be squarely allowable as trading loss. We find that the reliance placed by the ld AR on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd reporte din 46 ITR 649 (SC) and the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Rohtas Industries Ltd reported in 120 ITR 110 (Cal) are very well founded, among others. In view of the aforesaid observations and respectfully following the aforesaid judicial precedents, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld CITA granting relief to the assessee in this re…

Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-5(2), Kolkata

496/Kol/2014

ITA 421/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Sept 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 483/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-5, Kolkata [Pan: Aabcb 0984 E ] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 496/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-5, Kolkata -Vs- Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. [Pan: Aabcb 0984 E] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 421/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-5(2), Kolkata [Pan: Aabcb 0984 E ] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 471/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Circle-5(2), Kolkata -Vs- Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. [Pan: Aabcb 0984 E] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)

…aken a call to write off the same during the year under consideration which would be squarely allowable as trading loss. We find that the reliance placed by the ld AR on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd reporte din 46 ITR 649 (SC) and the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Rohtas Industries Ltd reported in 120 ITR 110 (Cal) are very well founded, among others. In view of the aforesaid observations and respectfully following the aforesaid judicial precedents, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld CITA granting relief to the assessee in this re…

DCIT, Cir-5, Kolkata vs. M/S Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd., Kolkata

496/Kol/2014

ITA 496/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Sept 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 483/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-5, Kolkata [Pan: Aabcb 0984 E ] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 496/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-5, Kolkata -Vs- Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. [Pan: Aabcb 0984 E] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 421/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-5(2), Kolkata [Pan: Aabcb 0984 E ] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 471/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Circle-5(2), Kolkata -Vs- Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. [Pan: Aabcb 0984 E] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)

…aken a call to write off the same during the year under consideration which would be squarely allowable as trading loss. We find that the reliance placed by the ld AR on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd reporte din 46 ITR 649 (SC) and the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Rohtas Industries Ltd reported in 120 ITR 110 (Cal) are very well founded, among others. In view of the aforesaid observations and respectfully following the aforesaid judicial precedents, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld CITA granting relief to the assessee in this re…

M/S Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-5, Kolkata

496/Kol/2014

ITA 483/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Sept 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 483/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-5, Kolkata [Pan: Aabcb 0984 E ] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 496/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-5, Kolkata -Vs- Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. [Pan: Aabcb 0984 E] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 421/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-5(2), Kolkata [Pan: Aabcb 0984 E ] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 471/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Circle-5(2), Kolkata -Vs- Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. [Pan: Aabcb 0984 E] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)

…aken a call to write off the same during the year under consideration which would be squarely allowable as trading loss. We find that the reliance placed by the ld AR on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd reporte din 46 ITR 649 (SC) and the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Rohtas Industries Ltd reported in 120 ITR 110 (Cal) are very well founded, among others. In view of the aforesaid observations and respectfully following the aforesaid judicial precedents, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld CITA granting relief to the assessee in this re…

R.V. Steels Pvt. Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circleii(3), Chennai

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2201/CHNY/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCITFor Respondent: 13.06.2018
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 41(1)

…ities which have ceased to have existed in the case of trade creditors can as well be brought to tax u/s.41(1). This issue is similar to allowing purchase advances written off as bad debts. Reliance is placed on the judicial decisions in Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd (46 ITR 649 SC), B.D. Bharucha (65 ITR 403 SC) and Dhanalakshmi Corporation (46 ITR 1031 Madras) for this corollary. Reliance is also placed on the judicial decisions in Kamal Basha (316 ITR 58 Madras), Palkhi Investments and Trading Co P Ltd (288 CTR 473 Bombay), Suresh Kumar T Jain (128 ITD 74 Bangalore) and Asht Lakshmi Diamond and Jewellery (154 ITR 688 M…