CIT v. Rashmi Trading

103 ITR 312High Court1976#14646 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2023.

Issues it is cited on

section 41(1)section 41 capital expenditure commissioner (appeals)previous year transfer section 143 company section 143(3)india total income business

Judgments citing CIT v. Rashmi Trading

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Udipur vs. M/S. Wagad Constrution Company, Udaipur

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 30/JODH/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri Venkatesh V. (JCIT-Sr.DR)

Section 143(1)

…alue of the benefit M/s. Wagad Construction Co. & M/s. Wagad Infra Project Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur. would become chargeable to income tax as income of that previous year. 12. We fully agree with the view taken by the Division Bench in CIT v. Rashmi Trading [1976] 103 ITR 312 (Gul), that the only meaning that can be attached to the words 'obtained, whether in cash or in any other manner whatsoever, any amount in respect of such loss or expenditure' incurred in any previous year clearly refer to the actual receiving of the cash of that amount. The amount may be actually received or it may be adjusted by way of an adjus…

ITO, War-4(1), Jaipur vs. Shri Amit Agarwal, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 267/JPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am

For Appellant: Shri G.M. Mehta (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (PCIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 143(3)Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68

…or benefit, as the case may be, has been obtained that the amount or the value of the benefit would become chargeable to income tax as income of that previous year. 12. We fully agree with the view taken by the Division Bench in CIT v. Rashmi Trading 119761 103 ITR 312 (Gui), that the only meaning that can be attached to the words 'obtained, whether in cash or in any other manner whatsdever, any amount in respect of such loss or expenditure' incurred in any previous year clearly refer to the actual 25 ITA 267/JP/2020_ ITO Vs Amit Agarwal receiving of the cash of that amount. The amount may be actually received…

Encorp E-Service Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1883/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jun 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 41(1)

…ash for application of the provisions of section 41(1) of the Act. Since this was a trading liability, which was written back in the year under consideration, application of the provisions of section 41(1) was perfectly justified. CIT v. Rashmi Trading [1976] 103 ITR 312 (Guj) and CIT v. Bharat Iron and Steel Industries [1993] 199 ITR 67 (Guj) [FB] applied. The assessee was the owner of a property, portions of which were let to various companies. There was a tenancy agreement between the tenants and the assessee, providing for rent but specifically for the charges payable for air-conditioning, the building being…

Encorp E-Service Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1882/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 41(1)

Flo Dyne Controls (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 10(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 983/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Blem/S. Flo Dyne Controls (India) Pvt. Ltd., V. Income Tax Officer – 10(3)(1) C/O. Jayesh Sangharjka & Co Llp Charted {Now Known As Income Tax Accountants Officer 15(1)(2)} Unit No. 405, Hind Rajasthan Centre, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, D.S. Phalke Road, Dadar (E) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai – 400 014

For Appellant: Shri Ritika AgarwalFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop

Section 40Section 41(1)

…benefit, as the case may be, has been obtained that the amount or the value of the benefit would become chargeable to income tax as income of that previous year. 12. We fully agree with the view taken by the Division Bench in C.I.T. v. Rashmi Trading (1976) 103 ITR 312 Gujarat (Supra) that the only meaning that can be attached to the words "obtained, whether in cash or in any other manner 8 M/s. Flo Dyne Controls (India) Pvt. Ltd., whatsoever, any amount in respect of such loss or expenditure" incurred in any previous year clearly refer to the actual receiving of the cash of that amount. The amount may be act…

ITO 8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Shiraz Develoers P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 6631/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri S.E. Dastur, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin

Section 41(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.6631/Mum./2014 (Assessment Year : 2011–12) Income Tax Officer ……………. Appellant Ward–8(3)(1), Mumbai v/s M/s. Shiraz Developers Pvt. Ltd. Shop no.1, Gokul Regency V.M. Shah Marg, Sahar ……………. Respondent Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 099 PAN – AAACS5310G Assessee by : Shri S.E. Dastur, Sr. Counsel Revenue by : Shri V. Justin Date of Hearing – 25.07.2017 Date of Order – 18.10.2017 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M. Captioned appeal by the Revenue is directed against the o…