CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co.

DCIT Cent. Cir. -5(3) (Erstwhile DCIT Cent. Cir. -36), Mumbai vs. Sumer Builders, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Blem/S. Sumer Builders V. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Central Circle – 5(3) 201, Commerce House {Erstwhile Dcit, Central Circle – 36} 140, Nm Road, Fort Room No. 1906, 19Th Floor Mumbai – 400 023 Air India Building, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaafs2829R

…grounds as held in Para Nos. 5.2.1 and 5.2.2 of his order. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that such an approach, apart from being unjust was also contrary to the settled binding judicial precedents. Reliance was placed on CIT v. Shoorji Valabhdas & Co [46 ITR 144 (SC)], Morvi Industries v. CIT [82 ITR 835 (SC)], Godhra Electricity Co. v. CIT [225 ITR 746 (SC)]. It was further argued that entry or absence in the books of accounts is not determinative of taxability of income or allowability of a deduction under the Act. Therefore, it is submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in not allowing the said grounds mere…

Sumer Builders, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 5(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Blem/S. Sumer Builders V. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Central Circle – 5(3) 201, Commerce House {Erstwhile Dcit, Central Circle – 36} 140, Nm Road, Fort Room No. 1906, 19Th Floor Mumbai – 400 023 Air India Building, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaafs2829R

…grounds as held in Para Nos. 5.2.1 and 5.2.2 of his order. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that such an approach, apart from being unjust was also contrary to the settled binding judicial precedents. Reliance was placed on CIT v. Shoorji Valabhdas & Co [46 ITR 144 (SC)], Morvi Industries v. CIT [82 ITR 835 (SC)], Godhra Electricity Co. v. CIT [225 ITR 746 (SC)]. It was further argued that entry or absence in the books of accounts is not determinative of taxability of income or allowability of a deduction under the Act. Therefore, it is submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in not allowing the said grounds mere…

Amoha Traders P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleamoha Traders P. Ltd., Dcit 3(1) बनाम/ 28 Hamam House, A Doshi R.No. 604, Aayakar Vs. Marg, Mumbai – 400023. Bhavan, M.K Marg, New Marine Lines, Mumbai - 20 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaca459Q (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

…No. 2472 /Mum/2013 Amoha Traders Pvt Ltd., Mumbai. assessee fallows the mercantile Accounting System. We support our view relying on the Hon’ble Supreme court decision of Godhra Electricity Co Ltd VS Cit (SC) 225 ITR 747 (SC) and CIT Vs Shoorji Vallabhdas &Co 46 ITR 144 (SC).Accordingly, the estimation of interest income is not tenable and the notional income cannot be hypothetical basis for making an addition by the A.O, and we set aside the CIT(A) order on this particular ground of appeal and direct the A.O to delete the addition and allow the ground of appeal of the assessee. 5. Whereas on the second disputed…

DCIT ( OSD) 2(3), Mumbai vs. Safari Mercantile P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2001-02

…e Tribunal in the impugned order has correctly held that what has to be taxed is the amount received or accrued and not any notional or Safari Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. 12 hypothetical income. As observed by the Apex Court in CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. [1962] 46 ITR 144 ‘Income-tax is a levy on income. No doubt, the Income-tax Act takes into account two points of time at which liability to tax is attracted, viz., the accrual of its income or its receipt; but the substance of the matter is income, if income does not result, there cannot be a tax, even though in book-keeping an entry is made about a hypothetical in…

Futura Polysters Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 6(3)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Ravish Soodita Nos.1459-1460/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Futura Polyster Limited Ito 6(3)(1) B-22, T.V. Indl Estate, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai – 400 030 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan – Aaaci3404K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Vijay Mehta & Shri Anuj Kisnadwala, A.R‘S Respondent By: Shri Debashis Chanda, D.R Date Of Hearing: 15.01.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.07.2020

…CG in the hands of the assessee had sought to tax a hypothetical income, which finds its roots in a transaction which had never fructified into a sale transaction. As observed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co., (1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC), income-tax is a levy on income. No doubt, the Income-tax act takes into account two points of time at which the liability to tax is attracted ,viz., the accrual of the income or its receipt, but the substance of the matter is the income. If income does not result at all, there cannot be a tax, even though in book-keeping, an entry is made ab…

Futura Polysters Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 6(3)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Ravish Soodita Nos.1459-1460/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Futura Polyster Limited Ito 6(3)(1) B-22, T.V. Indl Estate, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai – 400 030 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan – Aaaci3404K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Vijay Mehta & Shri Anuj Kisnadwala, A.R‘S Respondent By: Shri Debashis Chanda, D.R Date Of Hearing: 15.01.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.07.2020

…CG in the hands of the assessee had sought to tax a hypothetical income, which finds its roots in a transaction which had never fructified into a sale transaction. As observed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co., (1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC), income-tax is a levy on income. No doubt, the Income-tax act takes into account two points of time at which the liability to tax is attracted ,viz., the accrual of the income or its receipt, but the substance of the matter is the income. If income does not result at all, there cannot be a tax, even though in book-keeping, an entry is made ab…

United Shippers Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - 3(3), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

…efore, there was no reason for making any addition on the ground of interest being not charged by assessee. Ld. counsel has relied on following decisions for the proposition that only real income can be taxed and not notional income. - ShoorjiVallabhdas& Co. 46 ITR 144 (SC); - Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd.v. . CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC); - CIT vs. A. Raman & Co. 67 ITR 11(SC); - UCO Bank v. CIT 237 ITR 889 (SC); - Airport Authority of India v. CIT 340 ITR 407 (Del. )(FB); - CIT v. Motor Credit Co. P. Ltd. 127 ITR 572 (Mad.); - JCIT v. Pankaj Oxygen Ltd. 78 TTJ 119 (Nag.) - ACIT vs. Manick Chand Damani 72 TTJ 675 (Cal.)…

ITO 22(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Newtech (India0 Developers, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

…someone has earned the right to receive the money in income character, its immaterial, for recognition of the same as income, as to whether the income is received or not. As held by Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of CIT Vs Shoorji Ballabhdas & Co [(1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC)], “Income-tax is a levy on income. No doubt, the Income-tax Act takes into account two points of time at which the liability to tax is attracted, viz., the accrual of the income or its receipt; but the substance of the matter is the income. If income does not result at all, there cannot be a tax, even though in book-keeping, an entry is made…