CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co.

46 ITR 144Supreme Court of India1962#114 most cited

What is CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. authority for?

Income tax is levied only on real income that actually materializes, not on hypothetical or notional income, even if accounting entries suggest otherwise. If no income results, there is no tax liability.

551

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. · 46 ITR 144 · real income theory · notional income · hypothetical income · income tax levy · accrual of income · receipt of income · Section 48 · Income Tax Act 1961

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)Section 115JBSection 153ASection 1961Section 14A

Issues it is cited on

real income theoryright to receivemercantile system of accountingsection 48section 45section 35section 28loose papersliable to taxsection 145capital expendituresection 37(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co.

Shri Mukesh Rasiklal Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-9, Now Circle-4(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 3218/AHD/2015[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Dec 2024AY 1993-94

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh R. Shah – Party in personFor Respondent: Shri Karun Kant Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153Section 250

…as recovered or repaid in subsequent years does not negate the taxability of the income in the year of accrual. 15. The doctrine of real income requires taxation at the time of accrual, irrespective of later events. In CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. [(1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC)], the Hon’ble Supreme Court emphasized that income is taxable when it is received or accrued, and subsequent adjustments do not affect its original taxability. Thus, the assessee’s claim for deductions in respect of recovery or repayment fails, as it does not satisfy the conditions enumerated in Section 57 of the Act. This provision permits d…

Shri Mukesh Rasiklal Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-9, Now Circle-4(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 3217/AHD/2015[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Dec 2024AY 1992-93

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh R. Shah – Party in personFor Respondent: Shri Karun Kant Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153Section 250

…as recovered or repaid in subsequent years does not negate the taxability of the income in the year of accrual. 15. The doctrine of real income requires taxation at the time of accrual, irrespective of later events. In CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. [(1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC)], the Hon’ble Supreme Court emphasized that income is taxable when it is received or accrued, and subsequent adjustments do not affect its original taxability. Thus, the assessee’s claim for deductions in respect of recovery or repayment fails, as it does not satisfy the conditions enumerated in Section 57 of the Act. This provision permits d…

The Dy CIT CC-38, Mumbai vs. M/S. United Phosphourous Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 4099/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2024AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt.Renu Jauhri, Accountan Member

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Heera Ram Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…be decided in accordance with the provisions of law. It is contended that the said expenditure is allowable u/s 37 of the Act. Reliance has been placed on decisions of the High Courts and also of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. ShoorjiVallabhdas& Co. 46 ITR 144, Kedarnath Jute 82 ITR 363; Chowringhee Sales Bureau 87 ITR 542; Berger Paints 254 ITR 503. It is submitted that the registration of the product was compulsory to make sales in the respective countries. Without such registration, the appellant company could not have launched its product for sale in those countries. The expenditure was, therefore,…

DCIT, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad vs. Prakash Nimmagadda, Hyderabad, Secunderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 974/HYD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.974/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dy.Cit Vs. Shri Prakash Nimmagadda Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Acbpn4246R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/12/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order, Dated 20/03/2017 Of The Learned Cit (A)-9, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2008-09. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, CIT(DR)
Section 17(2)(c)Section 28

…e issue of hypothetical income brought to tax by applying the provisions of section 28(iv) in Para 17 to 27 as under: “17. First of all, it is now well settled that income tax cannot be levied on hypothetical income. In CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. [1962] 46 ITR 144 (SC) it was held as follows:— "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- ke…

Simoco Systems and Infrastructure Solutions Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO Ward 2 (1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 123/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Indranil Banerjee, ARFor Respondent: Ankur Goyal, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250

…on the moneys advanced during the year In the absence of actual charging of interest and as it has not been charged due business expediency, interest cannot assessed on notional basis. Lastly, it is a settled law, vide CIT vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. (1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC), Morvi Industries Ltd. vs. CIT 1974 CTR (SC) 149: (1971) 82 ITR 835 (SC), Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1997) 139 CTR (SC) 564: (1997) 225 ITR 746 (SC) and State Bank of Travancore vs. CIT (1986) 50 CTR (SC) 290: (1986) 158 ITR 102 (SC) that Income accrues when it becomes due but it must also be accompanied by a corresponding liability…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Hudco Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 3904/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Nov 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Gagan Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT DR &
Section 143(3)

…aid case are of relevance, and the same read as ITA No. 3262/Del/2015 (AY: 2011-12) ITA Nos. 3904 &3905/Del/2015 HUDCO 17. "First of all, it is now well settled that income tax cannot be levied on hypothetical income. In CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. [1962]46 ITR 144(SC) it was held as follows:— 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-keepi…

M/S. Housing & Urban Development Corporation Ltd. (Hudco), New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 3261/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Nov 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Gagan Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT DR &
Section 143(3)

…aid case are of relevance, and the same read as ITA No. 3262/Del/2015 (AY: 2011-12) ITA Nos. 3904 &3905/Del/2015 HUDCO 17. "First of all, it is now well settled that income tax cannot be levied on hypothetical income. In CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. [1962]46 ITR 144(SC) it was held as follows:— 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-keepi…

Venkat Rajasekhar Koneru, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are dismissed

ITA 627/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri M. Chandramouleswara RaoFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.AR
Section 132Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” , HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA No Assessment Appellant / Assessee Respondent No Year 1 610/Hyd/2022 2016-17 Shri Bandi Sudheer Assistant Commissioner of Reddy, Income Tax, Central Circle Hyderabad. – 1(4), Hyderabad. PAN : BYNPB7159M 2 611/Hyd/2022 2016-17 Shri Pramod Reddy Assistant Commissioner of Tekula, Income Tax, Central Circle Hyderabad. – 1(1), Hyderabad. PAN : AKDPT7293H 3 627/Hyd/2022 2016-17 Shri Venkata -do- Rajasekhar…

Pramod Reddy Tekula, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are dismissed

ITA 611/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri M. Chandramouleswara RaoFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.AR
Section 132Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” , HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA No Assessment Appellant / Assessee Respondent No Year 1 610/Hyd/2022 2016-17 Shri Bandi Sudheer Assistant Commissioner of Reddy, Income Tax, Central Circle Hyderabad. – 1(4), Hyderabad. PAN : BYNPB7159M 2 611/Hyd/2022 2016-17 Shri Pramod Reddy Assistant Commissioner of Tekula, Income Tax, Central Circle Hyderabad. – 1(1), Hyderabad. PAN : AKDPT7293H 3 627/Hyd/2022 2016-17 Shri Venkata -do- Rajasekhar…

Bandi Sudheer Reddy, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are dismissed

ITA 610/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri M. Chandramouleswara RaoFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.AR
Section 132Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” , HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA No Assessment Appellant / Assessee Respondent No Year 1 610/Hyd/2022 2016-17 Shri Bandi Sudheer Assistant Commissioner of Reddy, Income Tax, Central Circle Hyderabad. – 1(4), Hyderabad. PAN : BYNPB7159M 2 611/Hyd/2022 2016-17 Shri Pramod Reddy Assistant Commissioner of Tekula, Income Tax, Central Circle Hyderabad. – 1(1), Hyderabad. PAN : AKDPT7293H 3 627/Hyd/2022 2016-17 Shri Venkata -do- Rajasekhar…

Pme Power Solutions India Ltd, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi

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

ITA 249/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(9)Section 140ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 249(4)(a)Section 271(1)(c)Section 276C(2)

…years as it did. In view of the foregoing discussions the impugned order of the ITAT is set aside. The appeal consequently succeed and allowed." The counsel has also relied on "Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay City I vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co." [(1962) 46 ITR 1441 wherein the Supreme Court has opined that:- "...... 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 tough in book-keeping, an e…

Pme Power Solutions India Ltd, New Delhi vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi

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

ITA 242/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(9)Section 140ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 249(4)(a)Section 271(1)(c)Section 276C(2)

…years as it did. In view of the foregoing discussions the impugned order of the ITAT is set aside. The appeal consequently succeed and allowed." The counsel has also relied on "Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay City I vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co." [(1962) 46 ITR 1441 wherein the Supreme Court has opined that:- "...... 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 tough in book-keeping, an e…

The DCIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar vs. M/S. Tourism Corporation of Gujarat Ltd., Gandhinagar

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

ITA 819/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.819/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Dcit M/S.Tourism Corporation Of बनाम/ Udhyog Bhavan, Sector-11 Gujarat Ltd. V/S. Gandhinagar Circle Block No.17, 4Th Floor Udyog Bhavan, Sector-11 Gandhinagar – 382 011 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaact 7252 J (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Heman, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Heman, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…vily on the concept of DCIT vs. M/s.Tourism Corporation of Gujarat Ltd. Asst. Year : 2012-13 real income, arguing that the amount in question never actually accrued to TCGL but was pass-through. The assessee cited judgments such as, Shoorji Vallabhdas (1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC) to assert that notional or hypothetical income cannot be taxed unless it meets the test of real income. The AO emphasized that TCGL had consistently recognized 15% of grants utilized as income in prior years, without differentiation between direct and indirect utilizations. The AO concluded that there was no tangible reason to exclude the Rs.…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. Sh. Naval Kishore, Kota

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and that of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 456/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2015-16
Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…about such transaction would be rarely available. Therefore, in the absence of contrary evidences provided the claim of the appellant remains without proof and hence rejected. The appellant placed reliance on the case of CIT VS Shoorji Vallabhdas& 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 a…

Magendra Singh Rathore, Alwar vs. DCIT Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 483/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargiya (Adv.) &For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 57

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 460/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 Sh. Magendra Singh Rathore cuke The ACIT, Ganga Niwas, Bank colony, Vs. Central Circle-2, Jaipur. Alwar. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AIYPR0804M vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 483/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2017-18 Sh.…

Raath Vidyapeeth, Alwar vs. ITO (Exmp.), Ward-Alwar, Alwar

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is partly allowed with no orders as to costs

ITA 338/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 251

…42 ITR 22 (Gauhati) (HC) When there is no finding that assessee had in fact received interest on advance made to a sister concern or the debtor paid the interest to assessee; notional interest cannot be charged to tax CIT Vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas And Co. (1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC) It was held that 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…

Loramitra Rath, Kairapari Kotsahi, Tangi vs. DCIT (Circle-1(1), Cuttack

The appeal is allowed

ITA 314/CTK/2023[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack05 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2015-16 Loramitra Loramitra Rath, Rath, Kairapari Kairapari Vs. Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kotsahi, Tangi, Cuttack Kotsahi, Tangi, Cuttack Cuttack Pan/Gir No. No.Aebpr 6065 H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Purnendhu Bhusan Mohanty, Ca Purnendhu Bhusan Mohanty, Ca Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr

For Appellant: Shri Purnendhu Bhusan Mohanty, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr
Section 48

…252 ITR 880 (SC) 26 5 CIT v. Bagyalakshmi and Co. [1965] 55 I'TR 660 (SC) 24 6 CIT v. Patuck (1969) 71 [TR 713 (Bom) 10 7 CIT v. Sitaldas Tirathdas (1961) 41 ITR 367 (SC) 5 8 CIT v. Sitaldas Tirathdas (1961) 41 ITR 367 (SC) CIT vs. 5 Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. 46 ITR 144 (SC) 9 CIT vs. A. Gajapathy Naidu 53 ITR 114(SC) CIT vs. 5 Ahmedbhai Umarbhay & Co. 18 ITR 472 (SC) 10 CIT vs. Ahmedbhai Umarbhay & Co. 18 ITR 472 (SC) 5 11 CIT vs. Pepsu Road Transport Corpn.253 ITR 303 (Punj. & 5 Har.) 12 CIT Vs. Crawford Bayley & Co., 106 ITR 884 (Bom.) 23 P a g e 4 | 59 Assessment Year : 2015-16 13 Commissioner of Income Tax…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(2), Jaipur, Ncr Building, Statue Circle Jaipur vs. Vasudev Hemrajani, Arjun Nagar, Jaipur

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 634/JPR/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Sept 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anil Dhaka, CIT
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 634/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2020-21 cuke Income Tax Officer, Vasudev Hemrajani, Vs. Ward 6(2), Jaipur Arjun Nagar, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AADPH 3411 K vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Tarun Mittal, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Anil Dhaka,…

M/S. Bandhan Bank Ltd. (Erstwhile Ghosh Finance Ltd), Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-5(1), Kol, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 465/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Biswanath Paul, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhro Das, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 17(2)(vi)Section 192Section 250Section 37

…of account and still allowable by the Act to be deducted/added. The assessee relied upon the following judicial pronouncements in this regard. (a) Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. CIT [227 ITR 172 (SC)] (b) CIT Vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. [46 ITR 144 (SC)] (c) CIT Vs. Mogul Line Ltd. [46 ITR 590 (Bom) 8. The Ld. AO, vide paragraph 7.3 onwards of the assessment order, has discussed the matter. The Ld. AO examined the provisions of section 37 of the Act and relied upon several decisions and rejected the claim of the assessee as according to him, the same was not allowable. Further, he mentions…

Akshay Infrasys Industries Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-4(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 613/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…income which are paper incomeonly and no real transaction alleged to have taken place. The similar issue has been 16 Akshay Infrasys Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO decided by the apex court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas& Co. [ 46 ITR 144 (SC) ] wherein the court held that ; The contentions before us (as also in the High Court) were that the income had already accrued to the assessee firm in the year of account, and was thus assessable, that the arrangement amounted to a voluntary gift by the assessee firm to the shipping companies, and that the books being kept on a mercantile bas…