CIT v. Shri Ram Pistons and Rings Ltd. (2008) 220 CTR 404, CIT v. Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd.

336 ITR 374High Court2011#2824 most cited

What is CIT v. Shri Ram Pistons and Rings Ltd. (2008) 220 CTR 404, CIT v. Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd. authority for?

Mere timing differences in income recognition across assessment years, where the Revenue does not ultimately lose tax and the income is offered and taxed in a subsequent year, generally do not warrant an adverse inference or addition. This principle applies when an assessee offers extra income, such as from an anticipated insurance claim, which is later reversed upon final settlement without ambiguity.

42

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd. · 336 ITR 374 · income recognition · timing difference · insurance claim income · reversal of income · revenue not prejudiced · assessment year · Section 145(2) · business income

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 127Section 132(4)Section 132(4A)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 2(24)(x)

Issues it is cited on

section 36(i)(va)true and full disclosuresection 153(a)retraction of statementcorporate guaranteesection 145(2)statement under section 132(4)retracted statementwritten down valuepercentage completion methodput to usesection 132(4a)

Judgments citing CIT v. Shri Ram Pistons and Rings Ltd. (2008) 220 CTR 404, CIT v. Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd.

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, DELHI vs. M B POWER (MADHYA PRADESH) LTD., DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 267/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

…the Revenue does not lose anything, as it would receive the tax on this income in the succeeding year...." To the same effect are the judgments in CIT v. Shri Ram Pistons and Rings Ltd. (2008) 220 CTR 404, CIT v. Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 374 and CIT v. Modipon Ltd. (No.1) (2011) 334 ITR 102 (Del).” ITA No.3850/Del/2023 & Others 52. Heard the contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, due to fire, the extra income offered by the assessee in AYs 2017-18 & 2018-19 on account of insurance claim was not doubted by Revenue in the respective y…

MB POWER (MADHYA PRADESH) LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 211/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

…the Revenue does not lose anything, as it would receive the tax on this income in the succeeding year...." To the same effect are the judgments in CIT v. Shri Ram Pistons and Rings Ltd. (2008) 220 CTR 404, CIT v. Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 374 and CIT v. Modipon Ltd. (No.1) (2011) 334 ITR 102 (Del).” ITA No.3850/Del/2023 & Others 52. Heard the contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, due to fire, the extra income offered by the assessee in AYs 2017-18 & 2018-19 on account of insurance claim was not doubted by Revenue in the respective y…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, DELHI vs. MB POWER (MADHYA PRADESH) LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3923/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

…the Revenue does not lose anything, as it would receive the tax on this income in the succeeding year...." To the same effect are the judgments in CIT v. Shri Ram Pistons and Rings Ltd. (2008) 220 CTR 404, CIT v. Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 374 and CIT v. Modipon Ltd. (No.1) (2011) 334 ITR 102 (Del).” ITA No.3850/Del/2023 & Others 52. Heard the contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, due to fire, the extra income offered by the assessee in AYs 2017-18 & 2018-19 on account of insurance claim was not doubted by Revenue in the respective y…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, DELHI vs. M. B. POWER (MADHAYA PRADESH) LTD, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3874/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

…the Revenue does not lose anything, as it would receive the tax on this income in the succeeding year...." To the same effect are the judgments in CIT v. Shri Ram Pistons and Rings Ltd. (2008) 220 CTR 404, CIT v. Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 374 and CIT v. Modipon Ltd. (No.1) (2011) 334 ITR 102 (Del).” ITA No.3850/Del/2023 & Others 52. Heard the contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, due to fire, the extra income offered by the assessee in AYs 2017-18 & 2018-19 on account of insurance claim was not doubted by Revenue in the respective y…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 20, DELHI vs. M.B. POWER (MADHAYA PRADESH) LTD, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3870/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

…the Revenue does not lose anything, as it would receive the tax on this income in the succeeding year...." To the same effect are the judgments in CIT v. Shri Ram Pistons and Rings Ltd. (2008) 220 CTR 404, CIT v. Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 374 and CIT v. Modipon Ltd. (No.1) (2011) 334 ITR 102 (Del).” ITA No.3850/Del/2023 & Others 52. Heard the contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, due to fire, the extra income offered by the assessee in AYs 2017-18 & 2018-19 on account of insurance claim was not doubted by Revenue in the respective y…

MB POWER (MADHYA PRADESH) LIMITED ,SOUTH EAST DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3850/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

…the Revenue does not lose anything, as it would receive the tax on this income in the succeeding year...." To the same effect are the judgments in CIT v. Shri Ram Pistons and Rings Ltd. (2008) 220 CTR 404, CIT v. Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 374 and CIT v. Modipon Ltd. (No.1) (2011) 334 ITR 102 (Del).” ITA No.3850/Del/2023 & Others 52. Heard the contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, due to fire, the extra income offered by the assessee in AYs 2017-18 & 2018-19 on account of insurance claim was not doubted by Revenue in the respective y…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. TRIVENI ENGINEERING AND INDUSTRIES LTD

ITA/303/2025HC Delhi03 Sept 2025

Bench: Hon ’Ble Supreme Court? Iii. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld.

Section 260A

…ow advert to the assessee’s instant grievance seeking to allow the impugned provision wherein case law Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT (2000) 245 ITR 428 (SC); Calcutta Company Ltd. v. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 1 (SC); & CIT v. Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 374 (Delhi) i.e. the assessee itself, in paras 6,7,8 & 11 has held that such a provision based on scientific computation formula could indeed be allowed. 13. Learned counsel further reiterates the assessee’s stand that it has all along been recognizing the revenue from all projects subject to the corresponding expenditure provision which has to be in…

INTERNATIONAL SEAPORT DREDGING LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 72/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.72/Chny/2018 (िनधा)रणवष) / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकर अपील सं./ It (Tp)A No.35/Chny/2018 (िनधा)रणवष) / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं./ It (Tp)A No.87/Chny/2019 (िनधा)रणवष) / Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S. International Seaport Dredging Dcit / Jcit(Osd) Private Limited, Corporate Circle-2(2) बनाम 5Th Floor, Challam Towers, Chennai. Old No.62, New No.113, / Vs. Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai Chennai-600 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Tan No. Aabci-2286-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Ashik Shah (C.A) – Ld.Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri A.Sasi Kumar (Cit) -Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02-05-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri, Jm: These Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2013-14 & 2014-15 Arise Out Of The Separate Orders Of Assessments Framed By Ld.

For Appellant: Shri Ashik Shah (C.A) – Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri A.Sasi Kumar (CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 143(3)

…enditure would, in any case, be revenue neutral. The Appellant relies on the following decisions in this regard: Bilahari Investment Private Limited (299 ITR 1-Supreme Court) Excel Industries Limited (358 ITR 295-Supreme Court) Triveni Engg & Industries Ltd4 (336 ITR 374-Delhi High Court) Amec Foster Wheeler India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA 680/CHNY/2020-Chennai ITAT) The Appellant also submits that the aforesaid issue has been covered in Appellant's own case for AY 2016-17 in ITA No. 1284/CHNY/2023, where after considering and appreciating that the provision is an ascertained liability that has been created based on the est…

DCIT, GHAZIABAD vs. M/S. DEVIDAYAL ALUMINIUM INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3850/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jan 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

…the Revenue does not lose anything, as it would receive the tax on this income in the succeeding year...." To the same effect are the judgments in CIT v. Shri Ram Pistons and Rings Ltd. (2008) 220 CTR 404, CIT v. Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 374 and CIT v. Modipon Ltd. (No.1) (2011) 334 ITR 102 (Del).” ITA No.3850/Del/2023 & Others 52. Heard the contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, due to fire, the extra income offered by the assessee in AYs 2017-18 & 2018-19 on account of insurance claim was not doubted by Revenue in the respective y…

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-5, PUNE, PUNE vs. SANGAM PRESS PRIVATE LIMITED , PUNE

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 674/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.674/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Acit, Circle-5, Pune. Vs. Sangam Press Private Limited, 17-B, Sangam House, Sangam Press Road, Pune- 411038. Pan : Aaccs5995B Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari Assessee By Shri C. H. Naniwadekar : Date Of Hearing : 10.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.10.2024 आदेश / Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm: This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, [In Short The “Cit(A)”] Pune’S Din & Order No.Itba/Apl/S/250/2023- 24/1060642739(1), Dated 08.02.2024, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused.

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 143(3)Section 43C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.674/PUN/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 ACIT, Circle-5, Pune. Vs. Sangam Press Private Limited, 17-B, Sangam House, Sangam Press Road, Pune- 411038. PAN : AACCS5995B Appellant Respondent Revenue by : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari Assessee by Shri C. H. Naniwadekar : Date of hearing : 10.09.2024 Date of pronouncement : 25.10.2024 आदेश / ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM: This Revenue’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18 arises against the Co…

M/S INTERNATIONAL SEAPORT DREDGING PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 1284/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1284/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. International Seaport Dredging Dcit Private Limited Corporate Circle-2(2), P.No. 2C, 1St Floor, Ocean Square Chennai-34. बनाम/ South Phase, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Vs. Estate, Ekkattuthangal Guindy Industrial Estate, Chennai-600 032. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabci-2286-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Ashik Shah (Ca)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) -Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-08-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashik Shah (CA)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 37

…ngs. The provision has been reversed in subsequent years as per estimation made in subsequent year. Therefore, this case law would not render any assistance to the case of the revenue. The case law of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Triveni Engg & Industries Ltd [336 ITR 374] is on similar facts. The assessee recognized the income from the projects and also made provision for expenses to be incurred up-to the stage of completion. The Ld. AO termed the provision as contingent liability and accordingly, disallowed the same. However, Hon’ble Court confirmed the order of Tribunal allowing such deduction. Therefore, on th…

SURANA MUTHA BHANSALI,PUNE vs. ACIT-CIRCLE 5 PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 1442/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Neelesh KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Addl.CIT
Section 143(2)Section 270A(1)Section 270A(9)Section 43CSection 80I

…eds of said lands. Referring to the decision of the Hon‟ble High Court of Jharkhand in the case of TRF Ltd. vs. CIT (2011) 241 CTR 45 (Jharkhand) and the decision of the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Triveni Engg. & Industries Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 374 (Del), he submitted that similar view has been taken wherein for recognizing the profit / loss in respect of the projects, where the assessee had made provision for expenses to be incurred upto the stage of 7 completion the same was held to be allowed. He accordingly submitted that when there is no deviation from the sanctioned plan and the expen…

GK STEEL & WIRE PRODUCTS,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 46(5), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3530/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Shri Rajat Vaishnawi, Adv
Section 139(1)Section 139(9)

…relied on the following judgements:- (i) Pr. CIT v. Deccan Mining Syndicate (P.) Ltd. [(2019) 104 taxmann.com 111/262 Taxman 258 (SC)]; (ii) CIT vs Bilahari Investment (P.) Ltd. [(2008) 299 ITR 1 (SC)]; (iii) CIT vs Triveni Engg. & Industries Ltd. [(2011) 336 ITR 374 (Delhi High Court)] (iv) Housing & Urban Development Corporation Ltd. Vs Addl. CIT [([2020] 421 ITR 599 (Delhi High Court) (v) M/s Rasiklal & Sons vs ITO [ITA No. 1974/Mum/2010 – order dated 13.01.2012 (Mum.-Trib.) (vi) Gogga Gurusanthiah & Bros. vs DCIT [(2019) 108 taxmann.com 600 (Bangalore Trib.) 4. The ld. DR supports the orders of the au…

THE PANOPAT CENTRAL CO-OP. BANK LTD,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, PANIPAT

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for

ITA 1109/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2022AY 2013-14
Section 143(3)Section 43BSection 68

…recedents; (i) CIT vs Bilahari Investment (P.) Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 1 (Supreme Court) (ii) Tin Box Co. vs. CIT [2001] 249 ITR 216 9SC) (iii) Ester Industries Ltd. vs CIT [2009] 316 ITR 260 (Delhi High Court) (iv) CIT vs. Triveni Engg. & Industries Ltd. [2011] 336 ITR 374 (Delhi High Court) (v) CIT vs Pancham Dass Jain [2006] 205 CTR 444 (Allahabad High Court) (vi) Anna Maria Travels & Tours Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, ITA 2165/Del/2003 (Delhi -Tribunal) [(2005) 95 ITJ Delhi 71]. Page 6 of 8 ITA Nos.1108 and 1109 /Del/2018 The Panipat Central Co-op. Bank Ltd. vs. ACIT (C) The Ld. Departmental Representative (“DR” for…

THE PANOPAT CENTRAL CO-OP. BANK LTD,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, PANIPAT

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for

ITA 1108/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2022AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)Section 43BSection 68

…recedents; (i) CIT vs Bilahari Investment (P.) Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 1 (Supreme Court) (ii) Tin Box Co. vs. CIT [2001] 249 ITR 216 9SC) (iii) Ester Industries Ltd. vs CIT [2009] 316 ITR 260 (Delhi High Court) (iv) CIT vs. Triveni Engg. & Industries Ltd. [2011] 336 ITR 374 (Delhi High Court) (v) CIT vs Pancham Dass Jain [2006] 205 CTR 444 (Allahabad High Court) (vi) Anna Maria Travels & Tours Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, ITA 2165/Del/2003 (Delhi -Tribunal) [(2005) 95 ITJ Delhi 71]. Page 6 of 8 ITA Nos.1108 and 1109 /Del/2018 The Panipat Central Co-op. Bank Ltd. vs. ACIT (C) The Ld. Departmental Representative (“DR” for…

DCIT, CIRCLE- 20(1), NEW DELHI vs. POWER MACHINE (INDIA) LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 5334/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Kumar Jagia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Kothari, CIT DR

…ssue the assessee has strongly relied on various decisions of different High Court and ITAT in its favour and mainly on the case of jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of Triveni Engg. and Industries Ltd. vide order dated 29.11.2010 for AY 2000-01 (336 ITR 374 Delhi). The relevant portion of the order are as under: "1. Though various questions of law were proposed in this appeal, the appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law: i. Whether ITAT was correct in law in allowing provision made by the assessee for future losses that may occur on account of different project works undert…

DCIT, CIRCLE- 20(1), NEW DELHI vs. POWER MACHINE (INDIA) LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 5151/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Kumar Jagia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Kothari, CIT DR

…ssue the assessee has strongly relied on various decisions of different High Court and ITAT in its favour and mainly on the case of jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of Triveni Engg. and Industries Ltd. vide order dated 29.11.2010 for AY 2000-01 (336 ITR 374 Delhi). The relevant portion of the order are as under: "1. Though various questions of law were proposed in this appeal, the appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law: i. Whether ITAT was correct in law in allowing provision made by the assessee for future losses that may occur on account of different project works undert…

PRATEEK INFRAPROJECTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-08, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3129/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Mahavir Prasad[A.Y 2015-16]

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Pundir, Sr. DR

…he revenue recognised by the assessee from the entire project and the taxes paid by it. 13. It would be pertinent to consider the following decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the High Court of Delhi: “CIT vs Triveni Engg. & Industries Ltd. [201"1] 336 ITR 374 (Delhi High Court), "in the projected scenario ,f the instant case, 'the entire exercise was revenue neutral. lt was a matter of record that against the provision of Rs. 1.39 lakhs, the assessee had to actually incur expenditure of Rs. 28.03 lakhs, i.e., more than the provision made. It was undisputed that the expenditure incurred by the asse…

SHIVAM ENTERPRISE,ALTHAN vs. PR. CIT-2, SURAT

In the result, the appeals of the assessees (in ITA Nos

ITA 108/SRT/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 May 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.107 & 108/Srt/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:(2015-16) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shyam Corporation, Vs. The Pcit-2, Surat. S. No. 84/1, 885 Block No.137, T.P. No.58, F.P. No.38, B/H. Siddhivinayak Complex, Bamroli, Surat-394210. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acgfs7598M (Assessee) (Respondent) Shivam Enterprises, Vs. The Pcit-2, Surat. Tp. 43, Block No.50, Fp.30, At Post Bhimrad, Althan, Surat-395017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acdfs9748Q

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. T. Bidari, Sr. DR
Section 115Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.107 & 108/SRT/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:(2015-16) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shyam Corporation, Vs. The PCIT-2, Surat. S. No. 84/1, 885 Block No.137, T.P. No.58, F.P. No.38, b/h. Siddhivinayak Complex, Bamroli, Surat-394210. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ACGFS7598M (Assessee) (Respondent) Shivam Enterprises, Vs. The PCIT-2, Surat. TP. 43, Block No.50, FP.30, At Post Bhimrad, Althan, Surat-395017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ACDFS9748Q Assessee by : Shri Mehul Shah, CA…

SHYAM CORPORATION,SURAT vs. PR. CIT-2, SURAT

In the result, the appeals of the assessees (in ITA Nos

ITA 107/SRT/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 May 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.107 & 108/Srt/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:(2015-16) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shyam Corporation, Vs. The Pcit-2, Surat. S. No. 84/1, 885 Block No.137, T.P. No.58, F.P. No.38, B/H. Siddhivinayak Complex, Bamroli, Surat-394210. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acgfs7598M (Assessee) (Respondent) Shivam Enterprises, Vs. The Pcit-2, Surat. Tp. 43, Block No.50, Fp.30, At Post Bhimrad, Althan, Surat-395017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acdfs9748Q

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. T. Bidari, Sr. DR
Section 115Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.107 & 108/SRT/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:(2015-16) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shyam Corporation, Vs. The PCIT-2, Surat. S. No. 84/1, 885 Block No.137, T.P. No.58, F.P. No.38, b/h. Siddhivinayak Complex, Bamroli, Surat-394210. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ACGFS7598M (Assessee) (Respondent) Shivam Enterprises, Vs. The PCIT-2, Surat. TP. 43, Block No.50, FP.30, At Post Bhimrad, Althan, Surat-395017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ACDFS9748Q Assessee by : Shri Mehul Shah, CA…

Showing 1–20 of 42 · Page 1 of 3