How many judgments cite CIT v. Shri Vardhman Overseas Ltd.?

76 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Shri Vardhman Overseas Ltd. (343 ITR 408), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Shri Vardhman Overseas Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 41(1), Section 68, Section 142(1), Section 133(6), Section 69C.

CIT v. Shri Vardhman Overseas Ltd.

343 ITR 408High Court2012#1487 most cited

What is CIT v. Shri Vardhman Overseas Ltd. authority for?

An addition under Section 68 cannot be made for genuine sundry creditors or trade payables merely carried forward from previous assessment years if there is no fresh credit in the relevant assessment year. Section 41(1) does not apply to acknowledged outstanding liabilities without actual remission or cessation.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Shri Vardhman Overseas Ltd. · Section 68 · Section 41(1) · sundry creditors · trade payables · carried forward liabilities · no fresh credit · genuineness · remission of liability · cessation of liability · unexplained cash credit

Also reported as

145 Taxmann.com 245

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 68 Section 142(1)Section 133(6)Section 69C Section 271(1)(c)Section 133A

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

remission or cessation of liability section 41(1)section 41 sundry creditors section 44ab section 36(1)(va)genuineness of the transaction section 133 section 133(6)section 69c unexplained expenditure section 44

Judgments citing CIT v. Shri Vardhman Overseas Ltd.

Sanjib Ghosh, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle 26, Kolkata (Formerly ACIT, Circle - 53), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 260/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jan 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am]

Section 41(1)Section 68

…out of the transactions during the previous year. Therefore, sec. 68 of the Act cannot be invoked to make the addition. On identical facts, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Shri Vardhaman Overseas Ltd., ITA No. 774/2009 dated 23.12.2011 reported in 343 ITR 408 (Del) has clearly laid down that sec. 68 of the Act will be attracted only if the sum found credited in the books of account of an assessee maintained for the previous year of the assessment year under consideration. Since admittedly, the amount in question was the 3 Sanjib Ghosh, AY 2009-10 opening balance as on 01.04.2008 section 68 of the Act…

M/S. Airline Allied Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 2477/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Sahu, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Aparna Karan, CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.2476 & 2477/DEL/2014 Assessment Year: 2008-09, 2010-11 Airline Allied Services Ltd. v. DCIT Room No.205, 2nd Floor, G-5 Circle 1(1) Building New Delhi IGI Airport, Terminal 1 New Delhi TAN/PAN:AAACA1517B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri P.K. Sahu, Advocate Respondent by: Smt. Aparna Karan, CIT (DR) Date of hearing: 17 10 2017 Date of pronouncement: 10 11 2017 O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.: The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the assessee agai…

M/S. Airline Allied Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 2476/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Sahu, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Aparna Karan, CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

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)

…, he relied upon the following decisions:– i) Kohinoor Mills Ltd. v/s CIT, 49 ITR 578; ii) J.K. Chemical v/s CIT, 62 ITR 34; iii) CIT v/s Sugauli Sugar Works Ltd. 236 ITR 518; iv) CIT v/s Jain Exports Pvt. Ltd, 89 DTR 265; v) CIT v/s Wardhaman Overseas Ltd., 343 ITR 408; and vi) Principal CIT v/s Matru Prasad Pandey, 377 ITR 363. An entry in the Balance Sheet of assessee constitutes B) acknowledgement of assessee’s liability to honour his obligation and therefore, does not result in expiry of the period of limitation even assuming that mere expiry of the period of litigation is at all relevant. For this proposit…

Mackinnon Mackenzie & Co.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2392/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Hariom TulsyanFor Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 28Section 41(1)

…t as income. 7. In defence of his arguments the ld.AR heavily relied upon the following case laws: i) CIT V/s Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd (236 ITR 518)(SC) ii) New Commercial Mills Co Ltd V/s DCIT 73 TTJ 893(Ahd) iii) CIT V/s Vardhman Overseas Ltd reported at 343 ITR 408 (Del) The ld.AR finally prayed that it was unequivocally clear that the in the balance sheet these amounts were outstanding for many years and therefore cannot be treated as ceased liability under the provisions of section 41(1) of the Act specially when the assessee was the corporate entity acknowledging these credits by showing the same in the…

S. Sampathraj, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2211/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Respondent: Shri A.V. Sreekanth, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…‘F’ Bench New Delhi, in ITA No.159/Del/2011 dated 22/04/2015 on similar issue the Ld.A.R invited our attention to para No.7 of the order which reads as under: “The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Shri Vardhman Overseas Ltd., (2012) 343 ITR 408 (Del.), has dealt with the issues of taxability under section 41(1) of the Act in a case where long outstanding sundry creditors were treated as taxable. The Hon’ble High Court after referring to the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of CIT(Chief) Vs. Kesaria Tea Co. Ltd., (2002) 254 ITR 434(SC) and CIT Vs. Sugauli Sugar Works P. Lt…

Ub Air P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(3), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 7506/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain M/S. Ub Air Pvt. Ltd. D C I T – 5(3) Ewart House, 1St Floor Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Modi Street M.K. Road Mumbai 400001 Mumbai 400020 Pan – Aaacu1399K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K. GopalFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop

Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…e Act could not be invoked in the case on hand in the year under consideration. In support of this proposition, the learned A.R. of the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Shri Vardhaman Overseas Ltd. (2002) 343 ITR 408 (Delhi). It was prayed that the assessee’s appeal be allowed. 2.3 Per contra, the learned D.R. strongly supported the orders of the authorities below. According to the learned D.R., the assessee itself has admitted that to the extent of `8 lakhs the outstanding liabilities were not reconcilable. In respect of the balance `91 lakhs, no confirmatio…

Income Tax Officer-Ward-12(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Standard Leather Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 2620/KOL/2013[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Sept 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2010-11

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…iii) As regards applicability of provisions of section 41(1), the facts clearly show that the appellant did not write back the sundry creditors to its profit and loss account. In CIT v. Vardhman Overseas Ltd. in ITA No. 774//2009 decided on 23.12.2011, (2012) 343 ITR 408 (Del), the Delhi High Court, referring to its judgment in the case of Jay Engineering Works Ltd. v. CIT (22009) 311 ITR 299 (Del) and applying the ratio laid down the case of CIT v. T.V. Sundaram Iyengar & Sons Ltd. (1996) 222 ITR 344 (SC) under sec. 28 of the IT Act, considered the applicability of clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 41 as…

Bilt Industrial Packaging Co. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Coimbatore

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

ITA 1934/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 May 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Prakash Chand Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Vijayalakshmi, IRS, CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 41Section 41(1)Section 5

…ncurred loss. After slump sale the assessee is getting accounts Audited regularly and complying with provisions of Income Tax Act and Companies Act. The ld. Authorised Representative submitted and relid on the decisions: (1) CIT vs. Shri. Vardhman Overseas 343 ITR 408 (Del) (2) POABS Rocks Products (P) ltd vs. DICT 19 ITR 0546 (3) CIT vs. Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd 236 ITR 518 (SC) (4) Mahabir Cold Storage vs. CIT 188 ITR 91 (SC) (5) Glen Williams vs. ACIT in ITA No.1078/Bang/2014 (Bangalore) (6) M/s. Perfect Paradise Emporium vs. ITO in ITA No. 159/Del/2011. ITA No.1934/Mds/2015. :- 11 -: One crucial aspe…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Dlf Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 3061/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 133ASection 142Section 143(2)Section 144Section 146Section 250

…e year addition to that stale cheque account is only Rs.38,04,671/- and assesse has shown a clearing during the year of Rs.1,64,53,036/- from that account. Honourable Delhi high court in case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Shri Vardhman Overseas Ltd. [2012] 343 ITR 408 (Del) where in honourable High court was concerned with amounts paid for expenses remaining outstanding in the books for more than 4 years has held that:- “11. The question before us is limited to the applicability of Section 41(1) of the Act. The section in so far as it is relevant for our purpose is as below:- “Profits chargeable to tax. 41. (1…

Dlf Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 2677/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 133ASection 142Section 143(2)Section 144Section 146Section 250

ITO 4(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Indo Shares & Fintrade Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the AO is dismissed

ITA 751/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar Singh-DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 40(1)Section 41(1)

…अिधकरण, ‘अई’ खंडपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई आयकर आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI “I” BENCH सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"", लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं राम लाल नेगी एवं राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी, , , , "याियक सद"य राम लाल नेगी "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member & Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.ITA No.751/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-2009-10 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Income tax…

ITO WD 48(1), Kolkata vs. Sri Puspal Kumar Das, Howrah

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

ITA 1442/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, A.M. & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, J.M.)

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Uday Kr. Sardar, JCIT

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…extinguish the debt but it will only prevent the creditor from enforcing the debt is well settled." 8.5 This view of Hon Apex Court has been followed by the Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income –vs- Shri Vardhman Overseas Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ltd 343 ITR 408 and several other High Courts. In the assessee's there was no remission or cessation of liability therefore section 41(1) was not attracted. Section 41(1) refers to taxation of benefit in cash or otherwise by way of remission or cessation of any trading liability therefore the condition to be fulfilled first is that the liability is to should be…

Smt. Madhu Bhatnagar, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5218/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2015AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. S.M. Mathur, CAFor Respondent: Sh. P.D. Kanunjna, Sr.DR

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

…cases where even if the debt itself is found to be non-genuine from the very inception, at least in terms of section 41(1) of the Act there is no cure for it.” 7. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Shri Vardhman Overseas Ltd., (2012) 343 ITR 408 (Del.), has dealt with the issues of taxability under section 41(1) of the Act in a case where long outstanding sundry creditors were treated as taxable. The Hon’ble High Court after referring to the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of CIT(Chief) Vs. Kesaria Tea Co. Ltd., (2002) 254 ITR 434(SC) and CIT Vs. 5 Sugauli Sugar Works P.…

ACIT vs. M/S Alvares & Thomas

ITA 1676/BANG/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala, Jt. CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri S. Venkatesan, CA

Section 131(1)(d)Section 41(1)

…sment order. According to him, therefore the provisions of section 68 will not be attracted. The ld. counsel thereafter drew our attention to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Sri Vardhaman Overseas Ltd., ITA No.774/2009 dated 23.12.2011 343 ITR 408 (Del), wherein on identical facts, the Hon’ble High Court held that neither section 68 nor Page 5 of 14 section 41(1) of the Act would be attracted. In this regard, we have already observed that neither the order of the AO nor the order of CIT(A) is clear as to whether the impugned addition is being made u/s. 68 or 41(1) of the Act. U/s. 41(1) o…

Glen Williams, Bangalore vs. Asst. CIT, Bangalore

ITA 1078/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Aug 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri T.V. Subramanya Bhat, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. Dhivahar, Jt. CIT(DR)

Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…ssment order. According to him, therefore the provisions of section 68 will not be attracted. The ld. counsel thereafter drew our attention to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Sri Vardhaman Overseas Ltd., ITA No.774/2009 dated 23.12.2011 343 ITR 408 (Del), wherein on identical facts, the Hon’ble High Court held that neither section 68 nor section 41(1) of the Act would be attracted. In this regard, we have already observed that neither the order of the AO nor the order of CIT(A) is clear as to whether the impugned addition is being made u/s. 68 or 41(1) of the Act. U/s. 41(1) of the Act, if…