CIT v. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd.

328 ITR 257High Court2010#6466 most cited

What is CIT v. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. authority for?

When an Assessing Officer rejects books of account under Section 145(3), the AO's estimation of income is valid and the Assessing Officer is the best judge to estimate income.

18

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. · section 145(3) · rejection of books of account · estimation of income · Assessing Officer best judge · validity of AO's estimation

Sections most often in play

Section 37Section 68Section 145Section 132Section 153ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 133A

Issues it is cited on

circular tradingshell companyrejection of books of accountsection 145(3)entry operatorsection 145accommodation entrysection 37section 133agenuineness of the transactionfirst appealsearch and seizure

Judgments citing CIT v. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd.

DCIT, Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai vs. Subhkaran & Sons, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and that by the revenue is dismissed, for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 3986/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Snehal Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, CIT DR
Section 1Section 132

…tion that the Assessing Officer is the best judge to estimate the income when the books of accounts are rejected under Section AYs: 2013-14 to 2017-18 145(3), as per the judicial precedents in the case of CIT vs. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. (2010) 328 ITR 257 (Delhi), WHARE it was held that the AO's estimation of income was valid in cases of rejection of books of accounts. 7.On facts and circumstances of the case and in law. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the expenses claimed by the assessee, including indirect expenses and depreciation, should be allowed as deductions, despite the clear evidenc…

DCIT, Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai vs. Subhkaran & Sons, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and that by the revenue is dismissed, for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 3969/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Snehal Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, CIT DR
Section 1Section 132

…tion that the Assessing Officer is the best judge to estimate the income when the books of accounts are rejected under Section AYs: 2013-14 to 2017-18 145(3), as per the judicial precedents in the case of CIT vs. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. (2010) 328 ITR 257 (Delhi), WHARE it was held that the AO's estimation of income was valid in cases of rejection of books of accounts. 7.On facts and circumstances of the case and in law. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the expenses claimed by the assessee, including indirect expenses and depreciation, should be allowed as deductions, despite the clear evidenc…

DCIT, Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai vs. Subhkaran & Sons, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and that by the revenue is dismissed, for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 3968/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Snehal Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, CIT DR
Section 1Section 132

…tion that the Assessing Officer is the best judge to estimate the income when the books of accounts are rejected under Section AYs: 2013-14 to 2017-18 145(3), as per the judicial precedents in the case of CIT vs. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. (2010) 328 ITR 257 (Delhi), WHARE it was held that the AO's estimation of income was valid in cases of rejection of books of accounts. 7.On facts and circumstances of the case and in law. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the expenses claimed by the assessee, including indirect expenses and depreciation, should be allowed as deductions, despite the clear evidenc…

DCIT, Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai vs. Subhkaran & Sons, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and that by the revenue is dismissed, for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 3967/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Snehal Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, CIT DR
Section 1Section 132

…tion that the Assessing Officer is the best judge to estimate the income when the books of accounts are rejected under Section AYs: 2013-14 to 2017-18 145(3), as per the judicial precedents in the case of CIT vs. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. (2010) 328 ITR 257 (Delhi), WHARE it was held that the AO's estimation of income was valid in cases of rejection of books of accounts. 7.On facts and circumstances of the case and in law. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the expenses claimed by the assessee, including indirect expenses and depreciation, should be allowed as deductions, despite the clear evidenc…

DCIT, Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai vs. Subhkaran & Sons, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and that by the revenue is dismissed, for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 3966/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Snehal Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, CIT DR
Section 1Section 132

…tion that the Assessing Officer is the best judge to estimate the income when the books of accounts are rejected under Section AYs: 2013-14 to 2017-18 145(3), as per the judicial precedents in the case of CIT vs. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. (2010) 328 ITR 257 (Delhi), WHARE it was held that the AO's estimation of income was valid in cases of rejection of books of accounts. 7.On facts and circumstances of the case and in law. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the expenses claimed by the assessee, including indirect expenses and depreciation, should be allowed as deductions, despite the clear evidenc…

Subhkaran and Sons, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and that by the revenue is dismissed, for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 2910/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Snehal Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, CIT DR
Section 1Section 132

…tion that the Assessing Officer is the best judge to estimate the income when the books of accounts are rejected under Section AYs: 2013-14 to 2017-18 145(3), as per the judicial precedents in the case of CIT vs. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. (2010) 328 ITR 257 (Delhi), WHARE it was held that the AO's estimation of income was valid in cases of rejection of books of accounts. 7.On facts and circumstances of the case and in law. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the expenses claimed by the assessee, including indirect expenses and depreciation, should be allowed as deductions, despite the clear evidenc…

Subhkaran and Sons, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and that by the revenue is dismissed, for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 2909/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Snehal Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, CIT DR
Section 1Section 132

…tion that the Assessing Officer is the best judge to estimate the income when the books of accounts are rejected under Section AYs: 2013-14 to 2017-18 145(3), as per the judicial precedents in the case of CIT vs. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. (2010) 328 ITR 257 (Delhi), WHARE it was held that the AO's estimation of income was valid in cases of rejection of books of accounts. 7.On facts and circumstances of the case and in law. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the expenses claimed by the assessee, including indirect expenses and depreciation, should be allowed as deductions, despite the clear evidenc…

Subhkaran and Sons, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and that by the revenue is dismissed, for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 2908/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Snehal Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, CIT DR
Section 1Section 132

…tion that the Assessing Officer is the best judge to estimate the income when the books of accounts are rejected under Section AYs: 2013-14 to 2017-18 145(3), as per the judicial precedents in the case of CIT vs. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. (2010) 328 ITR 257 (Delhi), WHARE it was held that the AO's estimation of income was valid in cases of rejection of books of accounts. 7.On facts and circumstances of the case and in law. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the expenses claimed by the assessee, including indirect expenses and depreciation, should be allowed as deductions, despite the clear evidenc…

Subhkaran and Sons, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and that by the revenue is dismissed, for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 2907/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Snehal Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, CIT DR
Section 1Section 132

…tion that the Assessing Officer is the best judge to estimate the income when the books of accounts are rejected under Section AYs: 2013-14 to 2017-18 145(3), as per the judicial precedents in the case of CIT vs. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. (2010) 328 ITR 257 (Delhi), WHARE it was held that the AO's estimation of income was valid in cases of rejection of books of accounts. 7.On facts and circumstances of the case and in law. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the expenses claimed by the assessee, including indirect expenses and depreciation, should be allowed as deductions, despite the clear evidenc…

Subhkaran and Sons, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and that by the

ITA 2906/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Snehal Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, CIT DR
Section 132

…knowledge the legal position that the Assessing Officer is the best judge to estimate the income when the books of accounts are rejected under Section 145(3), as per the judicial precedents in the case of CIT vs. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. (2010) 328 ITR 257 (Delhi), WHARE it was held that the AO's estimation of income was valid in cases of rejection of books of accounts. 7.On facts and circumstances of the case and in law. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the expenses claimed by the assessee, including indirect expenses and depreciation, should be allowed as deductions, despite the clear evidenc…

DCIT, Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai vs. Lloyds Steels Industries Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3997/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta & Shri TarangFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav – CIT-
Section 145Section 145(3)Section 250Section 68

…knowledge the legal position that the Assessing Officer is the best judge to estimate the income when the books of accounts are rejected under Section 145(3), as per the judicial precedents in the case of CIT vs. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. (2010) 328 ITR 257 (Delhi), WHARE it was held that the AO's estimation of income was valid in cases of rejection of books of accounts. 10. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the expenses claimed by the assessee, including indirect expenses and depreciation, should be allowed as deductions, despite the clear evid…

Lloyds Engineering Works Limited (Earlier Known As Loyds Steels Industries Limited ), Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai

ITA 2857/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta & Shri TarangFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav – CIT-
Section 145Section 145(3)Section 250Section 68

…knowledge the legal position that the Assessing Officer is the best judge to estimate the income when the books of accounts are rejected under Section 145(3), as per the judicial precedents in the case of CIT vs. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. (2010) 328 ITR 257 (Delhi), WHARE it was held that the AO's estimation of income was valid in cases of rejection of books of accounts. 10. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the expenses claimed by the assessee, including indirect expenses and depreciation, should be allowed as deductions, despite the clear evid…

Aryacon Contractors and Engineers Pvt Ltd, Perumbavoor vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Aluva

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

ITA 853/COCH/2023[AY 2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Jan 2025

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessmentyear:2017-18

For Appellant: Shri. Thomas Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Snr AR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43C

…R 8 (ii) CIT v. P & C Constructions (P) Ltd (2009) 318 ITR 113 (iii) Amarshiv Construction (P) Ltd v. DCIT (2014) 367 ITR 659 and (iv) DIT v. Ballast Nedam International (2013) 355 ITR 300 which followed the decision in Anup Engineering Limited v. CIT (2000) 247 ITR 114. 71. All the above decisions hold that the retention money does not accrue to an Assessee until and unless the defect liability period is over and the Engineer-in-Charge certifies that no liability is attached to the Assessee. 72. The ICST Committee noted what was sought to be done by the Tax AS proposed as ICDS as under: “AS-7 is silent about…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 3, Pune vs. Rohan and Rajdeep Infrastructure, Pune

ITA 692/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Nov 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 28Section 80

…was received because the assessee has to give up its right to purchase and / or to operate certain hotel & it was loss of source of income to the assessee, amount received by the assessee would be capital receipt. III. CIT vs State Trading Corporation (2001) 247 ITR 114 (Delhi) & CIT vs Prabhu Dayal(1971) 82 ITR 804 (SC) Whereby due to cancellation of contract, the trading structure of the assessee is impaired or such a cancellation results in loss of what may be regarded as the source of assesses’s income, the payment made to compensate for cancellation of agreement is capital receipt. Charge of income-tax-Capi…

Rohan and Rajdeep Infrastructure, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 3, Pune

ITA 572/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Nov 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 28Section 80

…was received because the assessee has to give up its right to purchase and / or to operate certain hotel & it was loss of source of income to the assessee, amount received by the assessee would be capital receipt. III. CIT vs State Trading Corporation (2001) 247 ITR 114 (Delhi) & CIT vs Prabhu Dayal(1971) 82 ITR 804 (SC) Whereby due to cancellation of contract, the trading structure of the assessee is impaired or such a cancellation results in loss of what may be regarded as the source of assesses’s income, the payment made to compensate for cancellation of agreement is capital receipt. Charge of income-tax-Capi…

Quadron Business Park Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 36, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 4857/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4857/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. Quadron Business Part Ltd. Dy. Cit, C.C.36, Plot No.28, Midc, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, बनाम/ Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Hinjewadi, Phase-Ii, Pune, "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaeca 9058 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Sharma/ Shri Dhruv Mehta ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Abhijit Patankar

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Sharma/For Respondent: Shri Abhijit Patankar
Section 80Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “जी” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4857/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/s. Quadron Business Part Ltd. Dy. CIT, C.C.36, Plot No.28, MIDC, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, बनाम/ Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Hinjewadi, Phase-II, Pune, "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AAECA 9058 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Pradeep Sharma/ Shri Dhruv Mehta ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Abhijit P…

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

…vily on the order of the AO and various case laws relied upon. He vehemently submitted that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the revenue as per the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. - 247 ITR 114. In the end, he painstakingly argued that the addition confirmed by the CIT (A) is correct as those cheques are outstanding for more than 3 years. It was also stated that case laws relied upon by the assesse do not apply to the facts of the case. He also tried to distinguish that the decision of CIT vs. G.K. Patel and company- 212 taxman 384 (Guj…

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

…vily on the order of the AO and various case laws relied upon. He vehemently submitted that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the revenue as per the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. - 247 ITR 114. In the end, he painstakingly argued that the addition confirmed by the CIT (A) is correct as those cheques are outstanding for more than 3 years. It was also stated that case laws relied upon by the assesse do not apply to the facts of the case. He also tried to distinguish that the decision of CIT vs. G.K. Patel and company- 212 taxman 384 (Guj…

CIT v. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. (328 ITR 257) — Cited in 18 Judgments | BharatTax