CIT v. Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd.

236 ITR 518Supreme Court of India1999#449 most cited

What is CIT v. Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd. authority for?

For the purpose of Section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act, a liability is considered to have ceased only when the creditor actively releases or writes off the amount, or when the liability ceases to exist in the assessee's books; mere expiry of the limitation period for recovery does not constitute cessation of liability.

203

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2002 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sugauli Sugar Works · 236 ITR 518 · Supreme Court · Section 41(1) · cessation of liability · remission of liability · deemed income · limitation period · creditor write-off · liability ceased to exist in books

Also reported as

102 Taxmann 713

Sections most often in play

Section 41(1)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 1961Section 37(1)Section 69C
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

recognised provident fundapproved gratuity fundsection 50bsection 43b(f)section 40a(9)section 211section 41(1)wholly and exclusively for businesssection 35dsection 41slump salesection 32(1)(ii)

Judgments citing CIT v. Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd.

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed and appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5776/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: S/Shri Pradeep Dinodia & R.KFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…of the assessee’s case were not at par with T V Sundaram judgment and it was also explained that the subsequent judgment Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. 5 ITA. .899, 1348, 1349-D-2013, 5776-D-2014, 2083-D-2015, 1704-D-2015 Singauli Sugar Works (236 ITR 518) have explained the provisions of Section 41(1) and has clearly laid down the proposition that simply on expiry of the period of the limitation under the Limitation Act could not extinguish the debt and provisions of Section 41(1) are not attracted. (PB- 80-87). It was further explained that these clarifications by Hon’ble Supreme Court has subse…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed and appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1349/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: S/Shri Pradeep Dinodia & R.KFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…of the assessee’s case were not at par with T V Sundaram judgment and it was also explained that the subsequent judgment Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. 5 ITA. .899, 1348, 1349-D-2013, 5776-D-2014, 2083-D-2015, 1704-D-2015 Singauli Sugar Works (236 ITR 518) have explained the provisions of Section 41(1) and has clearly laid down the proposition that simply on expiry of the period of the limitation under the Limitation Act could not extinguish the debt and provisions of Section 41(1) are not attracted. (PB- 80-87). It was further explained that these clarifications by Hon’ble Supreme Court has subse…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Karnataka Power Transmission Corpn. Ltd

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

ITA/91/2015HC Karnataka26 Jul 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 260Section 260ASection 41(1)

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JULY 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR I.T.A. NO.91 OF 2015 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX JSS TOWERS, BSK III STAGE BANGALORE-560085. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX JSS TOWERS, BSK III STAGE BANGALORE-560085. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.,) AND: M/S. KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPN. LTD., 7TH FLOOR, KAVERI BHAVAN KEMPEGOWDA ROAD BANGALORE PAN:AABCK7281 ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. CHYTHANYA K.K. ADV.) - - - THIS…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Surat vs. M/S. J.K. Paper Ltd., Surat

In the result this ground of appeal is dismissed

ITA 365/SRT/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.365/Srt/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S J. K. Paper Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), P.O. Central Pulp Mills, Surat. Fort Songadh – 394660. Dist. Tapi, Gujarat. [Pan: Aaact 6305 N] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent

Section 115JSection 14ASection 41(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, सुरत "यायपीठ, सुरत INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, Hon'ble JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr. ARJUN LAL SAINI, Hon'ble ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.365/SRT/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. M/s J. K. Paper Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), P.O. Central Pulp Mills, Surat. Fort Songadh – 394660. Dist. Tapi, Gujarat. [PAN: AAACT 6305 N] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रतीकीओर से /Assessee by Shri Sourabh Soparkar Senior Advocate with Miss Urvashi Shodhan – Advocate राज"कीओर से /Revenue by Shri…

Reasonable Housing Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT 15(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4547/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 4547/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Reasonable Housing Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit-15(1)(1) Room No.470, 4Th Floor, Hincon House, Lal Bahadur Vs. Shastri Marg, Vikhroli (W), Aayakar Bhawan, M. K. Mumbai-400083. Road, Mumbai-400020. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaecr4936K (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Sushil Lakhani Revenue By: Dr. Sanjay Sethi (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 03/02/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/04/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 15.03.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -24, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2015- 16. 2. At The Very Outset, We Find That There Is Delay Of 26 Days In Filing Of Appeal By The Assessee Before Us. We Find That The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit Stating That It Went Into The Clutches Of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code (Ibc) In That All The Employees Of Company Had Resigned & The Existing Counsel Has Been Appointed By The Interim Resolution Professional (Irp). This Collectively Had Contributed To The Delay Of 26 Days In Preferring Appeal Before Us. We Are Inclined To Condone The Delay Of 26 Days & Admit The Appeal For Adjudication. A.Y. 2015-16 3. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Sushil LakhaniFor Respondent: Dr. Sanjay Sethi (Sr. AR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 257Section 41(1)

…t nowhere treated as remission or cessation of the liability and is not liable to be chargeable u/s 41(1) of the Act. In this regard, we also find support of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sugauli Sugar Works (P.) Ltd. (1999) 236 ITR 518, Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Bombay AIR 1958 SC 328, Kesoram Industries & Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT (1992) 196 ITR 845 (Cal), CIT Vs. Jain Exports Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 35 taxmann.com 540 & CIT Vs. G. K. Patel & Co. (2013) 29 taxmann.com 248 (Guj). Taking into accounts of all the above facts and circumstances and by relying upon the dec…

The ACIT-5(1), Indore vs. M/S. Sunderdeep Construction Pvt. Ltd., Indore

In the result all the grounds raised by the Revenue are

ITA 380/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2012-13

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 41(1)(a)Section 68

…isdictional Bench of Indore ITAT in the case of Shapers Industries Limited – ITA No. 112/Ind/2016. Sunderdeep Construction Pvt. Ltd Reliance is placed on following judicial precedents – a. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd – [1999] 236 ITR 518 – 04.02.1999 – b. Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of Combined Transport Co. (P.) Ltd [1988] 174 ITR 528– 14.07.1988 c. Hon’ble Indore Bench of ITAT in the case of Manoj Pavecha – ITA no. 307/2013 –15.05.2015 – d. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Jain Exports(P.) Ltd. – [2013] 35 taxmann.com 540 – 24.05.2013 – e…

Sri Tum Nath Shaw, Burdwan vs. I.T.O., Ward-2(3), Burdwan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2625/KOL/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 40A(3)

…that the aforesaid liabilities had actually ceased to exist during the relevant year. In such a situation the question of addition does not arise. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision in the case of CIT -vs.- Sugauli Sugar Works (P). Ltd. (1999) 236 ITR 518 (SC) wherein, affirming the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court, the Hon'ble Apex Court held as follows: “It will be seen that the following words in the section are important; the assessee had obtained whether in cash or in any other manner whatsoever any amount in respect of such loss or expenditure or some benefit in respect of such tr…

Deepak Garg, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 3175/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. Lalit Mohan, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 28Section 41Section 41(1)

…icer and therefore, it would be futile to contend that it is a case of introduction of unexplained and unaccounted money into the capital. According to ld. AR, the facts of this case are similar to the facts of the case in CIT vs. Sugauli Sugar Works P. Ltd., 236 ITR 518. Lastly, he contended that in view of the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd., 404 ITR 1 (SC), section 28 of the Act has no application since the alleged benefit of the assessee is not in the nature of cash or money and section 41(1) has also no application since there was no cessation of any trading lia…

M/S. Hpl Additive Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 2354/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowlashri N.K. Billaiya[A.Y 2012-13]

For Appellant: Shri Manish Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.N. Meena, Sr. DR
Section 41Section 41(1)

…n, merely because the period of limitation prescribed under the Limitation Act has expired, would not extinguish the debt. For this proposition, we draw support from the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sugauli Sugar Works P. Ltd 236 ITR 518 has held as under: "The assessee had obtained, whether in cash or in any other manner whatsoever any amount in respect of such loss or expenditure or some benefit in respect of such trading liability by way of remission or cessation thereof, the amount obtained by him". Thus, the section Contemplates the obtaining by the assessee of an amount ei…

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 1, New Delhi vs. Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5026/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…vide para 5.15 & 5.16 observed that the issue has been decided in favour of the taxpayer by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs Dalmia Finance Ltd. ITA No.833/2010 relying upon the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Sugauli Sugar Works Ltd. [1993] 236 ITR 518. However, it was observed by the CIT(A) that the Assessing Officer had rectified the above addition u/s 154/143(3) of the Act and hence, no grievance remains with the assessee. 54. The Ld.AR for the assessee pointed out that the rectification was carried out for MAT purposes and not for income tax purposes. 55. The Ld. DR placed reliance on t…

Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 3(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4913/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…vide para 5.15 & 5.16 observed that the issue has been decided in favour of the taxpayer by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs Dalmia Finance Ltd. ITA No.833/2010 relying upon the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Sugauli Sugar Works Ltd. [1993] 236 ITR 518. However, it was observed by the CIT(A) that the Assessing Officer had rectified the above addition u/s 154/143(3) of the Act and hence, no grievance remains with the assessee. 54. The Ld.AR for the assessee pointed out that the rectification was carried out for MAT purposes and not for income tax purposes. 55. The Ld. DR placed reliance on t…

M/S. Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1944/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…vide para 5.15 & 5.16 observed that the issue has been decided in favour of the taxpayer by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs Dalmia Finance Ltd. ITA No.833/2010 relying upon the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Sugauli Sugar Works Ltd. [1993] 236 ITR 518. However, it was observed by the CIT(A) that the Assessing Officer had rectified the above addition u/s 154/143(3) of the Act and hence, no grievance remains with the assessee. 54. The Ld.AR for the assessee pointed out that the rectification was carried out for MAT purposes and not for income tax purposes. 55. The Ld. DR placed reliance on t…

Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 1, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7637/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…vide para 5.15 & 5.16 observed that the issue has been decided in favour of the taxpayer by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs Dalmia Finance Ltd. ITA No.833/2010 relying upon the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Sugauli Sugar Works Ltd. [1993] 236 ITR 518. However, it was observed by the CIT(A) that the Assessing Officer had rectified the above addition u/s 154/143(3) of the Act and hence, no grievance remains with the assessee. 54. The Ld.AR for the assessee pointed out that the rectification was carried out for MAT purposes and not for income tax purposes. 55. The Ld. DR placed reliance on t…

Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, Special Range- 1, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7112/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…vide para 5.15 & 5.16 observed that the issue has been decided in favour of the taxpayer by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs Dalmia Finance Ltd. ITA No.833/2010 relying upon the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Sugauli Sugar Works Ltd. [1993] 236 ITR 518. However, it was observed by the CIT(A) that the Assessing Officer had rectified the above addition u/s 154/143(3) of the Act and hence, no grievance remains with the assessee. 54. The Ld.AR for the assessee pointed out that the rectification was carried out for MAT purposes and not for income tax purposes. 55. The Ld. DR placed reliance on t…

Arivent Technologies Holdings Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1308/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…vide para 5.15 & 5.16 observed that the issue has been decided in favour of the taxpayer by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs Dalmia Finance Ltd. ITA No.833/2010 relying upon the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Sugauli Sugar Works Ltd. [1993] 236 ITR 518. However, it was observed by the CIT(A) that the Assessing Officer had rectified the above addition u/s 154/143(3) of the Act and hence, no grievance remains with the assessee. 54. The Ld.AR for the assessee pointed out that the rectification was carried out for MAT purposes and not for income tax purposes. 55. The Ld. DR placed reliance on t…

ITO 26(1)(5), Mumbai vs. Hemant Ranjeet Singh, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 4533/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4533/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ito 26(1)(5) बिधम/ Shri Hemant Ranjeet Singh Room No.708, 7Th Floor, Flat No. B/106, Dosti Jupiter Vs. Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Bkc, Housing Society, Shaikh Bandra, Mumbai-400051. Misree Road, Wadala, Mumbai-37. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Bcxps1885F (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Mrs. Jyothi Laxmi Nayak (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Fenil Bhatt (Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/11/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 28.02.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -38, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2014- 15. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Fenil Bhatt (AR)For Respondent: Mrs. Jyothi Laxmi Nayak (DR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 41(1)

…iabilities. Our view is supported by many judgments which have been relied upon by the Ld. Counsel. We find it appropriate to reproduce relevant observation of Hon’ble Supreme Court form its judgment rendered in the case of CIT vs. Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd 236 ITR 518 as follows: “The following words in section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are important: "the assessee had obtained, whether in cash or in any other manner whatsoever any amount in respect of such loss or expenditure or some benefit in respect of such trading liability by way of remission or cessation thereof, the amount obtained by him". Th…

Dharamtar Motors Services Petroleum Product, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-6(1)(4), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1438/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1438 & 2534/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 M/S Dharamtar Motor Services Income Tax Officer, Petroleum Product, Vs. Ward 6(1)(4) C/O. Ketan H. Shah, Advocate 903, Ahmedabad. Sapphire Complex, C.G. Road, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. Pan: Aabfd9182F

For Respondent: Shri L.P. Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’C’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos. 1438 & 2534/AHD/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 M/s Dharamtar Motor Services Income Tax Officer, Petroleum Product, Vs. Ward 6(1)(4) C/o. Ketan H. Shah, Advocate 903, Ahmedabad. Sapphire Complex, C.G. Road, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. PAN: AABFD9182F (Applicant) (Respondent) : Assessee by Shri Ketan Shah, A.R Revenue by : Shri L.P. Jain, Sr. D.R सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 22/10/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /…

Dow Chemical Inernational Pvt. Ltd. As Successor of Roham and Haas (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO - 14(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee in A

ITA 6577/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am M/S. Rohm & Haas India Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax-11(1)(1) 1St Floor, Block B, Room No.204, Aayakar 02, Godrej Business District Bhavan, M.K. Road, Priojshanagar, Lbs Marg Mumbai – 400 020 Vikhroli (W) Mumbai – 400 079 Pan/Gir No.Aaacr2855F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Sa No.261/Mum/2019 M/S. Dow Chemical Vs. Income Tax Officer – International Pvt. Ltd., As 14(1)(1), Room No. 431, Successor Of Rohm & Haas Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road, (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai – 400 020 Godrej It Park – P2 1St Floor Block B, 02 Lbs Road, Godrej Business District, Pirojshahnagar Vikhroli (W) Mumbai – 400 079 Pan/Gir No.Aaacr2855F (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 92E

…r the assessee to decide whether a particular liability had ceased to exist from its books or not. We find lot of force in the reliance placed by the ld. AR on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Sugauli Sugar Works Pvt. Ltd.,reported in 236 ITR 518, decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shri Vardhman Overseas Ltd., in 343 ITR 408 (Del) which supports the argument of the assessee. In view of the aforesaid observations and respectfully following the judicial precedents, we direct the ld. AO to delete the addition made u/s.41(1) of the Act in the sum of Rs.1,24,008/-. Acc…

Rohm and Haas India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 11(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee in A

ITA 2199/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am M/S. Rohm & Haas India Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax-11(1)(1) 1St Floor, Block B, Room No.204, Aayakar 02, Godrej Business District Bhavan, M.K. Road, Priojshanagar, Lbs Marg Mumbai – 400 020 Vikhroli (W) Mumbai – 400 079 Pan/Gir No.Aaacr2855F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Sa No.261/Mum/2019 M/S. Dow Chemical Vs. Income Tax Officer – International Pvt. Ltd., As 14(1)(1), Room No. 431, Successor Of Rohm & Haas Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road, (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai – 400 020 Godrej It Park – P2 1St Floor Block B, 02 Lbs Road, Godrej Business District, Pirojshahnagar Vikhroli (W) Mumbai – 400 079 Pan/Gir No.Aaacr2855F (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 92E

…r the assessee to decide whether a particular liability had ceased to exist from its books or not. We find lot of force in the reliance placed by the ld. AR on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Sugauli Sugar Works Pvt. Ltd.,reported in 236 ITR 518, decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shri Vardhman Overseas Ltd., in 343 ITR 408 (Del) which supports the argument of the assessee. In view of the aforesaid observations and respectfully following the judicial precedents, we direct the ld. AO to delete the addition made u/s.41(1) of the Act in the sum of Rs.1,24,008/-. Acc…

Shri Vishal Kumar Arya, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-44(3), Kolkata

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1540/KOL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy., Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm] I.T. A No. 1540/Kol/2016 A.Y 2009-10 Vishal Kumar Arya V/S. I.T.O., Ward 44(3), Kolkata Pan: Agzpa8338G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Adovate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Halder, JCIT, ld.Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 36(2)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy., AM & Hon’ble Shri S.S. Godara, JM] I.T. A No. 1540/Kol/2016 A.Y 2009-10 Vishal Kumar Arya V/s. I.T.O., Ward 44(3), Kolkata PAN: AGZPA8338G (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Adovate, ld.AR For the Respondent : Shri Sankar Halder, JCIT, ld.Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 21-06-2019 Date of Pronouncement : 13-09-2019 ORDER Shri S.S. Godara, JM: 1. This Assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2009-10 arises against the CIT(A), 13, Kolkata’s order dated 30-03-2016 passed in case no. 1…