How many judgments cite CIT v. Tamilnadu Warehousing Corporation?

28 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Tamilnadu Warehousing Corporation (292 ITR 310), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Tamilnadu Warehousing Corporation come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 139, Section 143(1), Section 143(2), Section 148, Section 154, Section 263.

CIT v. Tamilnadu Warehousing Corporation

292 ITR 310High Court2007#4184 most cited

What is CIT v. Tamilnadu Warehousing Corporation authority for?

For an assessment order to be revised under section 263, it must be both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. Where two possible views exist, an order cannot be considered erroneous simply because the Commissioner disagrees with the Assessing Officer's chosen view.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Tamilnadu Warehousing Corporation · CIT v. Tamilnadu Warehousing Corpn. · 292 ITR 310 · section 263 · erroneous order · prejudicial to revenue · two views possible · assessment order

Sections most often in play

Section 139 Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148 Section 154 Section 263 Section 119 Section 119(2)(b)

Issues it is cited on

remission or cessation of liability section 41(1)section 41 revision under section 263 credit for tds malabar industrial sundry creditors erroneous and prejudicial revenue expenditure capital expenditure section 263 section 26

Judgments citing CIT v. Tamilnadu Warehousing Corporation

SLR INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 544/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263

…has taken one view with which the CIT did not agree, it cannot be treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The Madras High Court followed the above decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Tamilnadu Warehousing Corpn. (292 ITR 310).\n\nThe Punjab and Haryana High Court followed the above decision of Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nahar Exports Ltd. (173 Taxman 3 P & H).\n\nThe jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Mepco Industries Ltd. (294 ITR 121) has held that the order to be revised under section 263 should not only be erroneous but also prejudi…

M/S. CHENNAI BUSINESS TOWER PVT. LTD.,KANCHIPURAM vs. PCIT-4, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1570/CHNY/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1570/Chny/2025, धनिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11 M/S. Chennai Business Tower Pcit-4, Private Limited (Formerly Known Vs Chennai. As Rmz Infinity (Chennai) Pvt. . Ltd), 110, Mount Poonamallee Road, Porur, Porur S.O. Kanchipuram – 600 116. [Pan:Aaacd-2287-R] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca. प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. R. Raghupathy, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.08.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am:

For Appellant: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. R. Raghupathy, Addl. CIT

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 24Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘ए’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI श्री एबी टी वर्की, न्यायिर्क सदस्य एवं श्री एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1570/Chny/2025, धनिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11 M/s. Chennai Business Tower PCIT-4, Private Limited (formerly known vs Chennai. as RMZ infinity (Chennai) Pvt. . Ltd), 110, Mount Poonamallee Road, Porur, Porur S.O. Kanchipuram – 600 116. [PAN:AAACD-2287-R] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appel…

M/S. RMZ INFINITY (CHENNAI) PVT. LTD.,KANCHIPURAM vs. PCIT-4, , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 511/CHNY/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.511/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2009-10 M/S.Rmz Infinity(Chennai) Pvt. Ltd, The Principal Commissioner Of No.110, Mount Poonamallee Road, Income Tax-4, Porur, Porur S.O, Circle-1, Ltu, Kanchipuram Dist, Chennai Tamil Nadu-600 116. [Pan: Aaacd2287R]

For Appellant: Shri B.Ramakrishnan, F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘ए’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री एबी टी. वर्की, न्यायिर्क सदस्य एवं श्री अयिताभ शुक्ला, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.511/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2009-10 M/s.RMZ Infinity(Chennai) Pvt. Ltd, The Principal commissioner of No.110, Mount Poonamallee Road, Income Tax-4, Porur, Porur S.O, Circle-1, LTU, Kanchipuram Dist, Chennai Tamil Nadu-600 116. [PAN: AAACD2287R] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Shri B…

M/S. ANABOND LTD.,CHENNAI vs. PCIT, CHENNAI-1

In the result, all the grounds appeal raised by the assesse are allowed

ITA 1625/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1625/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2018-19 M/S. Anabond Limited The Principal Commissioner Of Type-Ii, 36, Dr. V.S.I. Estate Income Tax-1 Tiruvanmiyur, Chennai Chennai-600041. [Pan: Aacca4158Q] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri B.Ramakrishnan, F.C.A. अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri Nilay Baran Som, Cit प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02.09.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024

For Appellant: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35Section 5Section 80I

…the issue is decided in favour of the assessee. Accordingly, we hold that the allocation of expenditure on scientific research to Meghalaya unit is not justified and thus deleted” . 4.2 We have noted that in the case of CIT Vs. Tamilnadu Warehousing Corpn. (292 ITR 310) (Madras), the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court had confirmed the Order of Tribunal vide Para 8 as under: :- 7 -: “The Tribunal correctly followed the above principles of the Supreme Court and held as follows: “…For the purpose of invoking the provisions of section 263, twin conditions, i.e., (i) that the assessment order was erroneous and (ii)…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE vs. INDUS BIOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 863/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri S.S. Godara"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Dcit, Vs. Indus Biotech Pvt. Ltd. Circle-1(1), 1, Rahul Residency, Pune Plot Nos.6 & 7, Off Salunke Vihar Road, Kondhwa, Kondhwa Bk B.O., Pune – 411048 Maharashtra Pan: Aaaci5708E Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 41(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 DCIT, Vs. Indus Biotech Pvt. Ltd. Circle-1(1), 1, Rahul Residency, Pune Plot Nos.6 and 7, Off Salunke Vihar Road, Kondhwa, Kondhwa BK B.O., Pune – 411048 Maharashtra PAN: AAACI5708E Appellant Respondent Assessee by Ms. Chandni Shah & Mr. Hardik Nirmal Revenue by Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing 15.10.2024 Date of pronouncement 22.10.2024 आदेश / ORDER PER S.S. GODARA, JM : This Revenue’s appeal for AY 2018-19 arises against the NF…

SAKET AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(3) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 646/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Ms. Satwika Jhan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam (CIT) a

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

…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, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 646/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 Saket Agarwal cuke The ITO, 27, Everest Vihar, Kings Road, Vs. Ward-2(3), Jaipur. Nirman Nagar, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AEKPA9319Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Ms. Satwika Jhan, Adv. jktLo dh vksj ls@ Rev…

ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI vs. DELMOS AVIATION PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7894/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: or during the hearing of this appeal.”

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 41Section 68

…se are bound to be shown as outstanding. The very fact that these liabilities are appearing in the balance sheet is a strong acknowledgement of the debts payable by the assessee as has recently been held in the case of CIT vs Tamilnadu Warehousing Corporation 292 ITR 310(Mad). It has also been held in the case of Ambica Mills Ltd vs CIT 54 ITR 167 (Guj) Page 5 of 17 ACIT vs. Delmos Aviation Pvt. Ltd. that liability shown in the balance sheet is a clear case of acknowledging the liability and such liability cannot be treated to have ceased so as to attract section 41(1). That being so, where is the question of…

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, MARGAO., MARGAO vs. M/S SALGAONCAR MINING INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., PANAJI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 135/PAN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji05 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sukhsagar SyalFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Anand

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 41(1)

…ious placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nitin S. Garg, 22 taxmann.com 59 (Guj.). Placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Tamilnadu Warehousing Corporation, 292 ITR 310 (Mad.), he that there was cessation of liability. 8. On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR placing reliance on the orders of the lower authorities submits that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is based on the proper appreciation of facts and evidence on record as well as the legal position, therefore, no interference is called for. 9. We heard the rival submi…

SALGAOCAR MINING INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED.,PANAJI vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MARGAO RANGE., MARGAO

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 118/PAN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji05 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sukhsagar SyalFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Anand

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 41(1)

M/S SHRIRAM PROPERTIES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. PCIT-CENTRAL1, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 431/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 431/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri. Ananthan, CA & Ms. Lalitha. RFor Respondent: Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)(vii)

…has taken one view with which the CIT did not agree, it cannot be treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The Madras High Court followed the above decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Tamilnadu Warehousing Corpn. (292 ITR 310). • The Punjab and Haryana High Court followed the above decision of Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nahar Exports Ltd. (173 Taxman 3 P & H). • The jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Mepco Industries Ltd. (294 ITR 121) has held that the order to be revised under section 263 should not only be erroneous but also prejudici…

M/S GOOD EARTH FERTILIZERS COMPANY P LTD [CHEMIKAS SPECIALITY LLP],CHENNAI vs. ITO,CORPORATE WARD - 2[2], CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 424/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.424/Chny/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. M/S.Good Earth Fertilizers- The Income Tax Officer, Co. P. Ltd., Corporate Ward-2(2), (Now Known As Chemikas Chennai. Specialty Llp), No.2, North Crescent Road, T. Nagar,Chennai-600 017. [Pan:Aasfg 6012 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.R.Mohan Reddy, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 263

…has taken one view with which the CIT did not agree, it cannot be treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The Madras High Court followed the above decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Tamilnadu Warehousing Corpn. (292 ITR 310). • The Punjab and Haryana High Court followed the above decision of Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nahar Exports Ltd. (173 Taxman 3 P & H). • The jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Mepco Industries Ltd. (294 ITR 121) has held that the order to be revised under section 263 should not only be erroneous but also prejudici…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDIPUR vs. M/S. WAGAD CONSTRUTION COMPANY, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 30/JODH/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri Venkatesh V. (JCIT-Sr.DR)

Section 143(1)

…e assessee is still showing the liability ”. The assessee further relied on a number of decisions relating to the issue under consideration, few of the decisions are as under :- ITO vs. Bhavesh Prints (P) Ltd. 142 TTJ 128. Tamilnadu Ware Housing Corporation 292 ITR 310 . Willson and Co. Ltd. 121 TTJ 258 (Chennai Trib.) Dy CIT vs. Amod Petrochem (P) Ltd. (2008) 217 CTR (Guj.) 401. CIT vs. Usha Stud Agricultural Farms Ltd. (2008) 301 ITR 384 (Delhi) M/s. Wagad Construction Co. & M/s. Wagad Infra Project Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur. Relying upon the above cited decisions, the ld. A/R has submitted that so long the asses…

SR TRUST,MADURAI vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 213/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan

Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263

…has taken one view with which the CIT did not agree, it cannot be treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The Madras High Court followed the above decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Tamilnadu Warehousing Corpn. (292 ITR 310). • The Punjab and Haryana High Court followed the above decision of Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nahar Exports Ltd. (173 Taxman 3 P & H). • The jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Mepco Industries Ltd. (294 ITR 121) has held that the order to be revised under section 263 should not only be erroneous but also prejudici…

ITO CORPORATE WARD 6(1), CHENNAI vs. SCORPIO ENERGY RESOURCES PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

Accordingly, in view of the above, Ground No. 4 to 4.5 raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1368/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Rahul Chaudharyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A No.:1368/Chny/2018 िनधा&रणवष&/Assessment Year: 2013 - 2014

For Respondent: Ms. V. Sreedevi, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 41(1)Section 68

…f the Assessee relied upon the order passed by the CIT(A)and relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Narayanan Chettiar Industries Vs. Income-tax Officer: 277 ITR 426 (Madras) and CIT Vs. Tamilnadu Wearhousing Corporation: 292 ITR 310 (Madras). 13. Having considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record including the judgments relied upon by the parties, we are of the view that the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of INR 3,84,24,175/- made by the Assessing Officer under Section 41(1) of the Act as the addition was made by the Assessing Office…

ACIT, CIRCLE-3, RANCHI vs. SHRI SUMIT RAMSISARIA, RANCHI

ITA 222/RAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi11 Dec 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

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

…ability. It has been held in the case of Bhavesh Prints reported in 142 TTJ page 128 that simply because some of the creditors were not traceable it cannot be held that the liability is not payable. In the case of Taminadu Ware Housing Corporation reported in 292 ITR 310, it was held that so long the assessee had shown the liability in the balance sheet it cannot be said that the liability has ceased to exist. In the case of Willson and Co. Ltd reported in 121 TTJ 258 (Chennai Tribunal), it was held that unless it was shown by the Department that the liability ceased to exist during the assessment year in questio…

SHRI FARSURAM RATILAL BHAMWALA,,BHARUCH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, BHARUCH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1935/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) & Ld. Cit(A) After Considering The Case Of Both The Parties Dismissed The Appeal Filed By The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Anupma Singla, Sr. D.R

Section 234BSection 274Section 41(1)

…(Ahd 'C') In the absence of any cogent reason and material to come to conclusion that the liabilities outstanding for 10 to 15 years have ceased in the year under consideration same could not be charged to tax u/s 41(1). c. CIT v.Tamilnadu Warehousing Corpn. 292 ITR 310 (Mad) Remission of liability - Amount shown as liability in balance -sheet - No evidence of cessation of liability - Amount not assessable under section 41. d. CIT v. Southern Roadways Ltd. 202 CTR 289 (J&K) Amounts carried forward for years - In the absence of any evidence of cessation of liability , amount which has been merely carried forward…

PURNA CHANDRA BISWAL,JAJPUR vs. PRINCIPAL CIT, CUTTACK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 200/CTK/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.200/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Sri Purna Chandra Biswal, Vs. Principal Cit, Cuttack Jakhapura, Jajpur-755019 स्थायी लेखा सं./Panno. : Aclpb 1493 P (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Sarangi, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.M.Keshkamat, Citdr

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Sarangi, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.M.Keshkamat, CITDR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145Section 145(3)Section 263Section 44ASection 68

…een held in the ITA No.57/Ran/16 case of Bhavesh Prints reported in 142 TTJ page 128 that simply because some of the creditors were not traceable it cannot be held that the liability is not payable. In the case of Taminadu Ware Housing Corporation reported in 292 ITR 310, it was held that so long the assessee had shown the liability in the balance sheet it cannot be said that the liability has ceased to exist. In the case of Willson and Co. Ltd reported in 121 TTJ 258 (Chennai Tribunal), it was held that unless it was shown by the Department that the liability ceased to exist during the assessment year in questio…

SHRI NAVNEET MODI,RANCHI vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-2, RANCHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 106/RAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 Oct 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.106/Ran/2019 & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.53/Ran/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2015-2016 & 2013-2014) Shri Navneet Modi, Vs. Dcit, Circle-2, Ranchi Modi House, Kanke Dam Side Road, Kanke, Ranchi स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan No. : Actpm 1511 F (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Inderjeet Singh, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Inderjeet Singh, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HAL OFFSHORE LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4673/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4673/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Acit, Vs M/S Hal Offshore Ltd., Central Circle-15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bengali Market, New Delhi-110055 New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaach3144B Ita No. 2081/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 M/S Hal Offshore Ltd., Vs Dcit, C/O M/S Rra Taxindia, Circle-12(1), D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi New Delhi-110049 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaach3144B Assessee By : Sh. Somil Agarwal, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.07.2019 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

For Appellant: Sh. Somil Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…le by the Revenue as the assessee is liable to pay these amounts as and when demanded. It was also argued that the action of the Revenue is not tenable in the light of the judgment of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Tamil Nadu Warehousing Corporation 292 ITR 310 and the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Ambika Mills Ltd. 54 ITR 167. It was argued that the liability is being acknowledged by the assessee in their books of account and hence cannot be treated u/s 41(1) of the Act. Further, the assessee is also submitted the confirmations in the ITA Nos. 4673 & 2081/Del/2016 3 HAL Offsho…

M/S. HAL OFFSHORE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2081/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. Somil Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

Showing 1–20 of 28 · Page 1 of 2