CIT v. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd.

88 ITR 1Supreme Court of India1973#5716 most cited
21

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 2(14)Section 270A

Issues it is cited on

specified fundcorpus fundsection 40(a)(ii)retrospective amendmentweighted deductionsection 35(2ab)disallowance of interest expenditureeligible assesseeapplication of incomesection 45mercantile system of accountingsection 2(24)

Judgments citing CIT v. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd.

SHARP GARUDA FARM EQUIPMENTS PVT.LTD,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, , COIMBATORE

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

ITA 3394/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Seetharaman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. T.Mythili, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270Section 270ASection 270A(8)Section 274Section 37

…pleted by adding back the education cess claimed by the assessee as a deduction in the revised return filed on 31.03.2021. 10. The AO had relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. reported in 88 ITR 1. However, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the said case was considering the issue of diversion of income by overriding title and not the issue relating to the deductibility of education cess. Therefore, the reliance placed by the AO on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. (supra) is misplac…

SHRI RAMPRIYA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1946/HYD/2017[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Aug 2024AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1946/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 1999-2000) Shri Rampriya Developers Vs. Dy. C. I. T. (P) Ltd Circle 3(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aajcs6629P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/08/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA No 1946 of 2017 Sri Rampriya Developers Pvt Ltd आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member And Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.1946/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 1999-2000) Shri Rampriya Developers Vs. Dy. C. I. T. (P) Ltd Circle 3(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:AAJCS6629P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee by: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue by:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 09/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/0…

YOGESH PATEL,USA vs. DCIT CIRCLE INT TAXATION 2(2)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes with consequences to follow as directed above

ITA 2065/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2020-21 Yogesh Patel, Vs Dcit, 37319, Fowler Street New Ark Circle Int. Taxation 2(2)(2), California, New Delhi. Usa 94560. Pan: Arppp4747H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Bhupendra Shah, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 23.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 23.06.2023 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’), By The Dcit, Circle International Taxation 2(2)(2), New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao), For Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Applicant Is Non-Resident Indian Settled In Usa & Is Us Tax Resident. During The Previous Year Relevant To The Assessment Year Under Reference, The Applicant Sold Ancestral Land Bearing S No14 Hissa, No 7 Pt, Village Goregaon, Tal Borivli, Mumbai Suburban Dist On December 11, 2019 & Disclosed Long Term Capital Gains Computed As Under:- Amt In Rs Sale Consideration - 18,56,87,500 Less: Deduction U/S 48 - 13,56,87,500 Net Sale Consideration (I) 5,00,00,000 Acquisition Cost Fair Market Value On 01-04-2001 Rs 10,400/- X 3647.80 Sq M 3,79,37,120 Less: 60% Reduction In Fmv Due To Encroachment 2,27,62,272 1,51,74,848 Indexed Cost 1,51,74,848 X [289/100] 4,38,55,311 Cost Of Acquisition (Ii) 4,38,55,311 Long Term Capital Gains: (I) - (Ii) 61,44,689

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 48

…, as the addition made by the assessing officer is genuine and lawful." 5.4 The Panel is therefore of the view that, the assessee's reliance on the case laws cited below: CIT v Sitaldas Tirathdas (1961) 41 ITR 367 (SC), CIT v Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd 88 ITR 1(SC), Dalmia Cement Ltd v CIT 237 ITR 617 (SC),is misplaced as assessee has not discharged the primary onus of providing all the relevant documents in support of the claim of expenditure to the tune of Rs. 13,56,87,500/-. Therefore, the objection of the assessee on the above is rejected.” 6.2 The assessee is before us raising following grounds; “1. T…

DCIT 3(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL BANK OF AGRICULTURE AN RURAL DEVELOPMENT, MUMBAI

ITA 4010/MUM/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

….628.55 crores as income of the assessee. The Ld D.R relied upon following case laws in respect of the proposition on diversion of income by overriding title:- (a) CIT vs. Sunil J Kinerivala (126 Taxman 161)(SC) (b) CIT vs. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. (88 ITR 1)(SC) (c) CIT vs. Sithaldas Tirathdas (41 ITR 367)(SC) (d) Provat Kumar Mitter vs. CIT (41 ITR 624)(SC) 9. The Ld A.R, however, submitted that the RIDF/STCRC are schemes framed by the Government of India and it has appointed the assessee as implementing agency. He submitted that, as per the scheme, the scheduled commercial banks would deposit money w…

DCIT 3(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL BANK OF AGRICULTURE AN RURAL DEVELOPMENT, MUMBAI

ITA 4009/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

….628.55 crores as income of the assessee. The Ld D.R relied upon following case laws in respect of the proposition on diversion of income by overriding title:- (a) CIT vs. Sunil J Kinerivala (126 Taxman 161)(SC) (b) CIT vs. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. (88 ITR 1)(SC) (c) CIT vs. Sithaldas Tirathdas (41 ITR 367)(SC) (d) Provat Kumar Mitter vs. CIT (41 ITR 624)(SC) 9. The Ld A.R, however, submitted that the RIDF/STCRC are schemes framed by the Government of India and it has appointed the assessee as implementing agency. He submitted that, as per the scheme, the scheduled commercial banks would deposit money w…

DCIT 3(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL BANK OF AGRICULTURE AN RURAL DEVELOPMENT, MUMBAI

ITA 4007/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

….628.55 crores as income of the assessee. The Ld D.R relied upon following case laws in respect of the proposition on diversion of income by overriding title:- (a) CIT vs. Sunil J Kinerivala (126 Taxman 161)(SC) (b) CIT vs. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. (88 ITR 1)(SC) (c) CIT vs. Sithaldas Tirathdas (41 ITR 367)(SC) (d) Provat Kumar Mitter vs. CIT (41 ITR 624)(SC) 9. The Ld A.R, however, submitted that the RIDF/STCRC are schemes framed by the Government of India and it has appointed the assessee as implementing agency. He submitted that, as per the scheme, the scheduled commercial banks would deposit money w…

DCIT 3(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL BANK FOR AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, MUMBAI

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

ITA 3650/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

…s.628.55 crores as income of the assessee. The Ld D.R relied upon following case laws in respect of the proposition on diversion of income by overriding title:- (a) CIT vs. Sunil J Kinerivala (126 Taxman 161)(SC) (b) CIT vs. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd (88 ITR 1)(SC) (c) CIT vs. Sithaldas Tirathdas (41 ITR 367)(SC) (d) Provat Kumar Mitter vs. CIT (41 ITR 624)(SC) 9. The Ld A.R, however, submitted that the RIDF/STCRC are schemes framed by the Government of India and it has appointed the assessee as implementing agency. He submitted that, as per the scheme, the scheduled commercial banks would deposit money…

SONA BLW PRECISION FORGINGS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 3134/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Through Video Conferencing]

Section 40Section 92BSection 92C

…der to substantiate the distinction between expenditure incurred for the purpose of earning income and application of that income, reference has also been made to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. (88 ITR 1). Hon'ble Apex Court was concerned with the issue whether payment to the Government under a contract for taking over another Company by the Assessee Company would be eligible for deduction or not. The Assessee before the Court had entered into a contract, inter alia, with a condition that the Government would be entitled to twenty percent of net pr…

SONA OKEGAWA PRECISION FORGINGS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 204/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Through Video Conferencing]

Section 40Section 92BSection 92C

…der to substantiate the distinction between expenditure incurred for the purpose of earning income and application of that income, reference has also been made to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. (88 ITR 1). Hon'ble Apex Court was concerned with the issue whether payment to the Government under a contract for taking over another Company by the Assessee Company would be eligible for deduction or not. The Assessee before the Court had entered into a contract, inter alia, with a condition that the Government would be entitled to twenty percent of net pr…

M/S. THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE APEX BANK LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(2)(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly, Ground No.3 raised by revenue for assessment years 2011-12 stands dismissed

ITA 1761/BANG/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT)For Respondent: Shri. S. Ramasubramanyan, CA
Section 147

…rinciple was followed subsequently by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. V.s CIT (57 ITR 521) and this principle was re-iterated again by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. (90 ITR 307). Thus, the principle laid down in all the above cases is that though an amount of expenditure is ascertained with reference to profits, it does not lose the character of expenditure. Therefore, the reasoning adopted by the AO and the Id. CIT(A) cannot be accepted. 8. However, we have to examine the issue from the view of allowability of this expe…

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE - 5, BANGALORE vs. M/S. THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE APEX BANK LIMITED, BANGALORE

Accordingly, Ground No.3 raised by revenue for assessment years 2011-12 stands dismissed

ITA 1327/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT)For Respondent: Shri. S. Ramasubramanyan, CA
Section 147

…rinciple was followed subsequently by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. V.s CIT (57 ITR 521) and this principle was re-iterated again by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. (90 ITR 307). Thus, the principle laid down in all the above cases is that though an amount of expenditure is ascertained with reference to profits, it does not lose the character of expenditure. Therefore, the reasoning adopted by the AO and the Id. CIT(A) cannot be accepted. 8. However, we have to examine the issue from the view of allowability of this expe…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE APEX BANK LTD , BANGALORE

Accordingly, Ground No.3 raised by revenue for assessment years 2011-12 stands dismissed

ITA 2160/BANG/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT)For Respondent: Shri. S. Ramasubramanyan, CA
Section 147

…rinciple was followed subsequently by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. V.s CIT (57 ITR 521) and this principle was re-iterated again by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. (90 ITR 307). Thus, the principle laid down in all the above cases is that though an amount of expenditure is ascertained with reference to profits, it does not lose the character of expenditure. Therefore, the reasoning adopted by the AO and the Id. CIT(A) cannot be accepted. 8. However, we have to examine the issue from the view of allowability of this expe…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE APEX BANK LTD , BANGALORE

Accordingly, Ground No.3 raised by revenue for assessment years 2011-12 stands dismissed

ITA 2150/BANG/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT)For Respondent: Shri. S. Ramasubramanyan, CA
Section 147

…rinciple was followed subsequently by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. V.s CIT (57 ITR 521) and this principle was re-iterated again by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. (90 ITR 307). Thus, the principle laid down in all the above cases is that though an amount of expenditure is ascertained with reference to profits, it does not lose the character of expenditure. Therefore, the reasoning adopted by the AO and the Id. CIT(A) cannot be accepted. 8. However, we have to examine the issue from the view of allowability of this expe…

KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE APEX BANK LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(2)(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly, Ground No.3 raised by revenue for assessment years 2011-12 stands dismissed

ITA 2082/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT)For Respondent: Shri. S. Ramasubramanyan, CA
Section 147

…rinciple was followed subsequently by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. V.s CIT (57 ITR 521) and this principle was re-iterated again by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. (90 ITR 307). Thus, the principle laid down in all the above cases is that though an amount of expenditure is ascertained with reference to profits, it does not lose the character of expenditure. Therefore, the reasoning adopted by the AO and the Id. CIT(A) cannot be accepted. 8. However, we have to examine the issue from the view of allowability of this expe…

INDRANI PATNAIK,ROURKELA vs. DCIT, RORUKELA CIRCLE, ROURKELA

In the result, appeals of the revenue for assessment years 2012-13 &

ITA 393/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam,, CIT DR

…ng one’s business sis the prerogative of the business man, as are the related matters like incurring expenses, making investments, obtaining loans and providing advances, etc. The decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of S.A. Builders Limited vs CIT, 288 ITR 1 (SC) is relevant. The Hon’ble Court held in the above ratio reiterated the settled position in the past that no businessman can be compelled to maximize his profit. While considering the claim of deduction of any expenditure, income tax authorities must put themselves in the shoes of the assessee and see how a prudent businessman would act. Once it…

ACIT, RORUKELA CIRCLE, ROURKELA vs. INDRANI PATNAIK, ROURKELA

In the result, appeals of the revenue for assessment years 2012-13 &

ITA 389/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam,, CIT DR

…ng one’s business sis the prerogative of the business man, as are the related matters like incurring expenses, making investments, obtaining loans and providing advances, etc. The decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of S.A. Builders Limited vs CIT, 288 ITR 1 (SC) is relevant. The Hon’ble Court held in the above ratio reiterated the settled position in the past that no businessman can be compelled to maximize his profit. While considering the claim of deduction of any expenditure, income tax authorities must put themselves in the shoes of the assessee and see how a prudent businessman would act. Once it…

ACIT CIR, 31 (1) ROOM NO. 217, NEW DELHI vs. RNGS CONSORTIUM, NEW DELHI

In the result ITA No. 153/Del/2009 is dismissed

ITA 2238/DEL/2008[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2018AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiasst Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Rngs Consortium, Tax, 8, Aradhana Colony, Circle-31(1), Cr Building, Ip Sector-13, Rk Puram, New Estate, New Delhi Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. M/S. Expotec International Circle-11(1), Ltd, 8, Aradhana Colony, Rk New Delhi Puram, Sector-13, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 145(3)Section 44A

…appellant placed reliance in support was placed on the following decisions wherein it has been held the income divested by an overriding title would be assessable in the hands of person in whose favour it is vested: CIT vs. Travancore Sugar & Chemicals Ltd.: 88 ITR 1 (SC), CIT vs. Jhanzie Tea Association: 179 ITR 295 (Cal.), CIT vs. M.D. Kanoria: 137 ITR 137 (Bom.), Dalmia Cement Ltd. vs. CIT: 237 ITR 619 (SC), CIT vs. Canara Bank: 293 ITR 115 (Del. and CIT vs. Jayantilal D. Patel: 295 ITR 386 (Guj.) 15. The appellant submitted that no association of persons (AOP) was formed by coming together of consortium memb…

AJMER SAHKARI UPBHOKTA WHOLESALE BHANDAR LTD.,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1-2, AJMER

ITA 830/JPR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 May 2018AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri G.C. Jain (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Neena Jeph (JCIT)
Section 37(1)Section 43(2)Section 48Section 48(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh Hkkxpan] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 830/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2014-15 cuke Ajmer Sahkari Upbhokta Wholesale The ITO, Vs. Bhandar Ltd., Ward-1(2), Apna Bazar, Parao, Ajmer. Ajmer. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAAAA 0383 R vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri G.C. Jain (Adv.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Neena Jeph (JCIT) lquokb…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SHRIRAM CITY UNION FINANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 726/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jun 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.506/Mds/2016 "नधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: Mr.R.Sivaraman, Adv
Section 37Section 45

…not follow. It is the first kind of payment is merely an obligation to pay another a portion of one’s own income, which has been received and is since appIied”. Similarly, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. (88 ITR 1) has held that - “It is thus clear that whereby the obligation income is diverted before reaches the assessee it is deductible. But where the income is required to be applied to ITA Nos.506 & 726/Mds/2016 :- 4 -: discharge an obligation after such income reaches the assessee, it is merely a case of application of income to satisfy an obligation of…

SHRIRAM CITY UNION FINANCE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 506/CHNY/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jun 2017AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.506/Mds/2016 "नधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: Mr.R.Sivaraman, Adv
Section 37Section 45

…not follow. It is the first kind of payment is merely an obligation to pay another a portion of one’s own income, which has been received and is since appIied”. Similarly, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. (88 ITR 1) has held that - “It is thus clear that whereby the obligation income is diverted before reaches the assessee it is deductible. But where the income is required to be applied to ITA Nos.506 & 726/Mds/2016 :- 4 -: discharge an obligation after such income reaches the assessee, it is merely a case of application of income to satisfy an obligation of…

Showing 1–20 of 21 · Page 1 of 2