CIT v. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd.

312 ITR 254Supreme Court of India2009#45 most cited

What is CIT v. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Foreign exchange fluctuations, whether gains or losses, are inextricably linked to the underlying business transaction and must be accounted for under the mercantile system. The Supreme Court also affirmed the standard accounting principle of valuing stock at cost or net realisable value, whichever is lower.

968

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 371,887 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Woodward Governor · 312 ITR 254 · Section 37(1) · Section 43A · Section 145(3) · foreign exchange fluctuation · mercantile system of accounting · stock valuation · closing stock · revenue expenditure

Also reported as

21 DTR 106

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 115JBSection 147Section 142(1)Section 43(5)Section 40(a)(ia)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 43asection 40(a)(i)mercantile system of accountingbook profitssection 37(1)section 115jrevenue expendituresection 43capital expendituresection 40(a)section 115jbsection 32

Judgments citing CIT v. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd.

Hsbc Electronic Data Processing India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle-2(2), Hyderabad

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

ITA 302/HYD/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2024

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.302/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Hsbc Electronic Data Processing Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Hyderabad Circle-2(1) [Pan : Aaach8235M] Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Ms.Nusrath Farheen, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Mr.Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80G

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No.302/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) HSBC Electronic Data Processing Vs. Assistant Commissioner of India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Hyderabad Circle-2(1) [PAN : AAACH8235M] Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / ITA No.337/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Assistant Commissioner of Vs. HSBC Electronic Data Processing Income Tax India Pvt.…

Subros Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT Circle 22(2), Delhi

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 3579/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 35

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3577/Del/2023 (Assessment Year : 2016-17) ITA No. 3579/Del/2023 (Assessment Year : 2020-21) Subros Limited, vs. Addl.CIT, Range 24, LGF, World Trade Centre, New Delhi. Barakhamba Lane, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. (PAN : AABCS3910P) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. Advocate Shri Shailesh Gupta, Advocate Shri Uma Shankar, Advocate REVENUE BY : Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing : 08.08.2024 Date of Order : 0…

Subros Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT Circle 24(2) New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 3578/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 35

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3577/Del/2023 (Assessment Year : 2016-17) ITA No. 3579/Del/2023 (Assessment Year : 2020-21) Subros Limited, vs. Addl.CIT, Range 24, LGF, World Trade Centre, New Delhi. Barakhamba Lane, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. (PAN : AABCS3910P) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. Advocate Shri Shailesh Gupta, Advocate Shri Uma Shankar, Advocate REVENUE BY : Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing : 08.08.2024 Date of Order : 0…

Subros Limited, Delhi vs. JCIT Range 24 New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 3577/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 35

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3577/Del/2023 (Assessment Year : 2016-17) ITA No. 3579/Del/2023 (Assessment Year : 2020-21) Subros Limited, vs. Addl.CIT, Range 24, LGF, World Trade Centre, New Delhi. Barakhamba Lane, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. (PAN : AABCS3910P) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. Advocate Shri Shailesh Gupta, Advocate Shri Uma Shankar, Advocate REVENUE BY : Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing : 08.08.2024 Date of Order : 0…

Subros Limited, Delhi vs. Addl CIT Rang 24 New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 3576/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 35

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3577/Del/2023 (Assessment Year : 2016-17) ITA No. 3579/Del/2023 (Assessment Year : 2020-21) Subros Limited, vs. Addl.CIT, Range 24, LGF, World Trade Centre, New Delhi. Barakhamba Lane, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. (PAN : AABCS3910P) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. Advocate Shri Shailesh Gupta, Advocate Shri Uma Shankar, Advocate REVENUE BY : Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing : 08.08.2024 Date of Order : 0…

Amar Pratap Steels Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-7(2), Jaipur

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 228/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 36(1)(iv)

…e for rejection of Books of Accounts. 2.5 Accounts regularly maintained in the course of business are to be taken as correct unless there are strong and sufficient reasons to indicate that they are unreliable - CIT Vs. Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd. [2009] 312 ITR 254 (SC) 2.6 REASONS FOR DECREASE IN GROSS PROFIT PERCENTAGE 2.6.i Assessee company also effectively marketed its product by offering competitive rates which is visible from the fact that the turnover increased from Rs. 57.11 crores during preceding year to Rs. 94.38 crores in the current year (in % terms, sales arose by 65.28%). 2.6.ii In the abs…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -7, Delhi vs. Sony India Pvt. Ltd

Appeal is dismissed

ITA-551/2023HC Delhi30 Sept 2024
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 260A

…ing stock and closing stock – on the basis of cost or realisable value, whichever is lower. The aforesaid basis is well accepted for valuation of stock. The said basis was also noted by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Woodword Governor India (P.) Ltd.: (2009) 312 ITR 254. The learned counsel for the Revenue also does not dispute that if the aforesaid basis is followed consistently, the assessee’s income for the year would be fully captured as the element of profit would also not be included in the opening stock. 20. The finding of the Tribunal cannot be faulted. Clearly, no substantial question of law ar…

Idfc Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Co. Circle - II (3), Chennai

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

ITA 677/CHNY/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.877/Chny/2018 & 677/Chny/2020 िनधा&रण वष& /Assessment Years: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Farookh V. Irani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vi)Section 36(1)(vii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘डी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद" के सम$ BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.877/Chny/2018 & 677/Chny/2020 िनधा&रण वष& /Assessment Years: 2010-11 IDFC Limited, The Dy. Commissioner of (erstwhile known as Infrastructure Vs. Income Tax, Development Finance Company Company Circle-II(3), Limited), Chennai. KRM Tower, 8th Floor, No.1, Harrington Road, Chetpet, Chennai – 600 031. PAN: AAACI 2663N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील स…

DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Idfc Limited, Chennai

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

ITA 878/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.877/Chny/2018 & 677/Chny/2020 िनधा&रण वष& /Assessment Years: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Farookh V. Irani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vi)Section 36(1)(vii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘डी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद" के सम$ BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.877/Chny/2018 & 677/Chny/2020 िनधा&रण वष& /Assessment Years: 2010-11 IDFC Limited, The Dy. Commissioner of (erstwhile known as Infrastructure Vs. Income Tax, Development Finance Company Company Circle-II(3), Limited), Chennai. KRM Tower, 8th Floor, No.1, Harrington Road, Chetpet, Chennai – 600 031. PAN: AAACI 2663N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील स…

Idfc Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Company Circle II(3), Chennai

ITA 877/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.877/Chny/2018 & 677/Chny/2020 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2010-11 Idfc Limited, (Erstwhile Known As Infrastructure Vs. Income Tax, Development Finance Company Circle-Ii(3), Limited), Krm Tower, 8Th Floor, No.1, Harrington Road, Chetpet, Chennai – 600 031. Pan: Aaaci 2663N (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) The Dy. Commissioner Of Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.878/Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-2(2), Chennai Idfc Limited, (Erstwhile Known As Infrastructure Development Finance Company Vs. Limited), Krm Tower, 8Th Floor, No.1, Harrington Road, Chetpet, Chennai – 600 031. Pan: Aaaci 2663N अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Assessee By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : Shri Farookh V. Irani, Advocate : Shri A. Sasikumar, Cit : 23.07.2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2024

Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vi)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'डी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'D' BENCH: CHENNAI श्री एबी टी. वर्की, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री जगदीश, लेख सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.877/Chny/2018 & 677/Chny/2020 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2010-11 IDFC Limited, (erstwhile known as Infrastructure Vs. Income Tax, Development Finance Company Circle-II(3), Limited), KRM Tower, 8th Floor, No.1, Harrington Road, Chetpet, Chennai – 600 031. PAN: AAACI 2663N (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) The Dy. Commissioner of Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respo…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Ashok Leyland Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 484/CHNY/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.362/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 V. M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd., The Dcit, No.1, Sardar Patel Road, Non Corporate Circle-8(1), Guindy, Chennai-600 032. Ltu-Ii, Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca 4651 L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Mr. Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 32Section 35

…t as a deduction in the memo of income as the loss had occurred on account of restatement of forex liability on account of the forward contracts in that year by placing reliance on the Supreme Court decision in CIT vs. Woodward Governor India P Limited [2009] 312 ITR 254 (SC)/For AY 2010-11, when the underlying transaction such as import of raw materials actually crystallize, the hedge reserve is reversed and the loss is debited to Profit and Loss account. Though this amount was claimed as a deduction in for AY 2009-10, the debit to P&L was in AY 2010-11. In order to avoid double deduction, the debit to P&L in AY…

Ashok Leyland Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Non Corp Circle 8(1) - Ltu - II, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 362/CHNY/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.362/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 V. M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd., The Dcit, No.1, Sardar Patel Road, Non Corporate Circle-8(1), Guindy, Chennai-600 032. Ltu-Ii, Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca 4651 L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Mr. Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 32Section 35

…t as a deduction in the memo of income as the loss had occurred on account of restatement of forex liability on account of the forward contracts in that year by placing reliance on the Supreme Court decision in CIT vs. Woodward Governor India P Limited [2009] 312 ITR 254 (SC)/For AY 2010-11, when the underlying transaction such as import of raw materials actually crystallize, the hedge reserve is reversed and the loss is debited to Profit and Loss account. Though this amount was claimed as a deduction in for AY 2009-10, the debit to P&L was in AY 2010-11. In order to avoid double deduction, the debit to P&L in AY…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Napc Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

ITA 623/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Hon'Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon'Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 623/Chny/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1) No. 46, M.G. Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : V. : Shri. : Shri. : 01.07.2024 : 14.08.2024 Napc Pvt Ltd., No.3, 6Th Floor, Apex Plaza, Nungambakkam High Road, Nungambakkam – 600 034. [Pan: Aaccn-3625-P] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) V. Nandakumar, Cit T. Banusekar, Advocate & Shri. Suraj Nahar, Ca आदेश /Order Per S. R. Raghunatha: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Filed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-19, For The

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 41(1)Section 43C

…hout giving any cogent reasons in doing so. 9.3 Further in the present case, the AO has not given any specific finding that the assessee has not followed continuously accounting method. The Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of CIT Vs. Woodword Governor (2009) 312 ITR 254 (SC) held that the accounting method followed by an assessee continuously for a given time period has to be presumed to be correct till the AO comes to know the reasons to be given that system does not reflect the true profits. 9.4 In the case of Veeraiah Reddier Vs. CIT, 385 ITR 152 (sic) and Punjab Trading Co. Ltd Vs. CIT 53 ITR 335 (P &H), it…

Pragati Power Corporation Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 20(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1617/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 145(2)Section 32Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 43ASection 46ASection 80I

…t are two different and independent transactions. Thus, events subsequent to acquisition of assets cannot change the price paid for it. Pragati Power Corporation vs. ACIT ix) Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd. (2009) 312 ITR 254 (SC) have held that loss suffered by the assessee on account of foreign exchange difference as on the date of Balance Sheet is an item of expenditure u/s 37(1) of the Act. x) Assessee is also relying upon following judgements:- Cooper cooperation (P) Ltd. vs DCIT (2016) 159 ITD 165 (ITAT- Pune) DCIT vs Maddi Lakshmaiah & Co. Ltd. (2017) 166 ITD 6…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Hsbc Electronic Data Processing India Private Limited, Hyderabad

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

ITA 1632/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, C.AFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 115Section 115JSection 251(1)(a)Section 37(1)Section 41(1)

…ch Park Laboratories Ltd. (supra), after following the aforesaid Circular, held that straight jacket formula given rn sub-section (3) has to be followed to determine the eligible deduction. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of P.R. Prabhakar v. CIT [2006] 284 ITR 584/154 Taxman 503 had approved the principle laid down in the Special Bench decision in lnternational Research Park Laboratories Ltd. (supra). ln the assessee's own case the l.T.A.T. in the preceding years, after considering the decision in the case of Liberty lndia (supra) held that provisions of section 108 are different from the provisions of sec…

Sundaram Fasteners Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 6(2), Chennai

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

ITA 3236/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3236/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 V. M/S.Sundram Fasteners Ltd., The Dcit, 98-A, 7Th Floor, Corporate Circle-6(2), Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Chennai. Mylapore, Chennai-600 004. [Pan: Aaacs 8779 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vikaram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT

…every year, the forex difference on the outstanding loan amount if it is a loss will appear as a deduction in the P&L. Whether this claim is allowable under Income Tax was settled in the affirmative in the SC decision of CIT Vs Woodward Governor India P Ltd – 312 ITR 254(paras 18- 21). This issue is dealt with in Ground 8 of this Appeal separately. Please refer the same o On realization date (date of actual repayment of loan) wherein the loan is repaidand there may be a forex loss between the date of loan taken and loan repayment and such loss is an allowable deduction .This is clearly allowable as a normal reven…

Simbhaoli Sugars Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed ex-parte

ITA 5181/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 250Section 43Section 43(5)

…normal business loss. 11. We concur with the plea raised on behalf of the assessee before the lower authorities. The factual position being uncontroverted, the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Woodward Governor (P.) Ltd., [2009] 312 ITR 254 (SC) clinches the issue. It is trite that if the funds in foreign exchange held in trading asset is in the ordinary course of trade, loss arising due to fluctuation of rate would be trading loss allowable as deduction. A reference may be made to the judgment in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT, (1979) 116 ITR 1 (SC). If however the fo…

Caterpillar India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Ltu-1, Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2749/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2749/Chny/2017 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. Caterpillar India P. Ltd. Dcit 7Th Floor, International Tech Park, बनाम/ Large Taxpayer Unit-1 Taramani Road, Taramani, Chennai. Vs. Chennai-600 113. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcc-4615-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & Cross Objection No.22/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.2749/Chny/2017) (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit M/S. Caterpillar India P. Ltd. बनाम/ 7Th Floor, International Tech Park, Central Circle-3(3), Chennai-34. Taramani Road, Taramani, Vs. Chennai-600 113. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcc-4615-K (Cross-Objector) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri S.P.Chidambaram (Advocate)- Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri A.Sasikumar (Cit)- Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29-05-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11-06-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri S.P.Chidambaram (Advocate)- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri A.Sasikumar (CIT)- Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘डी’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय ,ी मनोज कुमार अ0वाल ,लेखा सद5 एवं माननीय ,ी मनु कुमार िग9र, "ाियक सद5 के सम:। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.2749/Chny/2017 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/s. Caterpillar India P. Ltd. DCIT 7th floor, International Tech Park, बनाम/ Large Taxpayer Unit-1 Taramani Road, Taramani, Chennai. Vs. Chennai-600 113. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AABCC-4615-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & Cross Objection No.22/Chny/2023 (…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 vs. M/S Care Health Insurance Limited (Earlier Known As M/S Religare Health Insurance Co. Ltd.)

ITA/304/2024HC Delhi30 May 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

Section 37

…ITA 304/2024 & other connected matters Page 1 of 20 $~58, 11 & 12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 30 May 2024 + ITA 304/2024 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Prashant Meharchandani, Sr.SC with Mr.Akshat Singh, Jr.SC, Ms.Ritika Vohra and Mr.Utkarsh Kandpal, Advs. versus M/S CARE HEALTH INSURANCE LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS M/S RELIGARE HEALTH INSURANCE CO. LTD.) ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Ajay Vohra Sr.Adv.…

Titan Company Limited 9Earstwhile Known As Titan Industries Limited), Krishnagiri vs. ACIT Ltu 1, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 518/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri T. Surya Narayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,‘डी’ "यायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "सह, उपा"य" एवं "ी अिमताभ शु"ला, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 518, 505, 506 & 507/CHNY/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Titan Company Ltd., 1. The Assistant (Erstwhile known as Titan Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Industries Ltd.,) Circle III(2), #3, SIPCOT Indl. Complex, Chennai. Hosur, Krishnagiri – 635 126. 2. The Joint / Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Large Taxpayer…