What is DCIT v. Beardsell Ltd. authority for?

Provisions made for unascertained liabilities, such as doubtful debts, cannot be excluded when computing book profits under Section 115JA or Section 115JB of the Income-tax Act.

How many judgments cite DCIT v. Beardsell Ltd.?

16 judgments on BharatTax cite DCIT v. Beardsell Ltd. (244 ITR 256), spanning 2009 to 2023.

DCIT v. Beardsell Ltd. (244 ITR 256)

Au Small Finance Bank Limited, Jaipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur-1

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 203/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Jhanwar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT

Section 115JSection 263Section 35ASection 36(1)(viia)

…scertained liability, and, thus, same could not be excluded while computing book profits under section 115JA". The Hon'ble High Court also relied upon decision of division bench in the case of the case of Dy. CIT v. Beardsell Ltd. [2001] 116 Taxman 149/[2000] 244 ITR 256. In the said decision, it was held that if a debt had become irrecoverable the same could be written off and deducted from the profit of the business. A debt, the recovery of which was doubtful could not be termed to be an ascertained liability as mentioned under Section 115) of the Act and could not be excluded from the book profits. As discusse…

Raymond Limited, Mumbai vs. Addl C.I.T. -2(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 2660/MUM/2008[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Nov 2022AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Raymond Limited V. Addl. Cit– Range 2(3) New Hind House 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Narottam Morarjee Marg M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Ballard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aaacr4896A (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit–2(3) V. M/S. Raymond Limited Room No. 555 New Hind House Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai Narottam Morarjee Marg Ballard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aaacr4896A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri Samuel Pitta

Section 115JSection 14ASection 35DSection 92C

…n ascertained liabilities, are to be added to the book profit as per Profit and Loss Account for the relevant previous year prepared under sub section 2 of Sec. 115JB. The Assessing Officer by relying on Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Beardsell Ltd [244 ITR 256]it is held that if a provision is made for 16 ITA NO. 2660& 2519/MUM/2008 (A.Y: 2002-03) M/s. Raymond Limited unascertained liability, the assessee is not entitled to get any relief claimed and if reserves have been made with regard to the ascertained liabilities, such reserve can be excluded from the book profit. The Assessing Officer observed t…

M/S. ACIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Raymond Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 2519/MUM/2008[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Nov 2022AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Raymond Limited V. Addl. Cit– Range 2(3) New Hind House 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Narottam Morarjee Marg M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Ballard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aaacr4896A (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit–2(3) V. M/S. Raymond Limited Room No. 555 New Hind House Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai Narottam Morarjee Marg Ballard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aaacr4896A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri Samuel Pitta

Section 115JSection 14ASection 35DSection 92C

…n ascertained liabilities, are to be added to the book profit as per Profit and Loss Account for the relevant previous year prepared under sub section 2 of Sec. 115JB. The Assessing Officer by relying on Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Beardsell Ltd [244 ITR 256]it is held that if a provision is made for 16 ITA NO. 2660& 2519/MUM/2008 (A.Y: 2002-03) M/s. Raymond Limited unascertained liability, the assessee is not entitled to get any relief claimed and if reserves have been made with regard to the ascertained liabilities, such reserve can be excluded from the book profit. The Assessing Officer observed t…

DCIT, Circle - 3, Kolkata vs. M/S. the Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 50/KOL/2009[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Dec 2020AY 2002-03

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 115JSection 260A

…4 The Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd., AY 2002-03 5. Per contra, the Ld. CIT, DR vehemently opposing the plea of the assessee contended that the AO has followed the judgment of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s. Breadshell Ltd. 244 ITR 256 and therefore, he does not want us to interfere, therefore, according to him, Tribunal was correct in the first round of litigation when it upheld the action of the AO. 6. We have heard rival submissions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We note that the short issue that has been raised before us is pertaining to the AO’s…

The DCIT, Cochin vs. M/S.Aspinwall & Co. Ltd, Cochin

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

ITA 133/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

Section 14A

…ity debited to profit and loss account other than an ascertained liability needs to be added to the net profit for arriving at book profits chargeable to MAT. The CIT(A) relied o the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of DCIT vs. Beardsell Ltd. (244 ITR 256) holding that the provision for bad debts cannot be termed as an ascertained liability, and therefore needs to be added back to the net profits for arriving at the book profit subject to MAT. However, distinguishing this decision, the Special Bench of ITAT, Kolkata in the case of JCIT vs. Usha Martin Industries (104 ITD 249) held that the prov…

M/S Aspinwall & Co., Ltd, Cochin vs. The ACIT, Cochin

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

ITA 128/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

Section 14A

…ity debited to profit and loss account other than an ascertained liability needs to be added to the net profit for arriving at book profits chargeable to MAT. The CIT(A) relied o the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of DCIT vs. Beardsell Ltd. (244 ITR 256) holding that the provision for bad debts cannot be termed as an ascertained liability, and therefore needs to be added back to the net profits for arriving at the book profit subject to MAT. However, distinguishing this decision, the Special Bench of ITAT, Kolkata in the case of JCIT vs. Usha Martin Industries (104 ITD 249) held that the prov…

Aspinwall & Company Ltd, Cochin vs. The ACIT, Cochin

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

ITA 61/COCH/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

Section 14A

…ity debited to profit and loss account other than an ascertained liability needs to be added to the net profit for arriving at book profits chargeable to MAT. The CIT(A) relied o the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of DCIT vs. Beardsell Ltd. (244 ITR 256) holding that the provision for bad debts cannot be termed as an ascertained liability, and therefore needs to be added back to the net profits for arriving at the book profit subject to MAT. However, distinguishing this decision, the Special Bench of ITAT, Kolkata in the case of JCIT vs. Usha Martin Industries (104 ITD 249) held that the prov…

Aspinwall & Company Ltd, Cochin vs. The ACIT, Cochin

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

ITA 60/COCH/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

Section 14A

…ity debited to profit and loss account other than an ascertained liability needs to be added to the net profit for arriving at book profits chargeable to MAT. The CIT(A) relied o the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of DCIT vs. Beardsell Ltd. (244 ITR 256) holding that the provision for bad debts cannot be termed as an ascertained liability, and therefore needs to be added back to the net profits for arriving at the book profit subject to MAT. However, distinguishing this decision, the Special Bench of ITAT, Kolkata in the case of JCIT vs. Usha Martin Industries (104 ITD 249) held that the prov…