How many judgments cite DCIT v. Eicher Motors Limited?

21 judgments on BharatTax cite DCIT v. Eicher Motors Limited (82 TTJ 61), spanning 2018 to 2023.

DCIT v. Eicher Motors Limited

82 TTJ 61Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#5591 most cited

What is DCIT v. Eicher Motors Limited authority for?

Section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which deals with the remission or cessation of trading liabilities, is not applicable if the liability continues to subsist and has not been waived off by the creditors. Similarly, provisions for gratuity made on actuarial valuation constitute an ascertained liability and are not to be added to net profits.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2023.

Also referred to as

Eicher Motors Limited · DCIT v. Eicher Motors Limited · 82 TTJ 61 · 58 SOT 14 · Section 41(1) · cessation of liability · subsisting liability · waiver of liability · provision for gratuity · actuarial valuation · ascertained liability

Also reported as

58 SOT 14

Judgments citing DCIT v. Eicher Motors Limited

M/S. Asahi India Glass Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1637/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2007-08 Asahi India Glass Limited, Dcit, Circle- 2(1), 38, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi. Vs. Phase- Iii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Shri Sandip Sapra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Parnav, Sr.DR

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 14A

…ty was made on the basis of actuarial valuation, it was an ascertained liability and the said amount would not be added to the net profits. Similar view has been held by the Indore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Eicher Motors Ltd. vs. DCIT reported in 82 TTJ 61. The various other decisions relied on by the ld. counsel for the assessee also support its case. In view of the above and in absence of any contrary material brought to our notice by the ld. DR against the order of the ld. CIT(A), we do not find any infirmity in the same. Accordingly, the order of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue is upheld and the g…