E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. v. CIT

26 ITR 27Supreme Court of India1954#326 most cited

What is E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Income is taxable only when it represents real income, not notional income. It accrues only when there is a vested right to receive it, typically upon the occurrence of a transfer or event, rather than merely on a time basis.

256

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 1992 to 2026.

Also referred to as

E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. v. CIT · 26 ITR 27 · Supreme Court · real income principle · notional income · income accrual · right to receive income · section 48 · capital gains computation · timing of tax liability · mercantile system · section 145

Also reported as

1 SCR 313

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(va)Section 48Section 115JBSection 142(1)Section 143(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

right to receivesection 145(2)mercantile system of accountingsection 48section 45section 34liable to taxbook profitsprofits and gains of business or professionsection 145section 115jrevenue expenditure

Judgments citing E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. v. CIT

ITO 29(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Nathpa Jhakari Joint Venture, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3953/MUM/2016[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Ito 29 (2)(4) Vs. M/S.Nathpa Jhakari Joint Building No.C-10, R.No.205 Venture It Office, Hincon House, Pratyakshkar Bhavana Lbs Marg Bkc, Bandra (E) Vikhroli (W) Mumbai – 400 011 Mumbai – 400 083 Pan/Gir No. Aaaan1127C Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…ounts. The taxability is to be determined in accordance with the provisions of law. 7.1.7 The fact that the Client SJVN has disputed the sums is an important factor in determining its taxability as held by the landmark judgment of the Apex Court in ED Sasoon (26 ITR 27) which asserts that unless and until there is created in favour of the 5 M/s. Nathpa Jhakri Joint Venture assessee a debt due by somebody it cannot be said that he has acquired a right to receive the income or that any income has accrued to him. In the instant case, the existence of dispute goes clearly to show that there is no debt considered due…

Tamil Nadu Brick Industries, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

ITA 744/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.744/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 M/S. Tamilnadu Brick Industries, The Income Tax Officer, No. 47, Mangali Nagar 1St Street, Vs. Non Corporate Circle 8(1), Arumbakkam, Chennai 600 106. Chennai. [Pan: Aafft3643P] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Kumar Punna, Jr. Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 13.02.2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.05.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 9, Chennai, Dated 27.02.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 9, Chennai Dated 27.02.2017 In I.T.A.No.07/Cit(A)-9/2016-17 For The Above Mentioned Assessment Year Is Contrary To Law, Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Punna
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(47)(v)

…e Apex Court, it is binding on the Appellate Authorities. 2. Real income to be taxed and not the notional or hypothetical income 4.2.1. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Balbir Singh Maini has referred to the decision in E.D Sassoon & Co. ltd Vs. CIT (1955) 1 SCR 313 at 343 has held that Income tax cannot be levied on ‘hypothetical income’ and the income accrues when there arises a corresponding liability of the other party from whom the income becomes due to pay that amount. Only then can it be said that for the purposes of taxability that the income is not hypothetical and it has really accrued to the assesse…

Mahipinder Singh Sandhu, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, Chandigarh

ITA 650/CHANDI/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Ashok GoyalFor Respondent: Smt. Chanderkanta
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 45Section 54E

…ceived and, therefore, the deduction u/s 54EC was rightly claimed by the assessee. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has also relied on the following decisions:- i) CIT Vs. Hemel Raju Shete [(2016) 136 DTR 417 (Bom)] ii) E.D. Sassoon & Co Ltd Vs. CIT [(1954) 26 ITR 27 (SC)] iii) R. Dalmia Vs. CIT [(1982) 133 ITR 179 (Delhi) ITA NO. 650/CHD/2017-Mahipinder Singh Sandhu 6 5. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, has relied on the findings of the lower authorities. 6. We have considered the rival submissions of the Ld. Representatives of the parties and have also gone through the record. We find force in the contenti…

ITO 9(1)(3), Mumbai vs. Anchor Residency P.Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 4407/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(iii)

…o such legally enforceable mutual agreement. No income accrues if it is not acknowledged by either of the parties nor any accounting entry passed in either party's accounts recognizing or acknowledging any accrual. 1. E. D. Sasoons Co. Ltd. v/s. CIT - [(1954) 26 ITR 27 (SC)J [Pg. 51, 52 & 55] The basic conception is that he must have acquired a right to receive the income. There must be a debt owed to him by somebody, Unless and until there is created in favour of the assessee a debt due by somebody it cannot be said that he has acquired a right to receive the income or that income has accrued to him. 2. CIT v/s.…

Sh. Jai Ram, Jagadhari vs. ITO, Yamunanagar

In the result, both the appeal of different assessees are allowed

ITA 366/CHANDI/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit GoelFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta

…e amount which has accrued to the respondent-assessee. The test of accrual is whether there is a right to receive the amount though later and such right is legally enforceable. In fact as observed by the Supreme Court in E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 27 “It is clear therefore that income may accrue to an assesee without the actual receipt of the same. If the assessee acquires a right to receive the income, the income can be said to have accrued to him though it may be received later on its being ascertained. The basic conception is that he must have acquired a right to receive the income. There mu…

Sh. Amar Singh, Jagadhari vs. ITO, Yamunanagar

In the result, both the appeal of different assessees are allowed

ITA 365/CHANDI/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit GoelFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta

…e amount which has accrued to the respondent-assessee. The test of accrual is whether there is a right to receive the amount though later and such right is legally enforceable. In fact as observed by the Supreme Court in E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 27 “It is clear therefore that income may accrue to an assesee without the actual receipt of the same. If the assessee acquires a right to receive the income, the income can be said to have accrued to him though it may be received later on its being ascertained. The basic conception is that he must have acquired a right to receive the income. There mu…

DCIT (TDS) Cir. - 1(2), Mumbai vs. First Source Solutions Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2012-2013

ITA 6110/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Dcit (Tds)-1 (2), M/S First Source Solutions Ltd., Room No. 803, 5Th Floor, Paradigm, K.G. Mittal Hospital Bldg., B-Wing, Mindspace Link Road, Charni Road (W), Vs. Malad (W), Mumbai - 400002 Mumbai - 400064 Pan: Aaaci8904N (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri S. Padmaja (Cit Dr) Assessee By : Shri F.V. Irani (Ar) Date Of Hearing: 13/12/2017 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/01/2018

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani (AR)For Respondent: Shri S. Padmaja (CIT DR)
Section 194HSection 196CSection 201

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2012-13 The DCIT (TDS)-1 (2), M/s First Source Solutions Ltd., Room No. 803, 5th Floor, Paradigm, K.G. Mittal Hospital Bldg., B-Wing, Mindspace Link Road, Charni Road (W), Vs. Malad (W), Mumbai - 400002 Mumbai - 400064 PAN: AAACI8904N (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri S. Padmaja (CIT DR) Assessee by : Shri F.V. Irani (AR) Date of Hearing: 13/12/2017 Date of Pronouncement: 19/01/2018 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM This appeal has been filed by the revenue against o…

Gautam R. Chadha Through L/H . Mrs. Ratna Chadha, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 4114/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 234ASection 271

…arise". The dicta of Mukherji, in Rogers Pyatt SI llac and Co. v Secretary of Stats for India [1925] 1 ITR 363 ITA No. 4114/Del./2014 6 has been quoted with approval in a series of decisions of the Supreme Court (vide E.D. Sassoon and Co. Ltd. v CIT [1954] 26 ITR 27 (page 50): "Now what is income? The term is nowhere defined in the Act,... In the absence of a statutory definition we must take its ordinary dictionary meaning.... The word clearly implies the idea of receipt, actual or constructive. The Policy of the Act is to make the amount taxable when it is paid or received either actually or constructively.…

ITO, WD-12(1), Kolkata vs. M/S White Cliff Properties (P) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1511/KOL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Nov 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)Section 251

…income must "arise" on the assumption that there is transfer of a capital asset. This income must have been received or have "accrued" under Section 48 as a result of the transfer of the capital asset. 25. This Court in E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. v. CIT, (1955) 1 SCR 313 at 343 held: "lt is clear therefore that income may accrue to an assessee without the actual receipt of the same. If the assessee acquires a right to receive the income, the income can be said to have accrued to him though it may be received later on its being ascertained. The basic conception is that he must have acquired a right to receive the in…

ITO 20(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Shehab Sultan Bohra, Mumbai

Appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3692/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3171/Mum/2015 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shehab S.Bohra Income Tax Officer 20(3)(3) Flat No. 1202, 12Th Floor Piramal Chamber बनाम/ Yash Height Chsl Parel Nesbit Road Mumbai – 400 012 Vs. Near Union Bank Of India Mazgaon, Mumbai-400 010 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Chetan Karia,Ld. ARFor Respondent: Pooja Swaroop, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 50C

…income must “arise” on the assumption that there is transfer of a capital asset. This income must have been received or have “accrued” under Section 48 as a result of the transfer of the capital asset. 25. This Court in E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. v. CIT, (1955) 1 SCR 313 at 343 held: “It is clear therefore that income may accrue to an assessee without the actual receipt of the same. If the assessee acquires a right to receive the income, the income can be said to have accrued to him though it may be received later on its being ascertained. The basic conception is that he must have acquired a right to receive the in…

Shehab S Bohra, Mumbai vs. ITO 20(3)(3), Mumbai

Appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3171/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3171/Mum/2015 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shehab S.Bohra Income Tax Officer 20(3)(3) Flat No. 1202, 12Th Floor Piramal Chamber बनाम/ Yash Height Chsl Parel Nesbit Road Mumbai – 400 012 Vs. Near Union Bank Of India Mazgaon, Mumbai-400 010 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Chetan Karia,Ld. ARFor Respondent: Pooja Swaroop, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 50C

…income must “arise” on the assumption that there is transfer of a capital asset. This income must have been received or have “accrued” under Section 48 as a result of the transfer of the capital asset. 25. This Court in E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. v. CIT, (1955) 1 SCR 313 at 343 held: “It is clear therefore that income may accrue to an assessee without the actual receipt of the same. If the assessee acquires a right to receive the income, the income can be said to have accrued to him though it may be received later on its being ascertained. The basic conception is that he must have acquired a right to receive the in…

Late Shri Gordhandas S. Garodia, Mumbai vs. DCIT 22(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5097/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivram a/sFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Patankar

…he amount which has accrued to the respondent-assessee. The test of accrual is whether there is a right to receive the amount though later and such right is legally enforceable. In fact as observed by the Supreme Court in E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 27 "It is clear therefore that income may accrue to an assesee without the actual receipt of the same. If the assessee acquires a right to receive the income, the income can be said to have accrued to him though it may be received later on its being ascertained. The basic conception is that he must have acquired a right to receive the income. There mu…

Smt.Uma Narendra, Bangalore vs. Income-Tax Officer, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2305/BANG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Padmameenakshi, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)(v)Section 53A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P. BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year : 2007-08 Smt. Uma Narendra, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Partner, M/s. Sudha Agencies, Ward 2(2), No.94, I Floor, Avenue Road, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 002. PAN: AADPU 8079N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Sheetal, Advocate Respondent by : Smt. Padmameenakshi, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru Date of hearing : 26.09.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 13.10.2017 O R D E R Per Sunil Kumar Yadav, Judicial Member This appeal is preferred by the asses…

Sri. Narayanaswamy, Bangalore vs. ITO, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 648/BANG/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A.K. Garodia

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. H.L. Sowmya Achar, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 2(47)Section 53A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.647 & 648/Bang/2015 Assessment year : 2007-08 Shri Tejas Vs. The Income Tax Officer, PAN: AKBPT 3433F Ward 7(2), Bangalore. Sri Narayanaswamy PAN: ACZPN 1342H No.258, 2nd Floor, Marappa Compound, Belathur, Bangalore – 560 067. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Sheetal, Advocate Respondent by : Smt. H.L. Sowmya Achar, Addl. CIT(DR) Date of hearing : 18.09.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 13.10.2017 O R D E R Per Sunil Kumar Yadav, Judicial Member Thes…

Sri. Tejas, Bangalore vs. ITO, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 647/BANG/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A.K. Garodia

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. H.L. Sowmya Achar, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 2(47)Section 53A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.647 & 648/Bang/2015 Assessment year : 2007-08 Shri Tejas Vs. The Income Tax Officer, PAN: AKBPT 3433F Ward 7(2), Bangalore. Sri Narayanaswamy PAN: ACZPN 1342H No.258, 2nd Floor, Marappa Compound, Belathur, Bangalore – 560 067. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Sheetal, Advocate Respondent by : Smt. H.L. Sowmya Achar, Addl. CIT(DR) Date of hearing : 18.09.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 13.10.2017 O R D E R Per Sunil Kumar Yadav, Judicial Member Thes…

Ashtvinayaka Construction, Navi Mumbai vs. JCIT Cir 22(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3883/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Bhadresh DoshiFor Respondent: Shri T A Khan
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…t has never accrued to the assessee in AY 2011-12. It should be taxed in the year of receipt or the year when the assessee gets a right to receive it. In defense of his arguments the ld AR relied on the some decisions namely:  E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 26 ITR 27  CIT vs. Gujarat Apollo Industries Ltd.  Amarshiv Construction (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT DIT ( International Taxation) vs. Ballast Nedam International  CIT vs. P & C Constructions (P.) Ltd.  10 I . T . A . N o . 3 8 2 1 / M u m / 2 0 1 5 a n d 3 8 8 3 / M / 2 0 1 5  CIT vs. East Coast Constructions & Ind. Ltd.  CIT vs. Ignifluid Boilers (I) Ltd. …

DCIT Cir 28(1), Navi Mumbai vs. Ashtavinayaka Construction, Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3821/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Bhadresh DoshiFor Respondent: Shri T A Khan
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…t has never accrued to the assessee in AY 2011-12. It should be taxed in the year of receipt or the year when the assessee gets a right to receive it. In defense of his arguments the ld AR relied on the some decisions namely:  E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 26 ITR 27  CIT vs. Gujarat Apollo Industries Ltd.  Amarshiv Construction (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT DIT ( International Taxation) vs. Ballast Nedam International  CIT vs. P & C Constructions (P.) Ltd.  10 I . T . A . N o . 3 8 2 1 / M u m / 2 0 1 5 a n d 3 8 8 3 / M / 2 0 1 5  CIT vs. East Coast Constructions & Ind. Ltd.  CIT vs. Ignifluid Boilers (I) Ltd. …

Dwarka Prasad Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 21(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4592/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri B Puresh
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…9 (SC) have clearly held that where the income accrues to the assess.ee directly and is merely applied upon such accrual, it is a case of application of the income of the assessee. Hon'ble Supreme Court in another case of E.O. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. vs CIT (1954) 26 ITR 27 has ruled that an obligation to use the income in a particular manner does not remove it from the category of income-tax; this is even if the obligation is a part of the original contract. 27. The second distinguishing feature of the appellant case with the other beneficiary Mrs. Kiran Agarwal is that while Mr. Dwarka Prasad Agarwal received the in…

Dwarka Prasad Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 21(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4591/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri B Puresh
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…9 (SC) have clearly held that where the income accrues to the assess.ee directly and is merely applied upon such accrual, it is a case of application of the income of the assessee. Hon'ble Supreme Court in another case of E.O. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. vs CIT (1954) 26 ITR 27 has ruled that an obligation to use the income in a particular manner does not remove it from the category of income-tax; this is even if the obligation is a part of the original contract. 27. The second distinguishing feature of the appellant case with the other beneficiary Mrs. Kiran Agarwal is that while Mr. Dwarka Prasad Agarwal received the in…

ACIT 21(2), Mumbai vs. Kiran Aggarwal, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1055/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri B Puresh
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…9 (SC) have clearly held that where the income accrues to the assess.ee directly and is merely applied upon such accrual, it is a case of application of the income of the assessee. Hon'ble Supreme Court in another case of E.O. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. vs CIT (1954) 26 ITR 27 has ruled that an obligation to use the income in a particular manner does not remove it from the category of income-tax; this is even if the obligation is a part of the original contract. 27. The second distinguishing feature of the appellant case with the other beneficiary Mrs. Kiran Agarwal is that while Mr. Dwarka Prasad Agarwal received the in…