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 367,154 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

Dlf Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 4061/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Prashant Maharishi & Sh. K. Narashimha Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dlf Limited Addl. Cit Dlf Centre, (9Th Floor) Vs Range-10 Sansad Marg, 404, C. R. Building New Delhi-110001 New Delhi Pan No.Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit Vs. Dlf Ltd. Circle –7 (1) Sansad Marg New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 23(1)

…ed is the income for financial year 2010-11. 26.11 An amount cannot be said to accrue unless enforceable debt is created in favour of assessee. Reference can be made to the judgment of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 27. Their Lordships at page 51 observed as under : “That the words „arising or accruing‟ are general words descriptive of a right to receive profits... 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 it being ascertained. The basic conception is that he must have…

Income Tax Officer 22(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Abdul Kayum Ahmed Mohd. Tamboli, Mumbai

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5851/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jul 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Lakhani-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Michael Gerald-Ld. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)Section 44ASection 53A

…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. v. CIT [ 1954] 26 ITR 27 "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, 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 inc…

Natvar Parikh & Co. P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT Cen IV, Mumbai

In the result, this ground of appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2082/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal (AR)For Respondent: Shri Michael Jerald (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 254(1)Section 40Section 40A

…here onetime membership is received for a specified period of time, the issue has been dealt by the ITAT Special Bench in the case of Club Mahindra Holidays, 40 DTR 1, wherein after considering the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of E.D. Sasoon, 26 ITR 27, Madras Industrial Corporation Ltd., 225 ITR 802, Calcutta Co. Ltd. 37 ITR 1 and in the case of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd., 314 ITR 62, it was held that membership fee received for 33/25 years was liable to spread over the period of time for which such fee is received. Respectfully following the same, we direct the AO to tax 1/25th share of fe…

DCIT, Circle - 35, Kolkata vs. M/S. Kolkata Port Trust, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and COs of the assessee are dismissed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 453/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…615/- (excluding Service Tax and Education Cess) was made during the year. Actual amount realized for the year 2011-12 was Rs.75,08,09,517/- has been recognized as revenue.” 22. And then the AO referred to the case of E. D. Sassoon and Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1984) 26 ITR 27 (SC) as well as the case of the CIT Vs. A Gajapathi Naidu (1964) 53 ITR 114 (SC) and thereafter held as under: “The plain and simple fact is that rent is nothing but a periodical payment paid by the tenant to the landlord for use of land. It accrues as soon as the tenant uses the land for the period. Here the period of use is the factor that dete…

DCIT, Circle - 35, Kolkata vs. M/S. Kolkata Port Trust, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and COs of the assessee are dismissed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 452/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…615/- (excluding Service Tax and Education Cess) was made during the year. Actual amount realized for the year 2011-12 was Rs.75,08,09,517/- has been recognized as revenue.” 22. And then the AO referred to the case of E. D. Sassoon and Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1984) 26 ITR 27 (SC) as well as the case of the CIT Vs. A Gajapathi Naidu (1964) 53 ITR 114 (SC) and thereafter held as under: “The plain and simple fact is that rent is nothing but a periodical payment paid by the tenant to the landlord for use of land. It accrues as soon as the tenant uses the land for the period. Here the period of use is the factor that dete…

Kolkata Port Trust, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 35, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and COs of the assessee are dismissed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 369/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…615/- (excluding Service Tax and Education Cess) was made during the year. Actual amount realized for the year 2011-12 was Rs.75,08,09,517/- has been recognized as revenue.” 22. And then the AO referred to the case of E. D. Sassoon and Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1984) 26 ITR 27 (SC) as well as the case of the CIT Vs. A Gajapathi Naidu (1964) 53 ITR 114 (SC) and thereafter held as under: “The plain and simple fact is that rent is nothing but a periodical payment paid by the tenant to the landlord for use of land. It accrues as soon as the tenant uses the land for the period. Here the period of use is the factor that dete…

Kolkata Port Trust, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 35, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and COs of the assessee are dismissed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 368/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…615/- (excluding Service Tax and Education Cess) was made during the year. Actual amount realized for the year 2011-12 was Rs.75,08,09,517/- has been recognized as revenue.” 22. And then the AO referred to the case of E. D. Sassoon and Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1984) 26 ITR 27 (SC) as well as the case of the CIT Vs. A Gajapathi Naidu (1964) 53 ITR 114 (SC) and thereafter held as under: “The plain and simple fact is that rent is nothing but a periodical payment paid by the tenant to the landlord for use of land. It accrues as soon as the tenant uses the land for the period. Here the period of use is the factor that dete…

Kolkata Port Trust, Kolkata vs. JCIT, Range - 35, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and COs of the assessee are dismissed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 367/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…615/- (excluding Service Tax and Education Cess) was made during the year. Actual amount realized for the year 2011-12 was Rs.75,08,09,517/- has been recognized as revenue.” 22. And then the AO referred to the case of E. D. Sassoon and Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1984) 26 ITR 27 (SC) as well as the case of the CIT Vs. A Gajapathi Naidu (1964) 53 ITR 114 (SC) and thereafter held as under: “The plain and simple fact is that rent is nothing but a periodical payment paid by the tenant to the landlord for use of land. It accrues as soon as the tenant uses the land for the period. Here the period of use is the factor that dete…

Jt. CIT -(OSD)-2(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Central Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3673/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Central Bank Of India Vs. The Deputy Commissioner 4Th Floor, Of Income Tax – 2(1) Chandermukhi Building Aayakar Bhavan Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021 Pan/Gir No.Aaacc2498P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Jt. Cit (Osd)-2(1)(2) Vs. Central Bank Of India R.No.561, 5Th Floor 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road Chandermukhi Building Mumbai – 400 020 Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Pan/Gir No.Aaacc2498P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Nitesh Joshi Revenue By Shri V. Sreekar Date Of Hearing 16/01/2020 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per M. Balaganesh (A.M): These Cross Appeals In Ita Nos.3739/Mum/2018 & 3673/Mum/2018 For A.Y.2012-13 Arises Out Of The Order By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Mumbai In Appeal No.Cit(A)-3/Dcit2(1) It- 44/Tr.4/16-17 Dated 30/01/2018 (Ld. Cit(A) In Short) Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As Act) Dated 25/03/2014 By The Ld. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax -2(1), Mumbai (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. Ao).

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…ith the sale consideration. There, since the amount to receive such interest vested with the assessee, it is clear that such interest is accrued to the assessee. 7.5 reference is made in this regard to Supreme Court decisions in the case of E. D. Sasoon & Co. 26 ITR 27 and Shri Govardhan Ltd. 69 ITR 675. It has further been held by the Supreme Court in the case of Morvi Inds 82 ITR 835 that once the income is accrued, it is chargeable to tax even if subsequently the same is not actually receive or is forgone. It is thus, clear that the matter is not settled in favour of the assessee. 7.6 Reliance is also pleased…

Income Tax Officer-23(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Indian Corporate Loan Securities Trust 2008 Series 14, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue's appeal for A

ITA 4789/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust 2008 Matru Mandir Series 14 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block 3Rd Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat16786P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust Series Iii Matru Mandir 2009 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat17440L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust Series Matru Mandir 2008 Series 36 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat16925L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Appeals In Ita No.4789/Mum/2017, 4791/Mum/2017 & 4794/Mum/2017 For A.Y.2010-11 Arise Out Of The Order By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-32, Mumbai In Appeal No.Cit(A)- 32/It-604/23(1)(2)/2015-16, Cit(A)-32/It-48/19(3)(2)/2012-13 & Cit(A)-32/It-483/Ito-19(3)(4)/12-13 Respectively Dated 24/04/2017 (Ld. Cit(A) In Short) Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As Act) Dated 26/02/2016, 31/10/2012 Respectively By The Ld. Income Tax Officer – 23(1)(2) & 19(3)(2) Respectively, Mumbai (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. Ao).

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 148Section 161Section 161(1)Section 61

…on) v. Credit Suisse First Boston (Cyprus) Ltd.[2013] 351 ITR 323/[2012] 209 Taxman 234/23 taxmannn.com 424 (Bom.), wherein the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of E.D. Sasson & Co. Ltd. v. CIT[1954] 26 ITR 27, held that when an instrument or an agreement stipulates interest to be payable on a specified date, interest does not accrue to the assessee on any date prior thereto. In view of the above, it is the contention of the assessee that the income accrued only when there was a right to receive the income, as mentioned in the Deed of Assignment, namely…

M/S Le Passage to India Tours & Travels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2098/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastavadr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2098/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Le Passage To India Tours & Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Travels Pvt. Ltd., E-29, Hauz Tax, Circle-15(1), Khas, Main Market, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110016 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacl8370K Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sanjay I. Bara, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.09.2019 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I. Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘I-1’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 2098/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Le Passage to India Tours & Vs Asstt. Commissioner of Income Travels Pvt. Ltd., E-29, Hauz Tax, Circle-15(1), Khas, Main Market, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110016 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACL8370K Assessee by : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Sanjay I. Bara, CIT DR Date of Hearing: 03.09.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 04.09.2019 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal…

M/S Nokia Corporation, New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee on the grounds- a

ITA 5819/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1006/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1007/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 1008/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 5819/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Nokia Corporation Vs Asstt. Director Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), International Taxation, (Formerly Nokia Networks Oy) New Delhi C/O Tarandeep Singh, F-99, Lajpat Nagar-Ii, New Delhi-110024 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcn3748E Ita No. 1236/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1237/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 1238/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Ms. Rashmi Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. G. K. Dhall, CIT DR

…has been created in favour of the assessee by somebody it cannot be said that income has accrued to it or it has a right to receive the income. This proposition has been well settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of E.D. Sassoon Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 27, CIT v. Ashokbhai Chaamanbhai [1965] 56 ITR 42, CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co. [1962] 46 ITR 144 and Godhara Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT, [1997] 225 ITR 746/91 Taxman 351. Further, the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITA Nos. 1006 to 1008, 1236 42 to 1238 & 5819/Del/2010 Nokia Corporation State Bank of Travancore, (supra) whi…

ADIT, New Delhi vs. Nokia Corportion, Gurgaon

In the result, appeals of the assessee on the grounds- a

ITA 1237/DEL/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1006/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1007/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 1008/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 5819/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Nokia Corporation Vs Asstt. Director Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), International Taxation, (Formerly Nokia Networks Oy) New Delhi C/O Tarandeep Singh, F-99, Lajpat Nagar-Ii, New Delhi-110024 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcn3748E Ita No. 1236/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1237/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 1238/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Ms. Rashmi Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. G. K. Dhall, CIT DR

…has been created in favour of the assessee by somebody it cannot be said that income has accrued to it or it has a right to receive the income. This proposition has been well settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of E.D. Sassoon Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 27, CIT v. Ashokbhai Chaamanbhai [1965] 56 ITR 42, CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co. [1962] 46 ITR 144 and Godhara Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT, [1997] 225 ITR 746/91 Taxman 351. Further, the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITA Nos. 1006 to 1008, 1236 42 to 1238 & 5819/Del/2010 Nokia Corporation State Bank of Travancore, (supra) whi…

ADIT, New Delhi vs. Nokia Corportion, Gurgaon

In the result, appeals of the assessee on the grounds- a

ITA 1236/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1006/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1007/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 1008/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 5819/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Nokia Corporation Vs Asstt. Director Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), International Taxation, (Formerly Nokia Networks Oy) New Delhi C/O Tarandeep Singh, F-99, Lajpat Nagar-Ii, New Delhi-110024 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcn3748E Ita No. 1236/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1237/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 1238/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Ms. Rashmi Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. G. K. Dhall, CIT DR

…has been created in favour of the assessee by somebody it cannot be said that income has accrued to it or it has a right to receive the income. This proposition has been well settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of E.D. Sassoon Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 27, CIT v. Ashokbhai Chaamanbhai [1965] 56 ITR 42, CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co. [1962] 46 ITR 144 and Godhara Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT, [1997] 225 ITR 746/91 Taxman 351. Further, the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITA Nos. 1006 to 1008, 1236 42 to 1238 & 5819/Del/2010 Nokia Corporation State Bank of Travancore, (supra) whi…

M/S. Nokia Corporation (Formerly Nokia Networks Oy), New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee on the grounds- a

ITA 1007/DEL/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1006/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1007/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 1008/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 5819/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Nokia Corporation Vs Asstt. Director Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), International Taxation, (Formerly Nokia Networks Oy) New Delhi C/O Tarandeep Singh, F-99, Lajpat Nagar-Ii, New Delhi-110024 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcn3748E Ita No. 1236/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1237/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 1238/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Ms. Rashmi Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. G. K. Dhall, CIT DR

…has been created in favour of the assessee by somebody it cannot be said that income has accrued to it or it has a right to receive the income. This proposition has been well settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of E.D. Sassoon Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 27, CIT v. Ashokbhai Chaamanbhai [1965] 56 ITR 42, CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co. [1962] 46 ITR 144 and Godhara Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT, [1997] 225 ITR 746/91 Taxman 351. Further, the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITA Nos. 1006 to 1008, 1236 42 to 1238 & 5819/Del/2010 Nokia Corporation State Bank of Travancore, (supra) whi…

ADIT, New Delhi vs. Nokia Corportion, Gurgaon

In the result, appeals of the assessee on the grounds- a

ITA 1238/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1006/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1007/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 1008/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 5819/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Nokia Corporation Vs Asstt. Director Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), International Taxation, (Formerly Nokia Networks Oy) New Delhi C/O Tarandeep Singh, F-99, Lajpat Nagar-Ii, New Delhi-110024 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcn3748E Ita No. 1236/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1237/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 1238/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Ms. Rashmi Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. G. K. Dhall, CIT DR

…has been created in favour of the assessee by somebody it cannot be said that income has accrued to it or it has a right to receive the income. This proposition has been well settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of E.D. Sassoon Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 27, CIT v. Ashokbhai Chaamanbhai [1965] 56 ITR 42, CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co. [1962] 46 ITR 144 and Godhara Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT, [1997] 225 ITR 746/91 Taxman 351. Further, the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITA Nos. 1006 to 1008, 1236 42 to 1238 & 5819/Del/2010 Nokia Corporation State Bank of Travancore, (supra) whi…

M/S. Nokia Corporation (Formerly Nokia Networks Oy), New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee on the grounds- a

ITA 1008/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1006/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1007/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 1008/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 5819/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Nokia Corporation Vs Asstt. Director Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), International Taxation, (Formerly Nokia Networks Oy) New Delhi C/O Tarandeep Singh, F-99, Lajpat Nagar-Ii, New Delhi-110024 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcn3748E Ita No. 1236/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1237/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 1238/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Ms. Rashmi Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. G. K. Dhall, CIT DR

…has been created in favour of the assessee by somebody it cannot be said that income has accrued to it or it has a right to receive the income. This proposition has been well settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of E.D. Sassoon Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 27, CIT v. Ashokbhai Chaamanbhai [1965] 56 ITR 42, CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co. [1962] 46 ITR 144 and Godhara Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT, [1997] 225 ITR 746/91 Taxman 351. Further, the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITA Nos. 1006 to 1008, 1236 42 to 1238 & 5819/Del/2010 Nokia Corporation State Bank of Travancore, (supra) whi…

M/S. Nokia Corporation (Formerly Nokia Networks Oy), New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee on the grounds- a

ITA 1006/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1006/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1007/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 1008/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 5819/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Nokia Corporation Vs Asstt. Director Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), International Taxation, (Formerly Nokia Networks Oy) New Delhi C/O Tarandeep Singh, F-99, Lajpat Nagar-Ii, New Delhi-110024 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcn3748E Ita No. 1236/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 1237/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 1238/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Ms. Rashmi Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. G. K. Dhall, CIT DR

…has been created in favour of the assessee by somebody it cannot be said that income has accrued to it or it has a right to receive the income. This proposition has been well settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of E.D. Sassoon Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 27, CIT v. Ashokbhai Chaamanbhai [1965] 56 ITR 42, CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co. [1962] 46 ITR 144 and Godhara Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT, [1997] 225 ITR 746/91 Taxman 351. Further, the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITA Nos. 1006 to 1008, 1236 42 to 1238 & 5819/Del/2010 Nokia Corporation State Bank of Travancore, (supra) whi…

ITO 2(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Mansoon Trading Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2011-12

ITA 1986/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2011-2012 & Assessment Year: 2012-2013 The Income Tax Officer-2(2)(3), M/S Monsoon Trading Co. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, R. No. 542, Commerce House, 4Th Floor, M.K. Road, 3, Currimbhoy Road, Mumbai Vs. Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcm4940K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Joijode (AR)For Respondent: Shri J. Saravanan (CIT DR)
Section 143

…crued. Form the above facts it is clear that appellant has not received any interest from the debts purchased from PNB and IDBI. Further whether appellant had accrued the interest income, for accrual of income Supreme Court in the case of E.D. Sasoon vs. CIT [26 ITR 27] held that “a debt must have come into existence and he must have acquired the right to receive the payment unless and until any contribution is effective in bringing into existence a debt or right to receive the payment or in other words a debitum in presenta and obendeum in future”. It cannot be said that any income has accrued to him. From the a…

Landbase India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 is allowed

ITA 4999/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)

…e same accrues. The concept of “income” and its accrual is judiciously well settled and reference, in this regard, may be made to the following decisions. In the landmark decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of E. D. Sassoon and Co. Ltd. v. CIT: 26 ITR 27, the question was raised as to when the commission for managing agency linked with annual net profits of the managed company accrues or arises. After deliberating on the concept of “accrual of income” as a whole, the Supreme Court laid down that income must be held to accrue at the point of time when the assessee contributed to its accruing or aris…