Emersons Process Management India P.Ltd. v. Addl.CIT

47 SOT 157Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2011#6203 most cited

What is Emersons Process Management India P.Ltd. v. Addl.CIT authority for?

A disallowance of expenditure under section 40A(2)(b) must be based on a finding that the payment was excessive or unreasonable vis-à-vis the fair market value of the services, not merely on the quantum of expenditure.

19

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2022.

Also referred to as

Emersons Process Management India Pvt Ltd · section 40A(2)(b) · excessive payment · unreasonable payment · fair market value · disallowance of expenditure · expenditure · services · ITAT Mumbai

Judgments citing Emersons Process Management India P.Ltd. v. Addl.CIT

B G EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, DDIT/ ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-1, DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

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

ITA 47/DDN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Mayak Kumar, JCIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…ple has also been upheld in the following cases: • IAC v/s. Consolidated Pneumatic Tool Co. (India) Ltd. (15 ITD 564) (ITAT Bom) • CIT v/s. Wolkem India Ltd. (221CTR 767) (Raj. HC) • Emersons Process Management India (P.) Ltd v/s. ACIT (13 taxmann.com 149)/ (47 SOT 157) (ITAT Mum.) 51. Further, reliance is placed on the decision of the ITAT in the case of Gillette India Ltd. v. ACIT (66 taxmann.com 221) wherein, the Hon’ble ITAT noted that the appellant had given details about the inventory written off along with ledger codes whereby the identified items of inventory are written off in the books of account, and…

B G EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, DDIT/ ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-1, DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN, UTTARAKHAND

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

ITA 13/DDN/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Mayak Kumar, JCIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…ple has also been upheld in the following cases: • IAC v/s. Consolidated Pneumatic Tool Co. (India) Ltd. (15 ITD 564) (ITAT Bom) • CIT v/s. Wolkem India Ltd. (221CTR 767) (Raj. HC) • Emersons Process Management India (P.) Ltd v/s. ACIT (13 taxmann.com 149)/ (47 SOT 157) (ITAT Mum.) 51. Further, reliance is placed on the decision of the ITAT in the case of Gillette India Ltd. v. ACIT (66 taxmann.com 221) wherein, the Hon’ble ITAT noted that the appellant had given details about the inventory written off along with ledger codes whereby the identified items of inventory are written off in the books of account, and…

M/S CONTINENTAL AUTOMOTIVE COMPONENTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 129/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year :2014-15 M/S. Continental Automotive Vs. Dcit, Components India Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 2(1)(1), Plot No.53B, Bommasandra Industrial Bengaluru. Area, Hosur Road, Attibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru–560 099. Pan : Aakcs 9578 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Senior Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Mudavathu Harish Chandra Naik, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.03.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Mudavathu Harish Chandra Naik, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 92

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year :2014-15 M/s. Continental Automotive Vs. DCIT, Components India Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 2(1)(1), Plot No.53B, Bommasandra Industrial Bengaluru. Area, Hosur Road, Attibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru–560 099. PAN : AAKCS 9578 C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Senior Advocate Revenue by : Shri. Mudavathu Harish Chandra Naik, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 21.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 29.03.2022 O R D E R Per N.…

AMERICAN POWER CONVERSION (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ADDL.C.I.T., BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated herein above

ITA 1111/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 1111/Bang/2012 Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, CA
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…hi HC)  CIT vs. Wolkem India Private Limited (315 ITR 211) (Raj HC)  Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Carborandum Universal Ltd [1984] 16 Taxman 25 (Mads HC)  Emersons Process Management India (P.) Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax (Mumbai ITAT) (47 SOT 157) On the contrary, the Ld.DR relied on the orders passed by the Ld.AO. We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides in light of records placed before us. We find that this issue needs to be revisited by the Ld.AO in order to verify the details filed having regards to the principles laid down by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of CIT…

M/S CONTINENTAL AUTOMOTIVE COMPONENTS INDIA PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 713/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No. 713/Bang/2017 Assessment year : 2012-13 M/s. Continental Automotive Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Components (India) Pvt. Ltd., of Income Tax, Plot No.53B, Bommasandra Circle 2(1)(1), Industrial Area, Hosur Road, Bengaluru. Attibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bangalore – 560 099. PAN: AAKCS 9578C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri T. Suryanarayana, Advocate Respondent by : Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 29.09.2021 Date…

ACIT 1(1), MUMBAI vs. FORBES & CO.LTD, MUMBAI

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

ITA 5536/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G S Pannu, Vice-And Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Girish Dave (AR)For Respondent: Shri S C Tiwari (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 3Section 37(1)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G S PANNU, VICE-PRESIDENTAND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 5536/Mum/2011 Assessment Year: 2007-08 ACIT 1(1), M/s. Forbes & Co. Ltd., Mumbai. Forbes Building, Vs. Charnjit Singh Rai Marg, Fort, Mumbai 400 001. PAN: AAACF1765A (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 5540/Mum/2011 Assessment Year: 2007-08 M/s. Forbes & Co. Ltd., Dy. CIT OSD, Fort, Mumbai 400 001. Mumbai. Vs. PAN: AAACF1765A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Girish Dave (AR) Respondent By : Shri S C Tiwari (CIT-DR) Date of Hearing : 01.07.2019 Date of Pronouncemen…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. INTERVET INDIA PVT. LTD.,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2008-09 is

ITA 801/PUN/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jun 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.155/Pun/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Danesh BafnaFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru
Section 143(3)

…regularly followed and accepted by the Revenue Authorities, no disallowance is to be made. In support of his submissions, the ld. AR has placed reliance on the following decisions: i) Emerson Process Management (India) Private Limited Vs. ACIT, reported as 47 SOT 157. ii) Inspecting Assistant Commissioner Vs. Consolidated Pneumatic Tool (India) Ltd. reported as 15 ITD 564. The ld. AR asserted that the “Rule of Consistency” demands, the provision which has been accepted by the Department in the earlier ITA Nos.722 & 801/PUN/2014 A.Ys.2008-09 & 2004-05 assessment years and the subsequent assessment years, the s…

INTERVET INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2008-09 is

ITA 722/PUN/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jun 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.155/Pun/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Danesh BafnaFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru
Section 143(3)

…regularly followed and accepted by the Revenue Authorities, no disallowance is to be made. In support of his submissions, the ld. AR has placed reliance on the following decisions: i) Emerson Process Management (India) Private Limited Vs. ACIT, reported as 47 SOT 157. ii) Inspecting Assistant Commissioner Vs. Consolidated Pneumatic Tool (India) Ltd. reported as 15 ITD 564. The ld. AR asserted that the “Rule of Consistency” demands, the provision which has been accepted by the Department in the earlier ITA Nos.722 & 801/PUN/2014 A.Ys.2008-09 & 2004-05 assessment years and the subsequent assessment years, the s…

INTERVET INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(2),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2008-09 is

ITA 155/PUN/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.155/Pun/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Danesh BafnaFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru
Section 143(3)

…regularly followed and accepted by the Revenue Authorities, no disallowance is to be made. In support of his submissions, the ld. AR has placed reliance on the following decisions: i) Emerson Process Management (India) Private Limited Vs. ACIT, reported as 47 SOT 157. ii) Inspecting Assistant Commissioner Vs. Consolidated Pneumatic Tool (India) Ltd. reported as 15 ITD 564. The ld. AR asserted that the “Rule of Consistency” demands, the provision which has been accepted by the Department in the earlier ITA Nos.722 & 801/PUN/2014 A.Ys.2008-09 & 2004-05 assessment years and the subsequent assessment years, the s…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DELHI PRESS SAMACHAR PATRA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 1 of the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1433/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Manish Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anshu Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…011-12 of total expenditure is incurred inherently bad in law because such disallowance can never have reasonable nexus with the market price of services for which the payment is made. Reliance is placed on Emersons Process Management India Pvt. Ltd. Addl.CIT 13 Taxmann.com 149 (Mum). The foundation of disallowance thus must rest on categorical findings that the payment for the services are indeed excessive or unreasonable vis-a-vis fair market value of the services. So far as, expenditure being excessive or unreasonable having regard to the fair market value of the services is concerned, that the fair market val…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S INDO SPANISH TASTY FOODS PVT. LTD.,,

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed whereas

ITA 194/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Mar 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B. Ramakotaiah & Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Smt Neera Malhotra, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…ouncements; 7 ITA No.194(B)/15 & C.O.No.90(B)/15 - Philips Software Centre (P) Ltd., Vs DCIT (2008) 26 SOT 226 (Bag) - Demag Cranes & Components (Ind) Pvt.Ltd Vs DCIT (2012) 17 Taxman.com 190(Pune). - Emerson Process Management (ind.) Pvt.Ltd Vs DCIT (2011) 13 Taxmann.com 149(Mum.) - Acts Advisers Pvt.Ltd.,Vs DCIT TS -688 ITAT- 2012(Del.)TP “Having heard the objections and perusal of the judicial pronouncements on which the reliance has been placed by the assessee are of the view that the working capital adjustment needs to be allowed. The AO is accordingly, directed to allow the working capital adjustment”. W…

M/S ARM EMBEDDED TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1161/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Dec 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri I.P.S. Bindra, CIT(DR-I)
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 92C

…has taken place cannot be taken as a comparable. In this regard, reliance was placed on the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the IT(TP)A Nos.1112/B/10 & 1161/Bang/2011 Page 42 of 78 ITAT in the case of Emersons & Process Management India Pvt. Ltd. v. Addl. CIT 13 Taxmann.com 149. 31. The learned DR relied on the order of the TPO and the DRP on this aspect. 32. We have considered the rival submissions. First we will consider the submission of the Assessee that companies with abnormal margins should not be regarded as comparable. In the case of Quark Systems Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the Special Bench had to deal with case…

M/S. ARM EMBEDDED TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD,BANGALORE vs. DCIT,, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1112/BANG/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Dec 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri I.P.S. Bindra, CIT(DR-I)
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 92C

…has taken place cannot be taken as a comparable. In this regard, reliance was placed on the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the IT(TP)A Nos.1112/B/10 & 1161/Bang/2011 Page 42 of 78 ITAT in the case of Emersons & Process Management India Pvt. Ltd. v. Addl. CIT 13 Taxmann.com 149. 31. The learned DR relied on the order of the TPO and the DRP on this aspect. 32. We have considered the rival submissions. First we will consider the submission of the Assessee that companies with abnormal margins should not be regarded as comparable. In the case of Quark Systems Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the Special Bench had to deal with case…

SIGMA ALDRICH CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

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

ITA 1433/BANG/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P.K.Srihari, Addl.CIT
Section 131Section 143(3)

…nternational BV India vs. ADIT (2010) 40 SOT 11(Mum.Tri.), ii) CIT vs. Wolkem India Ltd. (2009) 315 ITR 211 (Raj.), iii) CIT vs. Hotline Teletube & Components Ltd. (2008) 175 Taxman 286 (Delhi), iv) Emersons Process Management India P.Ltd. vs. Addl.CIT (2011) 47 SOT 157 (Mum.Tri.) v) Alfa Laval India Ltd. vs. DCIT (2003) 133 Taxman 740 (Bom.) (iii) The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, submitted that the AO has clearly brought out in the assessment order that the difference in stock claimed by the assessee was not acceptable at all and therefore the loss on account of such shortage cannot b…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. SIGMA ALDRICH CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

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

ITA 1416/BANG/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P.K.Srihari, Addl.CIT
Section 131Section 143(3)

…nternational BV India vs. ADIT (2010) 40 SOT 11(Mum.Tri.), ii) CIT vs. Wolkem India Ltd. (2009) 315 ITR 211 (Raj.), iii) CIT vs. Hotline Teletube & Components Ltd. (2008) 175 Taxman 286 (Delhi), iv) Emersons Process Management India P.Ltd. vs. Addl.CIT (2011) 47 SOT 157 (Mum.Tri.) v) Alfa Laval India Ltd. vs. DCIT (2003) 133 Taxman 740 (Bom.) (iii) The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, submitted that the AO has clearly brought out in the assessment order that the difference in stock claimed by the assessee was not acceptable at all and therefore the loss on account of such shortage cannot b…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. SIGMA ALDRICH CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

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

ITA 1399/BANG/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P.K.Srihari, Addl.CIT
Section 131Section 143(3)

…nternational BV India vs. ADIT (2010) 40 SOT 11(Mum.Tri.), ii) CIT vs. Wolkem India Ltd. (2009) 315 ITR 211 (Raj.), iii) CIT vs. Hotline Teletube & Components Ltd. (2008) 175 Taxman 286 (Delhi), iv) Emersons Process Management India P.Ltd. vs. Addl.CIT (2011) 47 SOT 157 (Mum.Tri.) v) Alfa Laval India Ltd. vs. DCIT (2003) 133 Taxman 740 (Bom.) (iii) The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, submitted that the AO has clearly brought out in the assessment order that the difference in stock claimed by the assessee was not acceptable at all and therefore the loss on account of such shortage cannot b…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S SIGMA ALDRICH CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

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

ITA 388/BANG/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P.K.Srihari, Addl.CIT
Section 131Section 143(3)

…nternational BV India vs. ADIT (2010) 40 SOT 11(Mum.Tri.), ii) CIT vs. Wolkem India Ltd. (2009) 315 ITR 211 (Raj.), iii) CIT vs. Hotline Teletube & Components Ltd. (2008) 175 Taxman 286 (Delhi), iv) Emersons Process Management India P.Ltd. vs. Addl.CIT (2011) 47 SOT 157 (Mum.Tri.) v) Alfa Laval India Ltd. vs. DCIT (2003) 133 Taxman 740 (Bom.) (iii) The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, submitted that the AO has clearly brought out in the assessment order that the difference in stock claimed by the assessee was not acceptable at all and therefore the loss on account of such shortage cannot b…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S SIGMA ALDRICH CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

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

ITA 387/BANG/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P.K.Srihari, Addl.CIT
Section 131Section 143(3)

…nternational BV India vs. ADIT (2010) 40 SOT 11(Mum.Tri.), ii) CIT vs. Wolkem India Ltd. (2009) 315 ITR 211 (Raj.), iii) CIT vs. Hotline Teletube & Components Ltd. (2008) 175 Taxman 286 (Delhi), iv) Emersons Process Management India P.Ltd. vs. Addl.CIT (2011) 47 SOT 157 (Mum.Tri.) v) Alfa Laval India Ltd. vs. DCIT (2003) 133 Taxman 740 (Bom.) (iii) The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, submitted that the AO has clearly brought out in the assessment order that the difference in stock claimed by the assessee was not acceptable at all and therefore the loss on account of such shortage cannot b…

M/S SIGMA ALDRICH CHEMICALS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ADDL..CI.T., BANGALORE

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

ITA 268/BANG/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P.K.Srihari, Addl.CIT
Section 131Section 143(3)

…nternational BV India vs. ADIT (2010) 40 SOT 11(Mum.Tri.), ii) CIT vs. Wolkem India Ltd. (2009) 315 ITR 211 (Raj.), iii) CIT vs. Hotline Teletube & Components Ltd. (2008) 175 Taxman 286 (Delhi), iv) Emersons Process Management India P.Ltd. vs. Addl.CIT (2011) 47 SOT 157 (Mum.Tri.) v) Alfa Laval India Ltd. vs. DCIT (2003) 133 Taxman 740 (Bom.) (iii) The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, submitted that the AO has clearly brought out in the assessment order that the difference in stock claimed by the assessee was not acceptable at all and therefore the loss on account of such shortage cannot b…

Emersons Process Management India P.Ltd. v. Addl.CIT (47 SOT 157) — Cited in 19 Judgments | BharatTax