Ester Industries Ltd. v. CIT

Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri Inturi Rama Rao Assessment Year : 2005-06 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Vs. Assistant Cit, Bses Bhawan, Nehru Place, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Deputy Cit, Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Circle 3(1), Bses Bhavan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2006-07 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Vs. Assistant Cit, Bses Bhawan, Nehru Place, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Cit, Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Circle 3(1), Bses Bhavan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent)

…arma vs. CIT: 66 ITR 647 (All.) − CIT vs. Bharat General Re-Insurance Co. Ltd.: 81 ITR 303(Del.) − Abdul Qayume V. CIT: 184 ITR 404 (All.) − Smt Snehlata Jain vs. CIT: 192 CTR 50 (J&K) − S.R. Koshti vs. CIT: 276 ITR 165 (Guj.) − Ester Industries Ltd. vs. CIT: 316 ITR 260 (Del.) − DCIT vs. Sanmukhdas Wadhwani: 85 ITD 734 (Nag) − Jyotsana Holding (P) Ltd. vs. ITO: 37 ITD 430 (Del.) − Indo Java & Co. vs. IAC: 30 ITD 161 (Delhi SB) 14.15 Further, it is also settled law that the purpose of the assessment is to compute income in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The assessing officer is therefore, even otherwi…

Commissioner of Income Tax-VI vs. Vrm India Ltd

…nce. Particulars in the tax audit report are not restricting the status of the assessee as to the contractors only. Even admission of the assessee is held to be not conclusive as held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Faster Industries Ltd. 316 ITR 260. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Staluj Cotton Mills -116 ITR 1 observed that the way in which entries are made by an assessee in his books of account is not determinative of the question whether the assessee has earned any profit or suffered any loss. The assessee may, by making entries which are not in conformity with the proper pri…

Commissioner of Income Tax-VI vs. Vrm India Ltd

…nce. Particulars in the tax audit report are not restricting the status of the assessee as to the contractors only. Even admission of the assessee is held to be not conclusive as held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Faster Industries Ltd. 316 ITR 260. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Staluj Cotton Mills -116 ITR 1 observed that the way in which entries are made by an assessee in his books of account is not determinative of the question whether the assessee has earned any profit or suffered any loss. The assessee may, by making entries which are not in conformity with the proper pri…

Commissioner of Income Tax-VI vs. Vrm India Ltd

…nce. Particulars in the tax audit report are not restricting the status of the assessee as to the contractors only. Even admission of the assessee is held to be not conclusive as held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Faster Industries Ltd. 316 ITR 260. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Staluj Cotton Mills -116 ITR 1 observed that the way in which entries are made by an assessee in his books of account is not determinative of the question whether the assessee has earned any profit or suffered any loss. The assessee may, by making entries which are not in conformity with the proper pri…

Bhagirath Aggarwal

The appeal is dismissed

…ITA 28/2012 Page 1 of 12 THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 22.01.2013 + ITA 28/2012 BHAGIRATH AGGARWAL ..... Appellant versus CIT ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr O.S. Bajpai, Sr.Adv. with Mr Piyush Kaushik, Mr Shashwat Bajpai and Ms Manasvini Bajpai, Advs. For the Respondent : Ms Suruchi Aggarwal and Mr Sanjeev Rajpal, sr. standing counsels CORAM:- HON’BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R.V.E…

Bhagirath Aggarwal

The appeal is dismissed

…ITA 28/2012 Page 1 of 12 THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 22.01.2013 + ITA 28/2012 BHAGIRATH AGGARWAL ..... Appellant versus CIT ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr O.S. Bajpai, Sr.Adv. with Mr Piyush Kaushik, Mr Shashwat Bajpai and Ms Manasvini Bajpai, Advs. For the Respondent : Ms Suruchi Aggarwal and Mr Sanjeev Rajpal, sr. standing counsels CORAM:- HON’BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R.V.E…