What is Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Income is not taxable until it actually accrues or is received; hypothetical income, based on a mere claim not yet settled, is not chargeable to tax.

How many judgments cite Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT?

514 judgments on BharatTax cite Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT (225 ITR 746), spanning 2009 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 14A, Section 40A(3), Section 37(1).

Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT (225 ITR 746)

ACIT Circle 1, Kumbakonam vs. City Union Bank Limited, Kumbakonam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA 1316/CHNY/2018

ITA 1315/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri. S. Ananthan,C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Sailendra Mamidi, IRS

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 40Section 41(1)

…td. v. CIT [1960] 39 ITR 706, Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1965] 57 ITR 521, Morvi Industries Ltd. v. CIT, [1971] 82 ITR 835, State Bank of Travancore v. CIT [1986] 158 ITR 102 (SC), Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd., v. Commissioner of Income-tax, [1997] 225 ITR 746 held that the assessee is taxable for interest on securities only on specified dates when it becomes due for payment, in view of third proviso to Section 145(1) of the Act, which was in force during the relevant assessment years. 4.2. In view of the ratio laid down in the decisions referred supra, the first substantial question of law raised in T…

City Union Bank Limited, Kumbakonam vs. ACIT Circle 1, Kumbakonam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA 1316/CHNY/2018

ITA 1130/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri. S. Ananthan,C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Sailendra Mamidi, IRS

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 40Section 41(1)

…td. v. CIT [1960] 39 ITR 706, Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1965] 57 ITR 521, Morvi Industries Ltd. v. CIT, [1971] 82 ITR 835, State Bank of Travancore v. CIT [1986] 158 ITR 102 (SC), Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd., v. Commissioner of Income-tax, [1997] 225 ITR 746 held that the assessee is taxable for interest on securities only on specified dates when it becomes due for payment, in view of third proviso to Section 145(1) of the Act, which was in force during the relevant assessment years. 4.2. In view of the ratio laid down in the decisions referred supra, the first substantial question of law raised in T…

City Union Bank Limited, Kumbakonam vs. ACIT Circle 1, Kumbakonam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA 1316/CHNY/2018

ITA 1129/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri. S. Ananthan,C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Sailendra Mamidi, IRS

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 40Section 41(1)

…td. v. CIT [1960] 39 ITR 706, Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1965] 57 ITR 521, Morvi Industries Ltd. v. CIT, [1971] 82 ITR 835, State Bank of Travancore v. CIT [1986] 158 ITR 102 (SC), Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd., v. Commissioner of Income-tax, [1997] 225 ITR 746 held that the assessee is taxable for interest on securities only on specified dates when it becomes due for payment, in view of third proviso to Section 145(1) of the Act, which was in force during the relevant assessment years. 4.2. In view of the ratio laid down in the decisions referred supra, the first substantial question of law raised in T…

The Peerless Gen.Fin and Investment Company Limited vs. Commnr. of Income Tax

The appeal is allowed

C.A. No.-001265-001265 - 2007Supreme Court09 Jul 2019

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

…t is well settled in income-tax law that book keeping entries are not decisive or determinative of the true nature of the entries as held by the Supreme Court in CIT vs. India Discount Co. Ltd. [1970] 75 ITR 191 and in Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 746 (SC). It has been held in those decisions that the court has to see the true nature of the receipts and not go only by the entry in the books of account. We agree with the Tribunal that these deposits are really capital receipts and not revenue receipts. In Chowringhee Sales Bureau P. Ltd. V. CIT [1973] 87 ITR 542 (SC) which w…

Red Fort Shahjahan Properties Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-21(1), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed with above direction

ITA 7239/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishired Fort Shahjahan Properties Vs. Dcit, Pvt. Ltd, Circle-21(1), N-226, Lgf, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aadcr6247E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

Section 143Section 144Section 144CSection 92C(3)Section 92D

…ed by the appellant to red Fort Akbar. He highlighted that it is trite law that tax can be imposed only on real income and not on notional income. He further relied upon several judicial precedent as under:- a. Godhra electricity Co Ltd vs CIT (Supreme Court) 225 ITR 746 b. CIT vs Soorji Vallabhdas & company 46 ITR 144 c. CIT vs Arihant avenues and credit Ltd (Gujarat) 217 Taxman 105 d. Maruti securities Ltd vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (Hyderabad) ITA number 1651/HYD/2017. e. Seth Madan Lal Modi vs CIT (Delhi) 261 ITR 49 f. CIT vs Modipon Ltd 171 ITR 658 g. Highway Construction Co Private Limited vs CIT…

Mdlr Estates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8215/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 142Section 144Section 153ASection 264

…termine the taxability of the sum received by partner from firm :- 1) Roshan Di Hatti Vs. CIT 107 ITR 938 (SC) 2) State bank of Travancore Vs. CIT 158 ITR 102 (SC) 3) Income Tax Officer Vs. Ch. Atchaiah 218 ITR 239 (SC) 4) Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC) 19. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dynamic Enterprises he submitted that the Hon’ble High Court in the said decision has held that where retiring partner took cash towards value of his share in partnership firm and there was no distribution of capital assets among partners, there was no trans…

Mdlr Builders P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8214/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 142Section 144Section 153ASection 264

…termine the taxability of the sum received by partner from firm :- 1) Roshan Di Hatti Vs. CIT 107 ITR 938 (SC) 2) State bank of Travancore Vs. CIT 158 ITR 102 (SC) 3) Income Tax Officer Vs. Ch. Atchaiah 218 ITR 239 (SC) 4) Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC) 19. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dynamic Enterprises he submitted that the Hon’ble High Court in the said decision has held that where retiring partner took cash towards value of his share in partnership firm and there was no distribution of capital assets among partners, there was no trans…

Ajb Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

ITA 7386/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri L.P. Sahu, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.V. Gupta, Sr. D.R

Section 115JSection 2(14)Section 45

…t in the statement of case or to produce additional evidence in the Supreme Court for controverting those findings.” 23 ITA.No.7386/Del./2018 M/s. AJB Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. 6.3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd., 225 ITR 746 held as under : “Under the Act, income chargeable to tax is the income that is received or is deemed to be received in India in the previous year relevant to the year for which assessment is made or the income that accrues or arise or is deemed to accrue or arise in India during such year. The computation of such income is to be made in accordan…

Matoshree Realtors, Mumbai vs. ITO 21(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 951/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.951/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. Matoshree Realtors बिधम/ Ito-21(2)(2) Piramal Chambers, 1St Floor, B/202, Matoshree Tower, Vs. Padmabai Thakkar Marg, Lal Baugh, Parel, Mumbai- Mahim, Mumbai-400016. 400012. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aamfm5625M (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Dr. K. Shivram/ Ms. Neelam C. Jadhav Revenue By: सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/05/2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/05/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 14.12.2016 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -33, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2010- 11. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Sustaining The Addition Of Rs.110,38,680/- Made By The Ao On Account Of Undisclosed Interest Income. A.Y.2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Dr. K. Shivram/ Ms. Neelam

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147

…ance which lies at page no. 31 of the paper book. This is the factual position and the controversy is required to be adjudicated in view of the law relied by the Ld. Representative of the assessee mentioned above i.e Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 746 (SC) and CIT Vs. Excel Industries Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 295 (SC). Therefore, in the said circumstances, we are of the view that the document issued by the bank and the closing balance of the assessee is further liable to be considered in the light of the law relied by the assessee (supra) in the interest of justice. Therefore, we set aside the find…

The ACIT, Circle-5, Ahmedabad vs. M/S Redex Protech P Ltd, Ahmedabad

ITA 462/AHD/2002[95-96]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 May 2019

Bench: The Tribunal Against Order Of The Ld.Cit(A)-Xi, Ahmedabad Dated 31.12.2001 Passed For The Asstt.Year 1995- 96. On Receipt Of Notice In The Revenue’S Appeal, The Assessee Has Filed Cross Objection Bearing No.28/Ahd/2002. Ita No.462/Ahd/2002 & Others With Co (Special Bench)

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar with Shri P.M. Mehta and Shri Parin ShahFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Sharma, CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 249(4)Section 255(4)Section 264Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘"वशेष "यायपीठ’ अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SPECIAL BENCH”, AHMEDABAD जि"टस "ी पी.पी.भ", अ"य", "ी राजपाल यादव, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी "द"प कुमार के"डया, लेखा सद"य के सम" With CO No.28/Ahd/2002 AND "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 1995-96 ACIT, Cir.5 Redex Protech P.Ltd. Ahmedabad. A/5, Jaymala House Vs. Opp: Gandhigram Rly. Station Ahmedabad. (Applicant) (Responent) Revenue by : Shri O.P. Sharma, CIT-DR Shri Vinod Tanwani,Sr.DR Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr.DR Assessee by : Shri S.N. Soparkar with Shri P.M. Mehta and Shri Parin Shah सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 13/02/2019 घोषणा क" त…