Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT

225 ITR 746Supreme Court of India1997#130 most cited

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.

514

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT · income accrual · hypothetical income · actual receipt · unconfirmed claims · income tax

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 40A(3)Section 37(1)Section 142(2A)Section 153A

Issues it is cited on

section 10(31a)section 100section 76undisclosed foreign income and assetssection 142(2c)section 149(1)(c)section 4(2)section 153b(1)(b)section 201(3)section 158basection 153b(1)rectification under section 154

Judgments citing Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Paragon Xt, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 363/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR
Section 194C

…oposition that the income cannot be taxed on hypothetical basis, and it is only the real income that is to be brought to tax. In this behalf, we also rely, giving below summary of the ratio laid down, on the following decisions) CIT vs. Godhra Electricity Co. 225 ITR 746 (SC), The view expressed was that if income does not result at all, there cannot be any tax and that if an income has not materialized, then merely an entry made about a hypothetical income by following book keeping methods, the liability to tax cannot be attracted. [Emphasis in the above submission is provided by me.] 5.12 In view of above disc…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Anil Kumar Sharma, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Department is Allowed for statistical purposes and Cross-Objection of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 6780/DEL/2013[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri O.P. Kant, A.M.

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT-D.R
Section 2(24)(iv)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “D” : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. AND SHRI O.P. KANT, A.M. ITA.No.6780/Del./2013 Assessment Year 2011-2012 The ACIT, Central Circle-7, Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Room No.363, E-2, ARA 83, AGCR Enclave, New vs. Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. Karkardooma, Delhi-032 New Delhi. PAN AUTPS1076K (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.240/Del./2014 Arising out of ITA.No.6780/Del./2013 - Assessment Year 2011-2012 Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, The ACIT, Central Circle- 83, AGCR Enclave, New 7, Room No.363, E-2, vs. Karkardooma, Delhi-032 ARA Centre, Jhandewalan PAN AUTPS…

M/S.Combined Foods P. Ltd, Cochin vs. The ACIT, Cochin

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 155/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Combined Foods Private The Principal Commissioner Of Limited, Income-Tax, Kochi-1. 28/3030, Elamkulam, Cheruparambath Road, Kadavanthara, Kochi-682 020. [Pan:Aaacc 9366N] Assessee-Appellant Revenue-Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 36(1)(iii)Section 43(1)

…) Ltd. – 236 ITR 518 (SC); (d) Star India P. Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT – 311 ITR (ST) 235 (Mumbai). (e) Govind Prasad Prabhu Nath – 171 ITR 417 (All.); (f) Hindustan Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. – 161 ITR 524 (SC); (g) Ace Builders Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT – 225 ITR 746 (SC); (h) Mantra Tanta Yantra Vigyan vs. CIT – 300 ITR 140 (Raj.); and I.T.A. No.155 /Coch/2017 (i) Guardian Industries Corpn. vs. Assistant Director of Income- tax – 7 DTR 594 (Del.). are also supports the plea of the assessee. The accrual has been dealt with in the relied judgments. Hence, under the given set of facts and circumstances, we b…

ACIT Cir, 31 (1) Room No. 217, New Delhi vs. Rngs Consortium, New Delhi

In the result ITA No. 153/Del/2009 is dismissed

ITA 2238/DEL/2008[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2018AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiasst Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Rngs Consortium, Tax, 8, Aradhana Colony, Circle-31(1), Cr Building, Ip Sector-13, Rk Puram, New Estate, New Delhi Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. M/S. Expotec International Circle-11(1), Ltd, 8, Aradhana Colony, Rk New Delhi Puram, Sector-13, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 145(3)Section 44A

…ncome. Unless, the assessee acquired that right it merely remains a claim and not income. The mere raising a claim or a bill does not by itself create any legally enforceable right to receive any income. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Godhra Electricity Vs. CIt 225 ITR 746 has held that unilateral increase in the rates of electricity shown as receipt in the books which could be realized due to protracted litigation did not result in an accrual of income, hence, such amount was not assessable. Therefore, in the present case there was no certainty of realization of the claim of the assessee as it was referred to arbi…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Chittranjan Dua, New Delhi

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

ITA 5884/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.D. Agarwal & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2011-12 Acit, Circle 61(1), Vs Shri Chittranjan Dua, New Delhi 88, Sunder Nagar,New Delhi. Pqa: Aacpj6311R Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Chittranjan Dua, Vs Acit, Circle 61(1), 88, Sunder Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi. Pqa: Aacpj6311R Appellant Respondent Assessee By S/Shri Pradeep Dinodia, Ca & R.K. Kapoor, Ca Revenue By Shri B.S. Anant, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 3.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 29.10.2018

…nterest on the premise that the assessee was entitled to this amount but had voluntarily foregone to receive the same, as such, there is an element of diversion of that income and consequently, is liable to tax. In the case of Godhra Electric Co. Ltd. Vs CIT, 225 ITR 746 (SC), the Hon’ble Apex Court held that the Income-tact Act takes into account two points of time at which the liability to tax is attracted viz. the accrual of income or its receipt, but the substance of the matter is the “income”. If income does not result at all, there can be no tax even though it is possible to reach a hypothetical income whic…

Mr. Chittranjan Dua, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5803/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.D. Agarwal & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2011-12 Acit, Circle 61(1), Vs Shri Chittranjan Dua, New Delhi 88, Sunder Nagar,New Delhi. Pqa: Aacpj6311R Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Chittranjan Dua, Vs Acit, Circle 61(1), 88, Sunder Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi. Pqa: Aacpj6311R Appellant Respondent Assessee By S/Shri Pradeep Dinodia, Ca & R.K. Kapoor, Ca Revenue By Shri B.S. Anant, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 3.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 29.10.2018

…nterest on the premise that the assessee was entitled to this amount but had voluntarily foregone to receive the same, as such, there is an element of diversion of that income and consequently, is liable to tax. In the case of Godhra Electric Co. Ltd. Vs CIT, 225 ITR 746 (SC), the Hon’ble Apex Court held that the Income-tact Act takes into account two points of time at which the liability to tax is attracted viz. the accrual of income or its receipt, but the substance of the matter is the “income”. If income does not result at all, there can be no tax even though it is possible to reach a hypothetical income whic…

Shelter Projects Ltd., Kolkata vs. CIT, (A)-XII, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 737/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Oct 2018AY 2009-2010
Section 47

…sly neither accrual nor/ receipt of income, even though an entry to that effect might, incineration circumstances, have been made in the books of account." ­ This pronouncement was applied by the Supreme Court in Godhra Electricity Co. Limited v. CIT, (1997) 225 ITR 746 (SC) and followed by the Calcutta High Court in CIT v. Balarampur Commercial Enterprises Limited,(2003) 262 ITR 439 (CaL). 45. Relying upon decision in Messrs Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. 's case (supra), the Supreme Court in CIT v. Excel Industries Limited (2013) 358 ITR 295 (SC) held that income tax cannot be levied on hypothetical income. Income…

Dy. C.I.T.2(1), Raipur (Cg) vs. Shri Taral Modi, Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 314/BIL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 Oct 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2006-07 Dcit- 2(1), Abhishek Atlani, Raipur (Cg). Atlani Bunglow, Khamardih Road, Vs. Shankar Nagar, Raipur (Cg).

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153C

…d not to have resulted at all, there is obviously neither accrual nor receipt of income, even though an entry to that effect might, in certain circumstances, have been made in the books of account. 11.. In the case of Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 746 (SC) enhanced rates shown as receipt in accounts but not realized due to litigation and takeover of the company by Government was held by the Supreme Court as not accruing to the assessee on real income basis in the following words: "The question whether there was real accrual of income to the assessee-company in respect of the enhanced charges f…

I.T.O. Ward -1(1), Raipur (Cg) vs. M/S Cmdc Icpl Coal Ltd, Raipur (Cg)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 271/BIL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2011-12 Ito, Ward- 1(1), Cmdc Icpl Coal Ltd., Raipur (Cg). Rajbandha Maidan, G. E. Road, Vs. Raipur (Cg).

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajit Kumar Laskar, DR

…rom other sources.” 9. In the case of Bokaro Steel Limited (supra), Hon’ble Apex Court also considered the ratio of the judgment in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. vs C.I.T. (supra) and Godhra Electricity Company Ltd. vs C.I.T.(1997) 225 ITR 746 (SC) and held as under:- “The appellant, however, relied upon the decision of this court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 172. That case dealt with the question whether investment of borrowed funds prior to commencement of business, resulting in earning of interest by the assessee would amount to the asses…

Dy. C.I.T.2(1), Raipur (Cg) vs. Shri Suresh Atlani, Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 186/BIL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 Oct 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2006-07 Dcit- 2(1), Abhishek Atlani, Raipur (Cg). Atlani Bunglow, Khamardih Road, Vs. Shankar Nagar, Raipur (Cg).

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153C

…d not to have resulted at all, there is obviously neither accrual nor receipt of income, even though an entry to that effect might, in certain circumstances, have been made in the books of account. 11.. In the case of Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 746 (SC) enhanced rates shown as receipt in accounts but not realized due to litigation and takeover of the company by Government was held by the Supreme Court as not accruing to the assessee on real income basis in the following words: "The question whether there was real accrual of income to the assessee-company in respect of the enhanced charges f…

Dy. C.I.T.2(1), Raipur (Cg) vs. Abhishek Atlani, Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 185/BIL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 Oct 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2006-07 Dcit- 2(1), Abhishek Atlani, Raipur (Cg). Atlani Bunglow, Khamardih Road, Vs. Shankar Nagar, Raipur (Cg).

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153C

…d not to have resulted at all, there is obviously neither accrual nor receipt of income, even though an entry to that effect might, in certain circumstances, have been made in the books of account. 11.. In the case of Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 746 (SC) enhanced rates shown as receipt in accounts but not realized due to litigation and takeover of the company by Government was held by the Supreme Court as not accruing to the assessee on real income basis in the following words: "The question whether there was real accrual of income to the assessee-company in respect of the enhanced charges f…

Asst CIT Cir 6(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Ask Investment Managers P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical

ITA 534/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year 2012-13 Acit M/S Ask Investment Circle-6(1)(2), Managers Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ R. No.536, 5Th Floor, 1St Floor Bandbox House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Dr. Ab Road, Worli, M. K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400030 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aafca2302P Shri Nitin Waghmode-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri J.D. Mistri Sr. Advocate

Section 115JSection 14A

…the ground of interest being not charged by assessee. Ld. counsel has relied on following decisions for the proposition that only real income can be taxed and not notional income. - Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. 46 ITR 144 (SC); - Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. . CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC); - CIT vs. A. Raman & Co. 67 ITR 11(SC); - UCO Bank v. CIT 237 ITR 889 (SC); - Airport Authority of India v. CIT 340 ITR 407 (Del. )(FB); - CIT v. Motor Credit Co. P. Ltd. 127 ITR 572 (Mad.); - JCIT v. Pankaj Oxygen Ltd. 78 TTJ 119 (Nag.) - ACIT vs. Manick Chand Damani 72 TTJ 675 (Cal.). 13.1. After hearing both the parties, we do not find a…

Mr.Dinesh Kumar, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 544/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodiashri Dinesh Kumar, No.204, Ii Floor, Suraj Ganga Arcade, No.332/7, 14Th Cross, Jayanagar Ii Block, Bengaluru-560 011. … Appellant Pan:Aarpk 5648 P Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 7(2)(1), Bengaluru. … Respondent Appellant By : Shri K.Y.Ningoji Rao, Ca. Respondent By : Smt.Padmameenakshi, Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 10/07/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/09/2018 O R D E R Per Arun Kumar Garodia, Jm: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Which Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A)-10, Bengaluru, Dated 02/01/2018 For The Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: Page 2 Of 6

For Appellant: Shri K.Y.Ningoji Rao, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Padmameenakshi, JCIT(DR)
Section 53ASection 54

…ssion thereof to the said company in part performance of the said agreement as contemplated u/s 53A of the Transfer of Property Act 1882. He placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (225 ITR 746)(SC) in support of his contention that if income does not result at all, there cannot be a tax even though in book keeping, an entry is made as hypothetical income which does not materialize. The ld.AR of the assessee submitted that since assessee could not sell the agricultural land to a company without converting the same into non-agricultural…

Canara Bank, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2014-15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1899/BANG/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Neera Malhotra, CIT (D.R)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH ‘ B ’ BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. & Asst. Year Appellant Respondent 1881/Bang/2017 Addl./Jt. Commissioner M/s. Canara Bank 2014-15 of Income Tax, LTU, Head Office, No.112, Bangalore. J C Road, Town Hall, Bangalore. 1899/Bang/2017 Canara Bank, Addl./Jt. Commissioner 2014-15 Head Office, of Income Tax, LTU, Bangalore. Bangalore. 1882/Bang/2017 Addl./Jt. Commissioner Canara Bank, 2013-14 of Income Tax, LTU, Head Office, Bangalore. Bangalore. 1900/Bang/2017 Canara Bank, Addl./Jt. Commissioner 20…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (4) vs. M/S Chamundi Winery and Distillery

ITA/172/2017HC Karnataka25 Sept 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260

…he said List which were read in little more detail by Mr. A. Shankar before the Court are dealt with herein below:- Sl.No CASE LAWS ON REAL INCOME Page No. 1 CIT Vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. 46 ITR 144 (SC) 01-03 2 Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd Vs. CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC) 04-11 13 CIT Vs. Chemosyn Ltd 371 ITR 427 (Bom) 75-79 14 Poorna Electric Supply Co. Ltd Vs. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 521 (SC) 80-85 17 CIT Vs. Chamanlal Mangaldas & Co. 39 ITR 8 (SC) 101-104 18 CIT Vs. Chamanlal Mangaldas & Co. 29 ITR 987 (Bom) 105-110 19 CIT Vs. Harivallabhadas Kalidas & Co. 39 ITR 1 (SC) 111-115 28 CIT Vs.…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Chamundi Winery and Distillery

ITA/467/2015HC Karnataka25 Sept 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260

…he said List which were read in little more detail by Mr. A. Shankar before the Court are dealt with herein below:- Sl.No CASE LAWS ON REAL INCOME Page No. 1 CIT Vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. 46 ITR 144 (SC) 01-03 2 Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd Vs. CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC) 04-11 13 CIT Vs. Chemosyn Ltd 371 ITR 427 (Bom) 75-79 14 Poorna Electric Supply Co. Ltd Vs. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 521 (SC) 80-85 17 CIT Vs. Chamanlal Mangaldas & Co. 39 ITR 8 (SC) 101-104 18 CIT Vs. Chamanlal Mangaldas & Co. 29 ITR 987 (Bom) 105-110 19 CIT Vs. Harivallabhadas Kalidas & Co. 39 ITR 1 (SC) 111-115 28 CIT Vs.…

The DCIT, Cochin vs. M/S. Creampacks(P) Ltd, Cochin

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 608/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.608/Coch/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Cream Packs Private Ltd., Income-Tax, Circle-1(1), Kochi. 28/3030, Cheruparambath Road, Elamkulam, Kadavanthara, Kochi-682 020. [Pan:Aaacc 9368C]

…5 I.T.A. Nos. 73-79/Coch/2014 (d) Star India P. Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT – 311 ITR (ST) 235 (Mumbai). (e) Govind Prasad Prabhu Nath – 171 ITR 417 (All.); (f) Hindustan Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. – 161 ITR 524 (SC); (g) Ace Builders Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT – 225 ITR 746 (SC); (h) Mantra Tanta Yantra Vigyan vs. CIT – 300 ITR 140 (Raj.); and (i) Guardian Industries Corpn. vs. Assistant Director of Income-tax – 7 DTR 594 (Del.). are also supports the plea of the assessee. The accrual has been dealt with in the relied judgments. Hence, under the given set of facts and circumstances, we by relying on the above decisi…

ACIT, Noida vs. M/S. Jubilant Enpro P. Ltd., Noida

In the result appeal filed by Revenue stands dismissed and Cross Objection by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3485/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Smt. Beena A Pillaiay: 2010-11 Acit, Circle 1 Vs. M/S Jubilant Enpro P Ltd. Noida 201 301 Plot No.1-A Sector 16 A Noida 201 301 Pan: Aaace0653L

For Appellant: Sh. Gaurav Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Amit Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 14ASection 28

…s by deleting the addition of Rs.5,79,60,145/- made on account of duty credit scrips received but not utilized, by following the order of CIT(A)VII, Delhi who had himself relied on the decision of Hon’ble apex court in Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. Vs C1T[1997] 225 ITR 746, a case wherein the issue dealt with is not even distantly similar to the one involved in this case. 2. The CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts by deleting the addition of Rs.5,79,60,145/- made on account of duty credit scrips received but not utilized by not appreciating that such duty credit scrips fetch free foreign exchange to the ass…

Nokia Net Works Nokia Group Finland vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the issues which have been remanded back by the Hon'ble High Court to this Tribunal stands decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue

ITA 1964/DEL/2001[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jun 2018AY 1998-1999

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini, Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Amit SrivastavaFor Respondent: Shri T.M. Shiv Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 3

…ell settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of E. D. Sassoon Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT, (1954) 26 ITR 27 (SC), CIT vs. Ashokbhai Chaamanbhai, (1965) 56 ITR 42, CIT vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co, (1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC) and Godhara Electricity Company Ltd. Vs. CIT, 225 ITR 746. Further, the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State Bank of Travancore, reported in (1986) 158 ITR 102 (SC) which has been relied upon by the ld. CIT (A), has not been treated to be correct enunciation of law by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Godhara Electricity Company Ltd. v/s. CIT (supra) and UCO Bank vs. CIT (supra)…

Nokia Net Works Nokia Gruop Finland vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the issues which have been remanded back by the Hon'ble High Court to this Tribunal stands decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue

ITA 1963/DEL/2001[1997-1998]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jun 2018AY 1997-1998

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini, Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Amit SrivastavaFor Respondent: Shri T.M. Shiv Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 3

…ell settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of E. D. Sassoon Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT, (1954) 26 ITR 27 (SC), CIT vs. Ashokbhai Chaamanbhai, (1965) 56 ITR 42, CIT vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co, (1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC) and Godhara Electricity Company Ltd. Vs. CIT, 225 ITR 746. Further, the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State Bank of Travancore, reported in (1986) 158 ITR 102 (SC) which has been relied upon by the ld. CIT (A), has not been treated to be correct enunciation of law by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Godhara Electricity Company Ltd. v/s. CIT (supra) and UCO Bank vs. CIT (supra)…