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 366,470 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

Anuj Kumar, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 62/JPR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Apr 2017AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal CAFor Respondent: Smt. Poonam Rai, DCIT-. DR
Section 68

…tled law that only real income can be taxed, hypothetical income cannot be taxed nor income cannot be taxed in vacuum as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case E.D. Sasoon & Co. & Ors. vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 27 and Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 746. ‘’ 2.3 On the other hand, the ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A). 2.4 I have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. it is noted that that the ld. CIT(A) has accepted the source of deposit of Rs. 25 lacs made in the bank account of the assessee being sale proceeds of the agricultural land sold by…

Maestro Ventures P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(2), Mumbai

ITA 7270/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2011-12
For Appellant: S/Shri Ronak G. Doshi & Manthan Shah-ARsFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen-DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 254(1)

…orked out the same at 8.5% for the loan advanced to AFL, that income cannot be levied on hypothetical income. He referred to the cases of Shoorji Vallabhdas & Company (46 ITR 144) and Morvi Industries Ltd. (82 ITR 835) and Godhra the Electricity Company Ltd. (225 ITR 746) that no real income had accrued to the assessee, that the AO had not given any finding of fact that the loan advanced was out of the interest-bearing funds, that he had also not given any finding as to whether the assessee had considered the loan in question while disallowing the interest on interest-free loans, that it had disallowed interest p…

Bajargan Traders, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Alwar

In the result, the ground no

ITA 137/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Mar 2017AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C. A)For Respondent: Shri Prem Prakash Meena (JCIT)
Section 133

…tion on account of notional interest of Rs. 1,39,366/-. There cannot be any addition on account of notional income as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of E.D.Sassoon & Co. & Ors. Vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 27 and Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 746 where it was held that only real income can be taxed, hypothetical income cannot be taxed nor income can be taxed in vacuum. Therefore, the addition made by the AO is not as per law and the same be deleted. The ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the addition by stating that it is the disallowance of interest. It is submitted that the lower authorities have…

Shah Rukh Khan, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 29, Mumbai

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

ITA 623/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Hiro RaiFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chouhan
Section 143(3)Section 234B

…essee had earned any income thereof. The learned representative relied upon the following judgments in support of the proposition that only real income is required to be taxed :- i) Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co., 46 ITR 144 (SC) ii) Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd., 225 ITR 746 (SC) 11. On the other hand, the ld. CIT-DR appearing for the Revenue has reiterated the stand of the lower authorities, which we have already noted in the earlier paras and is not being repeated for the sake of brevity. 12. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the assessment order reveals that the Assessing Officer i…

Shah Rukh Khan, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 29, Mumbai

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

ITA 4763/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Hiro RaiFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chouhan
Section 143(3)Section 234B

…essee had earned any income thereof. The learned representative relied upon the following judgments in support of the proposition that only real income is required to be taxed :- i) Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co., 46 ITR 144 (SC) ii) Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd., 225 ITR 746 (SC) 11. On the other hand, the ld. CIT-DR appearing for the Revenue has reiterated the stand of the lower authorities, which we have already noted in the earlier paras and is not being repeated for the sake of brevity. 12. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the assessment order reveals that the Assessing Officer i…

DCIT 6(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Deloitte & Touche Consulting Inida P. Ltdervice India P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4136/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K.Pradhan

Section 260Section 28

…nd made available for clearance. The benefits represent, at best, a hypothetical income which may or may not materialise and its money value is therefore not the income of the assessee. 22. In Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, [1997] 225 ITR 746 (SC) this Court reiterated the view taken in Shoorji Vallabhdas and Morvi Industries. 23. Godhra Electricity is rather instructive. In that case, it was noted that the High Court held that the assessee would be obliged Deloitte Corporate Finance Service India Pvt. Ltd., to pay tax when the profit became actually due and that income could not be…

M/S. G. R. Developers, Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1439/BANG/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.K Garodiashri Laliet Kumarg.R Developers, 142-143, 1St Floor, Gr Plaza, D.V.G Road, Basavanagudi, Bangalore-. . Appellant Pan No.Aaefg3522F. Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-3(1), Bangalore. . Respondent * Appellant By : Shri K.R Pradeep, C.A Assessee By : Shri M.K Biju, Jcit Date Of Hearing : 02-02-2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03-03-2017

For Appellant: Shri K.R Pradeep, C.A Assessee by : Shri M.K Biju, JCIT
Section 234BSection 8

…of these factors together but once the accrual takes place, on the conduct of the parties subsequent to the year of closing, an income which has accrued cannot be made 'no income'." 8. The Apex Court in the case of Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd., v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 746 / 91 Taxman 351 explaining the principles of 'real income' has held at page 760 as under: IT(TP)A No.1439/B/10 14 The question whether there was real accrual of income to the assessee company in respect of the enhanced charges for supply of electricity has to be considered by taking the probability or improbability of realisation in a realistic…

M/S. C.K. Cotspin Pvt. Ltd., Burhanpur vs. The DCIT, Khandwa

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 816/IND/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri O.P. Meena

…osition 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 a) 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. b) Andhra bank(225 ITR 447)(SC): It was held, that there cannot be a tax if no…

Patanjali Yogpeeth (Nyas), Delhi vs. ADIT(Exemption), New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2267/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L. P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv.; &For Respondent: Shri N. C. Swain, CIT [DR]
Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(5)Section 13Section 142Section 2(15)

…In its recent decision in the case of CIT Vs. Excel Industries Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 295 (SC), the Hon’ble Supreme Court applying its earlier decisions in the cases of Radhasoami Satsang Vs. CIT (1992) 193 ITR 321 (SC); Godhra Electricity Company Vs. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 746 (SC) etc., has been pleased to hold that on consistent view taken in favour of assessee, the Court will not take different view without very convincing reasons. That being so, the Revenue cannot be allowed to flip-flop on the issue and it ought let the matter rest rather than spend the taxpayers’ money in pursuing litigation for the sake of it.…

Asian Paints Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3289/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negiasian Paints Ltd. 6A, Shanti Nagar, Santacruz (East), Mumbai 400 400 055 Pan: Aaaca 3622K ...... Appellant Vs. Dy.Commissioner Income-Tax Ltu, Large Tax Payer Unit (Ltu), 29Th Floor, World Trade Centre -1, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400 006 .... Respondent Appellant By : Shri K. Shivram Respondent By : Shri N.K.Chand Date Of Hearing : 27/10/2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 11 /01/2017

For Appellant: Shri K. ShivramFor Respondent: Shri N.K.Chand
Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 43B

…being brought to the tax is real income or not. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has emphasized on taxing of real income in various judgments viz. in the case of CIT vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co, 46 ITR 144(SC) and in the case of Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, 225 ITR 746(SC). Therefore, even if, entry of income is made in the books of account maintained by the assessee , yet if it does not result in any income at all, the same cannot be taxed as it would amount to taxing a hypothetical income. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Godhra Electricity Company Ltd. (supra) has held (Assessment Year 2009-10) that…

ITO (TDS) (OSD) 1(2), Mumbai vs. Entertainment Network (I) Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5227/MUM/2014[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ito (Tds)(Osd) Entertainment Network (I) Ltd. 1(2) Trade Garden, Gr. Floor, Kamala बनाम/ R.No.811 K.G. Mill Compound, Senapati Bapat Vs. Mittal Hospital Marg, Lower Parel,(W) Bldg. Charni Rd Mumbai-400013 Mumbai-400002 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaace7796G Revenue By Shri Vishwas Mundhe (Dr) Respondent By Shri Mayur Kisnadwala (Ar) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing: 15/12/2016 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order: 11/01/2017

Section 192Section 194CSection 194HSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

…TTJ 17 (Hyd) 3. CIT (TDS) v. Yashoda Super Speciality Hospital [2014] 365 ITR 356 (AP) 4. ITO v. Calcutta Medical Reasearch Institute [2000] 75 lTD 484 (Calcutta) 5. CIT v. Mrs. Durga Khote [1952] 21 ITR 22 (Born) 6. Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 746 (SC) 7. ACIT v. Ushodaya Enterprises (P.) Ltd. [2012] 23 taxrnann.com 258 (Hyd.) 5.7. We have gone through the orders passed by the lower authorities, copies of agreement and other evidences shown to us and also judgment placed before us. It is noted by the us at the very outset that it has been pointed out by the assessee that the impugned payme…

ITO (TDS) (OSD) 1(2), Mumbai vs. Entertainment Network (India) Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1352/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ito (Tds)(Osd) Entertainment Network (I) Ltd. 1(2) Trade Garden, Gr. Floor, Kamala बनाम/ R.No.811 K.G. Mill Compound, Senapati Bapat Vs. Mittal Hospital Marg, Lower Parel,(W) Bldg. Charni Rd Mumbai-400013 Mumbai-400002 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaace7796G Revenue By Shri Vishwas Mundhe (Dr) Respondent By Shri Mayur Kisnadwala (Ar) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing: 15/12/2016 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order: 11/01/2017

Section 192Section 194CSection 194HSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

…TTJ 17 (Hyd) 3. CIT (TDS) v. Yashoda Super Speciality Hospital [2014] 365 ITR 356 (AP) 4. ITO v. Calcutta Medical Reasearch Institute [2000] 75 lTD 484 (Calcutta) 5. CIT v. Mrs. Durga Khote [1952] 21 ITR 22 (Born) 6. Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 746 (SC) 7. ACIT v. Ushodaya Enterprises (P.) Ltd. [2012] 23 taxrnann.com 258 (Hyd.) 5.7. We have gone through the orders passed by the lower authorities, copies of agreement and other evidences shown to us and also judgment placed before us. It is noted by the us at the very outset that it has been pointed out by the assessee that the impugned payme…

Kp Sanghvi Infrastructure P.Ltd( Formelry Knwon As Somnath Project Organizers P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 5(2)2, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 6157/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Dec 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.6157/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07) K.P. Sanghvi Infrastructures Income Tax Officer – Ward बनाम/ Private Limited, – 5(2)(2), V. (Formerly Known As Somnath 5 Th Floor, Project Organizers Private Aayakar Bhavan, Limited) M.K. Road, 1301, Prasad Chambers, Mumbai 400 020. Opera House, Mumbai – 400 004. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aafcs5184H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Vikash Kumar Agarwal
Section 143(3)

…itted that before accrual of the interest being payable on capital contributed by partners , partnership deed were amended on 18-01-2006 and no inteerst was accrued. The ld. Counsel relied on the following cases:- 1. Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. V. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 746 (SC)/ CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. [1962] 46 ITR 144 (SC). 2. Alison Singh & Co. v. CIT [2013] 358 ITR 458 (All) HC 3. D.S. Bist & Sons v. CIT [1984] 149 ITR 276 (Del) HC 4. Shin Satellite Public Co. Ltd. V. Jain Studios Ltd. [2006] 2 SCC 628 5. CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. [1999] 236 ITR 315 (SC) It is submitted that no interest has been receive…

ITO, WD-1(1), Siliguri vs. M/S Associated Contractors, Siliguri

In the result, all the appeals of revenue

ITA 1130/KOL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1127,1128,1129 &1130/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-09,2009-10,2010-11, 2011-12 ) Ito Ward-1(1), Aayakar Vs. M/S Associated Contractors, Bhawan, Paribahan Nagar, Vivekananda Mini Market, Matigara,Siliguri-Pin- Hill Cart Road, 734010 Siliguri "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaffa 1590 E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Dutta, Jcit,Sr.Dr "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 20/10/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/10/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Four Appeals, Cited Above, Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To The Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011- 2012, Are Directed Against Orders Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Jalpaiguri, In Appeal Nos.89,90,91&92/Cit(A)/Slg/2013- 2014, All Dated 11.03.2014, Which In Turn Arise Out Of Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section.148/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated 12.12.2013, 12.12.2013, 12.12.2013 & 12.12.2013, Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Dutta, JCIT,Sr.DR

…, and the interest earned from Centurian Bank of Punjab do not form part of the award at all. 3) CIT vs Shoorji Vallabhdas B & Co (1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC) 4) Poona Electric Supply Co Ltd vs CIT (1965)57 ITR 521 (SC) 5) Godhra Electricity Co Ltd vs CIT (1997) 225 ITR 746 All the three cases above only lays down the principle of determination of real income of an assessee, while taking care of existing constraints and exigencies that it may be subject to. In the instant case the assessee itself has declared the interest incomes as business receipts in the returns of income filed against notices u/s 148 and theref…

ITO, WD-1(1), Siliguri vs. M/S Associated Contractors, Siliguri

In the result, all the appeals of revenue

ITA 1129/KOL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1127,1128,1129 &1130/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-09,2009-10,2010-11, 2011-12 ) Ito Ward-1(1), Aayakar Vs. M/S Associated Contractors, Bhawan, Paribahan Nagar, Vivekananda Mini Market, Matigara,Siliguri-Pin- Hill Cart Road, 734010 Siliguri "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaffa 1590 E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Dutta, Jcit,Sr.Dr "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 20/10/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/10/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Four Appeals, Cited Above, Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To The Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011- 2012, Are Directed Against Orders Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Jalpaiguri, In Appeal Nos.89,90,91&92/Cit(A)/Slg/2013- 2014, All Dated 11.03.2014, Which In Turn Arise Out Of Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section.148/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated 12.12.2013, 12.12.2013, 12.12.2013 & 12.12.2013, Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Dutta, JCIT,Sr.DR

…, and the interest earned from Centurian Bank of Punjab do not form part of the award at all. 3) CIT vs Shoorji Vallabhdas B & Co (1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC) 4) Poona Electric Supply Co Ltd vs CIT (1965)57 ITR 521 (SC) 5) Godhra Electricity Co Ltd vs CIT (1997) 225 ITR 746 All the three cases above only lays down the principle of determination of real income of an assessee, while taking care of existing constraints and exigencies that it may be subject to. In the instant case the assessee itself has declared the interest incomes as business receipts in the returns of income filed against notices u/s 148 and theref…

ITO, WD-1(1), Siliguri vs. M/S Associated Contractors, Siliguri

In the result, all the appeals of revenue

ITA 1128/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2016AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1127,1128,1129 &1130/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-09,2009-10,2010-11, 2011-12 ) Ito Ward-1(1), Aayakar Vs. M/S Associated Contractors, Bhawan, Paribahan Nagar, Vivekananda Mini Market, Matigara,Siliguri-Pin- Hill Cart Road, 734010 Siliguri "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaffa 1590 E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Dutta, Jcit,Sr.Dr "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 20/10/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/10/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Four Appeals, Cited Above, Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To The Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011- 2012, Are Directed Against Orders Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Jalpaiguri, In Appeal Nos.89,90,91&92/Cit(A)/Slg/2013- 2014, All Dated 11.03.2014, Which In Turn Arise Out Of Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section.148/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated 12.12.2013, 12.12.2013, 12.12.2013 & 12.12.2013, Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Dutta, JCIT,Sr.DR

…, and the interest earned from Centurian Bank of Punjab do not form part of the award at all. 3) CIT vs Shoorji Vallabhdas B & Co (1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC) 4) Poona Electric Supply Co Ltd vs CIT (1965)57 ITR 521 (SC) 5) Godhra Electricity Co Ltd vs CIT (1997) 225 ITR 746 All the three cases above only lays down the principle of determination of real income of an assessee, while taking care of existing constraints and exigencies that it may be subject to. In the instant case the assessee itself has declared the interest incomes as business receipts in the returns of income filed against notices u/s 148 and theref…

ITO, WD-1(1), Siliguri vs. M/S Associated Contractors, Siliguri

In the result, all the appeals of revenue

ITA 1127/KOL/2014[]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2016

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1127,1128,1129 &1130/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-09,2009-10,2010-11, 2011-12 ) Ito Ward-1(1), Aayakar Vs. M/S Associated Contractors, Bhawan, Paribahan Nagar, Vivekananda Mini Market, Matigara,Siliguri-Pin- Hill Cart Road, 734010 Siliguri "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaffa 1590 E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Dutta, Jcit,Sr.Dr "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 20/10/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/10/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Four Appeals, Cited Above, Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To The Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011- 2012, Are Directed Against Orders Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Jalpaiguri, In Appeal Nos.89,90,91&92/Cit(A)/Slg/2013- 2014, All Dated 11.03.2014, Which In Turn Arise Out Of Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section.148/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated 12.12.2013, 12.12.2013, 12.12.2013 & 12.12.2013, Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Dutta, JCIT,Sr.DR

…, and the interest earned from Centurian Bank of Punjab do not form part of the award at all. 3) CIT vs Shoorji Vallabhdas B & Co (1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC) 4) Poona Electric Supply Co Ltd vs CIT (1965)57 ITR 521 (SC) 5) Godhra Electricity Co Ltd vs CIT (1997) 225 ITR 746 All the three cases above only lays down the principle of determination of real income of an assessee, while taking care of existing constraints and exigencies that it may be subject to. In the instant case the assessee itself has declared the interest incomes as business receipts in the returns of income filed against notices u/s 148 and theref…

S. Mansukhlal & Co., Mumbai vs. DCIT 14(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4793/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4793/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11) M/S. S. Mansukhlal & Co., The Deputy Commissioner बनाम/ Srbc & Associates Llp, Of Income Tax –14(2), V. Chartered Accountants, Earnest House, Iii Floor, 12 Th Floor, The Ruby, Nariman Point, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai – 400 021. Dadar (West), Mumbai – 400 028. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aahfs9459A .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…nd made available for clearance. The benefits represent, at best, a hypothetical income which may or may not materialise and its money value is therefore not the income of the assessee. ITA 4793/Mum/2014 18 22. In Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT, [1997] 225 ITR 746/91 Taxman 351 (SC) this Court reiterated the view taken in Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. (supra)and Morvi Industries Ltd. (supra). 23. Godhra Electricity is rather instructive. In that case, it was noted that the High Court held that the assessee would be obliged to pay tax when the profit became actually due and that income could not be said to have…

Jayshree Motors Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 3(4), Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 1818/KOL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2007-08

Section 143(3)(ii)

…rmit taxation of hypothetical or opportunity income and what is subject matter of tax is read income, irrespective of the fact whether an entry is made in the books of account or not. This is the ratio laid down in the case of Godhra Electric Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 225 ITR 746). The Income Tax Act does not compel an assessee to earn maximum income but brings to tax only the income which is actually earned by an assessee. It is a settled proposition of law that in what manner the assessee should conduct his business is best left to the discretion of the assessee and the Assessing Officer cannot sit in the arm chair of t…

Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, four appeals of the assessee for AY: 2006-07 & 2008-

ITA 868/BANG/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A.K.Garodia, Accounant Member

For Appellant: Shri Shreehari Kutsa, CAFor Respondent: Smt. P. Renugadevi, JCIT
Section 201Section 201(1)

…Vs CIT 46 ITR 144(SC) iii) CIT Vs Birla Gwalior Pvt.Ltd 89 ITR 266(SC) iv) CIT Vs WExcel Industries Ltd., 358 ITR 295(SC) v) State Bank of Travancore Vs CIT 158 ITR 102(SC) vi) Morvi Industries Ltd., Vs CIT 82 ITR 835 (SC) vii) Godhara Electricity Co.Ltd.,CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC) viii) M/s P.G & W.Sawoo Pv.Ltd., Vs ACIT in Civil appeal No.4091 of 2016 arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos.6384 of 2009 dated 19/04/2016. Reliance on these judgments was placed in support of this contention that the income tax is a tax on income and income has to be real income only and not hypothetical income. 4. At this juncture, the Bench…