(i) CIT v. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited

255 ITR 351High Court2002#6932 most cited

What is (i) CIT v. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited authority for?

Income is computed in accordance with the method of accounting regularly employed by the assessee, but this does not mean an adopted accounting system can never be changed.

16

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited · Section 145 · method of accounting · regularly employed · change in accounting system · income computation

Sections most often in play

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145Section 145(1)Section 145(2)Section 145(3)

Judgments citing (i) CIT v. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited

ITO 19(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Pallon Shapoorji Mistry, Mumbai

In the result, grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1408/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate and Shri Divesh Chawla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Jhaveri, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145Section 3

…poorji Mistry., AY 2020-21 of CIT vs. Punjab State Industrial Development Ltd. [2002] 255 ITR 351 (P&H) held that – “Reliance is placed on the decision of Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. Punjab State Industrial Development Corp Ltd [2002] 255 ITR 351 (Pun) & Har) (Refer page no. 197-198) wherein it was held that on perusal of section 145, the income could be computed "in accordance with the method of accounting regularly employed by the assessee". It is undoubtedly correct that the statute stipulates that the income shall be computed on the basis of the system of accounting 'regularly' follow…

Vedanta Ltd (Earlier Known As Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd.), Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle- 26(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1454/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishivedanta Ltd. Vs. Acit, (Earlier Known As Sterlite Circle-26(1), Industries (India) Ltd,) New Delhi Core-6, 3Rd Floor, Scope Complex, 7, Lodhi Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaccs7101B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 234BSection 263Section 271

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Vedanta Ltd. Vs. ACIT, (earlier known as Sterlite Circle-26(1), Industries (India) Ltd,) New Delhi Core-6, 3rd Floor, Scope Complex, 7, Lodhi Road, New Delhi PAN: AACCS7101B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sachit Jolly, Adv Revenue by: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR Date of Hearing 11/07/2019 Date of pronouncement 09/10/2019 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. The above appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT (A)- 9, New Delhi date…

The ACIT-3(1), Indore vs. M/S. Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (I) Ltd., Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 534/IND/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…attributable, the assessee is treating the same as revenue expenditure following accounting standards & GAAP. The assessee rely upon following Judgment in support of his argument: (i) CIT Vs. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (2002) 255 ITR 351 (P&H) it is undoubtedly correct that the statue stipulates that the income shall be computed on the system of accounting -: 172 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore “regularly” followed by the assessee. It should mean during the period under consideration. However, the provision cannot be interpreted to mean that once a system of ac…

The ACIT-3(1), Indore vs. M/S. Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (I) Ltd., Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 533/IND/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…attributable, the assessee is treating the same as revenue expenditure following accounting standards & GAAP. The assessee rely upon following Judgment in support of his argument: (i) CIT Vs. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (2002) 255 ITR 351 (P&H) it is undoubtedly correct that the statue stipulates that the income shall be computed on the system of accounting -: 172 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore “regularly” followed by the assessee. It should mean during the period under consideration. However, the provision cannot be interpreted to mean that once a system of ac…

The ACIT-3(1), Indore vs. M/S. Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (I) Ltd., Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 532/IND/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…attributable, the assessee is treating the same as revenue expenditure following accounting standards & GAAP. The assessee rely upon following Judgment in support of his argument: (i) CIT Vs. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (2002) 255 ITR 351 (P&H) it is undoubtedly correct that the statue stipulates that the income shall be computed on the system of accounting -: 172 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore “regularly” followed by the assessee. It should mean during the period under consideration. However, the provision cannot be interpreted to mean that once a system of ac…

The ACIT-3(1), Indore vs. M/S. Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (I) Ltd., Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 531/IND/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…attributable, the assessee is treating the same as revenue expenditure following accounting standards & GAAP. The assessee rely upon following Judgment in support of his argument: (i) CIT Vs. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (2002) 255 ITR 351 (P&H) it is undoubtedly correct that the statue stipulates that the income shall be computed on the system of accounting -: 172 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore “regularly” followed by the assessee. It should mean during the period under consideration. However, the provision cannot be interpreted to mean that once a system of ac…

The ACIT-3(1), Indore vs. M/S. Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (I) Ltd., Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 530/IND/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…attributable, the assessee is treating the same as revenue expenditure following accounting standards & GAAP. The assessee rely upon following Judgment in support of his argument: (i) CIT Vs. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (2002) 255 ITR 351 (P&H) it is undoubtedly correct that the statue stipulates that the income shall be computed on the system of accounting -: 172 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore “regularly” followed by the assessee. It should mean during the period under consideration. However, the provision cannot be interpreted to mean that once a system of ac…

M/S. Sez Indore Limted, Indore vs. The DCIT Circle -3(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 206/IND/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…attributable, the assessee is treating the same as revenue expenditure following accounting standards & GAAP. The assessee rely upon following Judgment in support of his argument: (i) CIT Vs. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (2002) 255 ITR 351 (P&H) it is undoubtedly correct that the statue stipulates that the income shall be computed on the system of accounting -: 172 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore “regularly” followed by the assessee. It should mean during the period under consideration. However, the provision cannot be interpreted to mean that once a system of ac…

M/S. Sez Indore Limted, Indore vs. The DCIT Circle -3(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 205/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…attributable, the assessee is treating the same as revenue expenditure following accounting standards & GAAP. The assessee rely upon following Judgment in support of his argument: (i) CIT Vs. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (2002) 255 ITR 351 (P&H) it is undoubtedly correct that the statue stipulates that the income shall be computed on the system of accounting -: 172 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore “regularly” followed by the assessee. It should mean during the period under consideration. However, the provision cannot be interpreted to mean that once a system of ac…

M/S. M.P. Audhyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam, Indore vs. The DCIT 3(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 761/IND/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…attributable, the assessee is treating the same as revenue expenditure following accounting standards & GAAP. The assessee rely upon following Judgment in support of his argument: (i) CIT Vs. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (2002) 255 ITR 351 (P&H) it is undoubtedly correct that the statue stipulates that the income shall be computed on the system of accounting -: 172 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore “regularly” followed by the assessee. It should mean during the period under consideration. However, the provision cannot be interpreted to mean that once a system of ac…

M/S. Sez Indore Limited, Indore vs. The CIT-I, Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 571/IND/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…attributable, the assessee is treating the same as revenue expenditure following accounting standards & GAAP. The assessee rely upon following Judgment in support of his argument: (i) CIT Vs. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (2002) 255 ITR 351 (P&H) it is undoubtedly correct that the statue stipulates that the income shall be computed on the system of accounting -: 172 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore “regularly” followed by the assessee. It should mean during the period under consideration. However, the provision cannot be interpreted to mean that once a system of ac…

M/S Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (Indore) Ltd., Indore vs. The ACIT3(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 351/IND/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…attributable, the assessee is treating the same as revenue expenditure following accounting standards & GAAP. The assessee rely upon following Judgment in support of his argument: (i) CIT Vs. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (2002) 255 ITR 351 (P&H) it is undoubtedly correct that the statue stipulates that the income shall be computed on the system of accounting -: 172 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore “regularly” followed by the assessee. It should mean during the period under consideration. However, the provision cannot be interpreted to mean that once a system of ac…

M/S Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (Indore) Ltd., Indore vs. The ACIT3(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 350/IND/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…attributable, the assessee is treating the same as revenue expenditure following accounting standards & GAAP. The assessee rely upon following Judgment in support of his argument: (i) CIT Vs. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (2002) 255 ITR 351 (P&H) it is undoubtedly correct that the statue stipulates that the income shall be computed on the system of accounting -: 172 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore “regularly” followed by the assessee. It should mean during the period under consideration. However, the provision cannot be interpreted to mean that once a system of ac…

M/S Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (Indore) Ltd., Indore vs. The ACIT3(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 349/IND/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…attributable, the assessee is treating the same as revenue expenditure following accounting standards & GAAP. The assessee rely upon following Judgment in support of his argument: (i) CIT Vs. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (2002) 255 ITR 351 (P&H) it is undoubtedly correct that the statue stipulates that the income shall be computed on the system of accounting -: 172 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore “regularly” followed by the assessee. It should mean during the period under consideration. However, the provision cannot be interpreted to mean that once a system of ac…

M/S Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (Indore) Ltd., Indore vs. The ACIT3(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 348/IND/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…attributable, the assessee is treating the same as revenue expenditure following accounting standards & GAAP. The assessee rely upon following Judgment in support of his argument: (i) CIT Vs. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (2002) 255 ITR 351 (P&H) it is undoubtedly correct that the statue stipulates that the income shall be computed on the system of accounting -: 172 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore “regularly” followed by the assessee. It should mean during the period under consideration. However, the provision cannot be interpreted to mean that once a system of ac…

M/S Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (Indore) Ltd., Indore vs. The ACIT3(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 347/IND/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…attributable, the assessee is treating the same as revenue expenditure following accounting standards & GAAP. The assessee rely upon following Judgment in support of his argument: (i) CIT Vs. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (2002) 255 ITR 351 (P&H) it is undoubtedly correct that the statue stipulates that the income shall be computed on the system of accounting -: 172 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore “regularly” followed by the assessee. It should mean during the period under consideration. However, the provision cannot be interpreted to mean that once a system of ac…

(i) CIT v. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (255 ITR 351) — Cited in 16 Judgments | BharatTax