Income Tax Vs. India Discount Co. Ltd. 75 ITR 191 (SC), Commissioner of Income Tax v. Provincial Farmers (P) Ltd.

Q: How many judgments cite Income Tax Vs. India Discount Co. Ltd. 75 ITR 191 (SC), Commissioner of Income Tax v. Provincial Farmers (P) Ltd.?

55 judgments on BharatTax cite Income Tax Vs. India Discount Co. Ltd. 75 ITR 191 (SC), Commissioner of Income Tax v. Provincial Farmers (P) Ltd. (245 ITR 421), spanning 2008 to 2025.

Q: Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Income Tax Vs. India Discount Co. Ltd. 75 ITR 191 (SC), Commissioner of Income Tax v. Provincial Farmers (P) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 37(1), Section 143(3), Section 194H, Section 271(1)(c), Section 35ABA, Section 35ABB.

245 ITR 421Supreme Court of India2000#2081 most cited

What is Income Tax Vs. India Discount Co. Ltd. 75 ITR 191 (SC), Commissioner of Income Tax v. Provincial Farmers (P) Ltd. authority for?

The entry in the books of accounts is not determinative of the true nature of a transaction for income tax purposes; the substance of the transaction, rather than its accounting treatment, governs its taxability and deductibility.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2025.

Also referred to as

India Discount Co. Ltd. 75 ITR 191 SC · true nature of transaction · books of account not determinative · accounting entries taxability · substance over form principle · Section 37(1) · revenue expenditure deductibility · business income deductions · pre-operating expenses · Commissioner of Income Tax vs India Discount Co Ltd

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 194H Section 271(1)(c)Section 35ABA Section 35ABB Section 40(a)(ia)Section 263

Issues it is cited on

section 35abb section 194h explanation to section 37 intangible assets section 35 section 30 section 201(1)profits and gains of business or profession section 253 revenue expenditure section 32 section 201

Judgments citing Income Tax Vs. India Discount Co. Ltd. 75 ITR 191 (SC), Commissioner of Income Tax v. Provincial Farmers (P) Ltd.

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary vs. Sri B Rudra Gowda, Bellary

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed and the appeal by revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1199/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Tatakrishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT (DR)

Section 32(1)Section 37Section 37(1)

…trary, Ld.CIT DR submitted that it is an application of income and therefore has to be disallowed in the hands of assessee. He submitted that Ld.AO in support of disallowing the claim of expenditure relied on following decisions:  CIT vs.KCP Ltd. reported in 245 ITR 421(SC)  G.Padnabha Chettiyar & Sons vs.CIT reported in 182 ITR 1(Mad)  ReformFlour Mills Pvt.Ltd Vs.CIT reported in 132 ITR 184,196(Cal)  CIT vs.A.Krishnaswamy udaliar & Ors reported in 53 ITR 122(SC) We note that these decisions are on the accrual of income, which has been considered by us in forgoing paras. We have already held that entire inco…

M/S Zeenath Transport Company, Bellary vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated herein above

ITA 1780/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Siva Prasad Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)

Section 135Section 37Section 37(1)

…rary, Ld.CIT DR submitted that it is an application of income and therefore has to be disallowed in the hands of assessee. He submitted that Ld.AO in support of disallowing the claim of expenditure relied on following decisions: • CIT vs.KCP Ltd. reported in 245 ITR 421(SC) • G.Padnabha Chettiyar & Sons vs.CIT reported in 182 ITR 1(Mad) • ReformFlour Mills Pvt.Ltd Vs.CIT reported in 132 ITR 184,196(Cal) • CIT vs.A.Krishnaswamy Mudaliar & Ors reported in 53 ITR 122(SC) We note that these decisions are on the accrual of income, which has been considered by us in forgoing paras. We have already held Page 14 of…

M/S Gogga Gurusanthaiah and Brothers, Hospet vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3319/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Sivaprasad Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 37

…on of income and therefore has to be disallowed in the hands of assessee. He submitted that Ld.AO in support of disallowing the claim of expenditure relied on following decisions: Page 85 of 138 ITA No. 1054/Bang/2019 A.Y:2013-14 • CIT vs.KCP Ltd. reported in 245 ITR 421(SC) • G.Padnabha Chettiyar & Sons vs.CIT reported in 182 ITR 1(Mad) • ReformFlour Mills Pvt.Ltd Vs.CIT reported in 132 ITR 184,196(Cal) • CIT vs.A.Krishnaswamy udaliar & Ors reported in 53 ITR 122(SC) We note that these decisions are on the accrual of income, which has been considered by us in forgoing paras. We have already held that entire inco…

M/S Gogga Gurusanthaiah and Brothers, Hospet vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3318/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Sivaprasad Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 37

M/S Gogga Gurusanthaiah and Brothers, Hospet vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3317/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Sivaprasad Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 37

Sri. B. Rudragouda, Bellary vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 315/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 37Section 37(1)

…trary, Ld.CIT DR submitted that it is an application of income and therefore has to be disallowed in the hands of assessee. He submitted that Ld.AO in support of disallowing the claim of expenditure relied on following decisions: • CIT vs.KCP Ltd. reported in 245 ITR 421(SC) • G.Padnabha Chettiyar & Sons vs.CIT reported in 182 ITR 1(Mad) • ReformFlour Mills Pvt.Ltd Vs.CIT reported in 132 ITR 184,196(Cal) • CIT vs.A.Krishnaswamy Mudaliar & Ors reported in 53 ITR 122(SC) We note that these decisions are on the accrual of income, which has been considered by us in forgoing paras. We have already held that entire inc…

Sri. B. Rudragouda, Bellary vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 314/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 37Section 37(1)

…trary, Ld.CIT DR submitted that it is an application of income and therefore has to be disallowed in the hands of assessee. He submitted that Ld.AO in support of disallowing the claim of expenditure relied on following decisions: • CIT vs.KCP Ltd. reported in 245 ITR 421(SC) • G.Padnabha Chettiyar & Sons vs.CIT reported in 182 ITR 1(Mad) • ReformFlour Mills Pvt.Ltd Vs.CIT reported in 132 ITR 184,196(Cal) • CIT vs.A.Krishnaswamy Mudaliar & Ors reported in 53 ITR 122(SC) We note that these decisions are on the accrual of income, which has been considered by us in forgoing paras. We have already held that entire inc…

DCIT, Circle- 62(1), New Delhi vs. Ramesh Kumar Pabbi, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6168/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit Vs. Ramesh Kumar Pabbi Circle – 62(1), A-41, Phase-Ii, New Delhi Mayapuri Industrial Area, New Delhi-110017 Pan – Aanpp 5995 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Sohail Malik, Sr.D.R. Revenue By Shri Lalit Mohan, Adv. Date Of Hearing: 16/03/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 16/03/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am:

Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 2(22)(e)Section 40

…entry in the books of accounts is not determinative of the true nature of transaction. See Commissioner of Income Tax vs. India Discount Co. Ltd. 75 ITR 191 (SC), Commissioner of Income Tax vs Provincial Farmers (P) Ltd. 108 ITR 219 (Cal) and KCP Ltd. vs. CIT 245 ITR 421 In the present case after going through the relevant evidence as well as account maintained between the parties, it has been established that the payment made were the result of trading transaction between the parties and the amount was not given by way of loan or advance. 21.7 It is further noted that, so far the alleged advances received by the…

Ashwathnarayana Singh and Co, Bellry vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

In the result appeal is filed by assessee for year under consideration stands allowed

ITA 522/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Laxminiwas Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Muzaffar Hussain, CIT (DR)

Section 143(2)Section 37

…trary, Ld.CIT DR submitted that it is an application of income and therefore has to be disallowed in the hands of assessee. He submitted that Ld.AO in support of disallowing the claim of expenditure relied on following decisions: • CIT vs.KCP Ltd. reported in 245 ITR 421(SC) • G.Padnabha Chettiyar & Sons vs.CIT reported in 182 ITR 1(Mad) • ReformFlour Mills Pvt.Ltd Vs.CIT reported in 132 ITR 184,196(Cal) • CIT vs.A.Krishnaswamy udaliar & Ors reported in 53 ITR 122(SC) We note that these decisions are on the accrual of income, which has been considered by us in forgoing paras. We have already held that entire inco…

M/S. Veerabhadrappa Sangappa & Company, Sandur vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1054/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Dec 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013–14

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT

Section 145Section 28Section 5

…t it is an application of income and therefore has to be disallowed in the hands of assessee. He submitted that Ld.AO in support of disallowing the claim of expenditure relied on following decisions: Page 85 of 138 A.Y:2013-14 • CIT vs.KCP Ltd. reported in 245 ITR 421(SC) • G.Padnabha Chettiyar & Sons vs.CIT reported in 182 ITR 1(Mad) • ReformFlour Mills Pvt.Ltd Vs.CIT reported in 132 ITR 184,196(Cal) • CIT vs.A.Krishnaswamy udaliar & Ors reported in 53 ITR 122(SC) We note that these decisions are on the accrual of income, which has been considered by us in forgoing paras. We have already held that entire inco…

DCIT, Circle-1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Landis+Gyr Limited, South 24 Parganas

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2298/KOL/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jul 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2298/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2004-05)

For Appellant: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Akash Patel, CA

Section 143(3)

…so asto fall outside the ambit of clause (c) of Explanation 1 to Section 115JB of the Act. The issue on whether liabilty for leave encashment is contingent or nothas been dealt by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers vs CIT reported in 245 ITR 4218 wherein it had been held that if the liability is capable of being; estimated with reasonable certainty even though actual quantification may not/be possible,'If these requirements are satisfied, the liability is not a contingentone. 3, The appellant has also invited my attention towards the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Courts' in the case Metal Bo…

The Travancore Cochin Chemicals Limited, Udyogamandal vs. DCIT, Ernakulam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 673/COCH/1995[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Jan 2020AY 1992-93

Bench: S/Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vp & Chandra Poojari, Am Assessment Year: 1992-93

…rules framed thereunder, i.e., the Kerala Land Assignment Rules, 1964. Therefore, it cannot be said that the payment of lease rent is a contractual obligation. 9.1 The Ld. DR relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of K.C.P. Limited vs. CIT 245 ITR 421 wherein it was held that if a receipt is a trading receipt the fact that it is not so shown in the account books of the assessee would not prevent the assessing authority from creating it as a trading receipt. It is the true nature and quality of the receipt and not the head under which it is entered in the account books which is decisive. Even…

Sri V.N.K.Memon, Bellary District vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Gulbarga

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 157/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year : 2012-13 Shri V.N.K. Memon, The Assistant Khb Colony, Commissioner Of Sandur, Vs. Income Tax, Bellary District. Circle – 1, Pan: Agxpm5124G Bellary. Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri B.S. Balachandran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…nt case, the closing stock figure is not appearing at all and also the assessee has not hooked the sale to the extent of 20% sale amount retained by the CEC. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs K.C.P. Limited (SC) 245 ITR 421 dated 09.08.2000 wherein the assessee has collected excess amount of levy price on sugar as against the levy price fixed by the Government. The assessee has challenged the same by filing of a Writ Petition. The assessee, protected by an interim order, continued to sell sugar at higher price. The assessee was following mercantile system of account…

ACIT, Muzaffarnagar vs. M/S. Tikaula Sugar Mills Ltd., Muzaffarnagar

In the result appeal of the revenue are dismissed and CO partly allowed

ITA 4997/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…f discharge of subsidy is free sale of additional quota, which is meant to be utilized for the repayment of term loans taken from the financial institutions etc. 7. The reliance of the AO on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in KCP Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 245 ITR 421 (SC) is misconceived. In that case, the excess amount was realized and ITA NOS. 63&443/Del2006 & 116&924/Del2007 9 retained though the right to realize the amount was subject of dispute. Interim order was passed by the Hon’ble High Court pursuant to which the excess realization was made. It was under those circumstances that the Hon’ble Supreme C…

ACIT, Muzaffarnagar vs. M/S. Tikaula Sugar Mills Ltd., Muzaffarnagar

In the result appeal of the revenue are dismissed and CO partly allowed

ITA 5470/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

M/S. M. Hanumantha Rao, Bellary vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Kalaburagi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 158/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S. M. Hanumatha Rao, H. No.37, W. No.17, Ground Floor, Main Road Near Park Patel Nagar, Ballari – 583101. … Appellant Pan:Aanfm 1777H Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 1, Ballary. … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. P. Dinesha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. N. Parbat, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)

…as a deduction while computing the profits and Page 6 of 13 gains of business by virtue of the Explanation to section 37(1) of the Act. The learned Principal CIT also placed reliance upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. KCP Ltd., (245 ITR 421) in support of the proposition that the amount collected during the ordinary course of business should be taxed as a trading business and also placed reliance upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madhya Venkataramana Pvt. Ltd., Vs. CIT (229 ITR 534) wherein it was held that the penalty paid for breach of any provision of law…

ACIT, Muzaffarnagar vs. M/S Tikaula Sugar Mills Ltd., Muzaffarnagar

ITA 3598/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. S. Syal & Smt Suchitra Kamble

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 145A

…DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .No.-3561/Del/2007 (A.Y 2004-05) DCIT vs M/S Tikaula Sugar Mills Ltd, Circle I Muzaffarnagar Muzaffarnagar (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) I.T.A .No.-2817/Del/2008 (A.Y 2005-06) DCIT vs M/S Tikaula Sugar Mills Ltd, Circle I Muzaffarnagar Muzaffarnagar (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) C.O No. 144/Del/2008 (A.Y 2005-06) M/S Tikaula Sugar Mills Ltd, vs DCIT, Circle I Muzaffarnagar Muzaffarnagar (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DCIT, Circle I vs M/S Tikaula Sugar Mills Ltd, Muzaffarnagar Muzaffarnagar (APPELLANT)…

Dy.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. Lenovo India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal for the Assessment Years 2007-08 as well

ITA 511/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri P. Pardiwala, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR) (ITAT)-2, Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(v)Section 40A(9)

…e cannot be treated as uncertain liability/provision. As regards the provision for leave encashment though the said claim was not allowable in view of the provision of Section 43B however in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of BEML 245 ITR 421, this is a certain liability though payable in future we further note that the Tribunal in assessee's own case for the Assessment Year 2011-12 has considered and decided this issue vide order dt.21.10.2016 in paras 11 & 12 as under : “ 11. Ground No.3 relates to addition of provision for gratuity, leave encashment and warranty to book profits.…

DCIT, Muzaffarnagar vs. M/S Tikaula Sugar Mills Ltd., Muzaffarnagar

ITA 2817/DEL/2008[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. S. Syal & Smt Suchitra Kamble

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 145A

DCIT Circle I vs. Tikaula Sugar Mills Ltd

ITA 3561/DEL/2007[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2016AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri R. S. Syal & Smt Suchitra Kamble

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 145A