Jamshri Rajitsinghji Spinning and Weaving Mills Limited v. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner

41 ITD 142Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1992#15873 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 43(1)

Judgments citing Jamshri Rajitsinghji Spinning and Weaving Mills Limited v. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner

ITO-41(3)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. K S CHAMANKAR ENTERPRISES, MALAD (E),MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4586/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Prabhash Shankarincome Tax Officer, Ward V/S. K S Chamankar Enterprises, – 41(3)(2), Room No. 851, बनाम B-15, Pethe Nagar, Kedarmal 8Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, Road, Malad(E), Mumbai – Bandra Kurla Complex, 400097, Maharashtra Bandra (East), Mumbai 400051, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aagfk5823R Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Raichandani, Adv. [virtually appear]For Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra,(CIT-DR)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 28

…enerated from the activity undertaken, there cannot be any tax on such hypothetical income. Reliance is placed on the following cases as decided by the hon’ble Supreme Court in Jamshri Ranjit Singh ji Spg. & Wvg. Mills v. Inspecting Asstt. Commissioner [1992] 41 ITD 142 (Bom.), CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. [1962] 46 ITR 144 (SC) and CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. (Civil Appeal No. 125 of 2013). 5.6 In an alternative argument, it is contented without prejudice, that assuming whilst vehemently denying that the tax was leviable on the accrual of the FSI, the FSI so held to be accrued to the firm is a sum total of…

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

…til imports were made and the raw material consumed. 6. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee relied upon a decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in Jamshri Ranjitsinghji Spinning and Weaving Mills v. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner [1992] 41 ITD 142 (Mum) and also the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in its own case for the assessment years 1995-96 to 1997-98. Deloitte Corporate Finance Service India Pvt. Ltd., 7. By his order dated 24th March 2004, the Assessing Officer did not accept the assessee’s claim on the ground that the taxability of such benefits is covered by Sect…

ASST CIT 16(3), MUMBAI vs. ALLIED GEMS CORPORATION (BOMBAY), MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed, as above

ITA 2502/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Ramlal Negithe Acit, 16(3), 2Nd Floor,Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, Mumbai 400 007 ...... Appellant Vs. M/S. Allied Gems Corporation (Bombay), 2505, Panchratna, Opera House, Mumbai -400 004 Pan: Aaefa 7201P .... Respondent Appellant By : Shri A.Ramachandran Respondent By : Shri Jignesh A.Shah Date Of Hearing : 22/09/2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 20 /01/2017

For Appellant: Shri A.RamachandranFor Respondent: Shri Jignesh A.Shah

Section 143(3)

…Rs.49,64,937/-. The following discussion in the order of the CIT(A) is relevant:- “2.4.12 The Principle of Prudence was again the subject matter of discussion before the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Jamshri Ranjitsinghji Spinning and Weaving Mills Limited 41 ITD 142. The Tribunal was considering whether the notional benefit from import entitlements, under the DEEC scheme, available against exports could be treated as income accrued to the company in year in which the exports were made. The company had estimated the import entitlement benefits and recognized in its 4 books of account as income accrued the est…

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

…ccrued until imports were made and the raw material consumed. 6. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee relied upon a decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in Jamshri Ranjitsinghji Spg. and Wvg. Mills v. Inspecting Asstt. Commissioner [1992] 41 ITD 142 (Bom) and also the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in its own case for the assessment years 1995-96 to 1997-98. 7. By his order dated 24th March 2004, the Assessing Officer did not accept the assessee's claim on the ground that the taxability of such benefits is covered by Section 28(iv) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'th…

ASST CIT CC 38, MUMBAI vs. ANSHUL SPECIALITY MOLECULES LTD ( FORMERLY KNWON AS ANSHUL CHEMICALS LTD), MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed accordingly

ITA 6369/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran & Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6369/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S. Anshul Speciality बनाम/ Income Tax Cent. Cir. 38 Molecules Ltd. (Formerly Vs. R.No.32(1), Ground Floor, Known As Anshul Chemicals Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Ltd.) Mumbai - 400020 13, Aradhana Industrial Developers Corporation, Near Virwani Industrial Estate, Goregaon (East), Mumbai - 400063 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabca4003N .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kirit KamdarFor Respondent: Shri Somanath S. Ukkali

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,“ए” "यायपीठ, मुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी बी. आर. बा"करन, लेखा सद"य यवं "ी अमरजीत "संह, "या"यक सद"य, के सम" BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6369/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Asstt. Commissioner of M/s. Anshul Speciality बनाम/ Income Tax Cent. Cir. 38 Molecules Ltd. (Formerly Vs. R.No.32(1), Ground Floor, known as Anshul Chemicals Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Ltd.) Mumbai - 400020 13, Aradhana Industrial Developers Corporation, Near Virwani Industrial Estate, Goregaon (E…

M/S. MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT SPL. RG. - 20, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4597/MUM/2005[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao & Shri Sandeep Gosainआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.4597/Mum/2005 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 1999-2000)

For Appellant: Shri Girish DaveFor Respondent: Shri Shishir Dhamija

Section 35D

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “आई” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI सर्वश्री डी. करुणाकर राव, ऱेखा सदस्य एर्ं संदीप गोसाई, रेखा सदस्म के सभऺ BEFORE SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.4597/Mum/2005 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 1999-2000) Mafatlal Industries Limited, बिधम/ Income Tax officer 6(3)(4), Mafatlal House, 1st floor, DCIT, 6(3), 5th floor, Vs. Backbay Reclamation , Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020 M K Road, Mumbai-400020 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN : AAACM2813L (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Responde…