Jay Engineering Works Ltd. v. CIT

311 ITR 299High Court2009#12607 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2022.

Judgments citing Jay Engineering Works Ltd. v. CIT

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-12, Kolkata vs. M/S.Soorajmull Nagarmull

In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the substantial questions of

ITAT/46/2020HC Calcutta23 Nov 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 148Section 260ASection 41Section 41(1)

…parties, or by discharge of the debt-the debtor making payment thereof to his creditor. Transfer of an entry is neither an agreement between the parties nor payment of the liability……” 11 (2009) 311 ITR 299 (del) 12 (2011) 336 ITR 479 (Bom) ITAT NO. 46 OF 2020 REPORTABLE Page 14 of 22  The Supreme Court held that the principle that the expiry of the period of limitation prescribed under the…

ACIT, Circle-3, Ranchi vs. Shri Sumit Ramsisaria, Ranchi

ITA 222/RAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi11 Dec 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…ould not be treated as income of the assessee. Copy of relevant order of ITAT is filed herewith. In CIT v. Vardhman Overseas Ltd. (2012) 343 ITR 408 (Del), the Delhi High Court, referring to its judgment in the case of Jay Engineering Works Ltd. v. CIT (2009) 311 ITR 299 (Del) and applying the ratio laid down the case of CIT v. T. V. SundaramIyengar & Sons Ltd. (1996) 222 ITR 344 (SC) under section 28 of the Income Tax Act, considered the applicability of clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 41 as to what would constitute remissions or cessation of trading liability. The Hon'ble Court noted that in the report…

Purna Chandra Biswal, Jajpur vs. Principal CIT, Cuttack

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 200/CTK/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.200/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Sri Purna Chandra Biswal, Vs. Principal Cit, Cuttack Jakhapura, Jajpur-755019 स्थायी लेखा सं./Panno. : Aclpb 1493 P (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Sarangi, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.M.Keshkamat, Citdr

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Sarangi, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.M.Keshkamat, CITDR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145Section 145(3)Section 263Section 44ASection 68

…he sundry creditors to its profit and loss account. In CIT v. Vardhman Overseas Ltd. in ITA No. 774//2009 decided on 23.12.2011, (2012) 343 ITR 408 (Del), the Delhi High Court, referring to its judgment in the case of Jay Engineering Works Ltd. v. CIT (22009) 311 ITR 299 (Del) and applying the ratio laid down the case of CIT v. T.V. Sundaram Iyengar & Sons Ltd. (1996) 222 ITR 344 (SC) under sec. 28 of the IT Act, considered the applicability of clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 41 as to what would constitute remissions or cessation of trading liability. The Hon'ble Court noted that in the reported case, th…

Shri Navneet Modi, Ranchi vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Ranchi

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 106/RAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 Oct 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.106/Ran/2019 & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.53/Ran/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2015-2016 & 2013-2014) Shri Navneet Modi, Vs. Dcit, Circle-2, Ranchi Modi House, Kanke Dam Side Road, Kanke, Ranchi स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan No. : Actpm 1511 F (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Inderjeet Singh, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Inderjeet Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…he sundry creditors to its profit and loss account. In CIT v. Vardhman Overseas Ltd. in ITA No. 774//2009 decided on 23.12.2011, (2012) 343 ITR 408 (Del), the Delhi High Court, referring to its judgment in the case of Jay Engineering Works Ltd. v. CIT (22009) 311 ITR 299 (Del) and applying the ratio laid down the case of CIT v. T.V. Sundaram Iyengar & Sons Ltd. (1996) 222 ITR 344 (SC) under sec. 28 of the IT Act, considered the applicability of clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 41 as to what would constitute remissions or cessation of trading liability. The Hon'ble Court noted that in the reported case, th…

Income Tax Officer-Ward-12(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Standard Leather Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 2620/KOL/2013[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Sept 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2010-11

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA Before Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member and Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member Assessment Years:2010-11 ITO Ward-12(1), बनाम / M/s Standard Leather Pvt. Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Ltd., 21G. Atal Sur Road, V/s. Chowringhee Squre, Tangra, Kolkata-700 015 Kolkta-700 069 [PAN No.AAECS 4167 K] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT-DR अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 10-06-2016 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 07-09-2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश /O…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. Shri Vardhman Overseas Ltd

ITA/774/2009HC Delhi23 Dec 2011

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 260ASection 41(1)Section 68

…nefit to the assessee. Strong reliance was placed by him on the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT v. T.V.Sundaram (supra). Our attention was also drawn by him to a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Jay Engineering Works Ltd. v. CIT (2009) 311 ITR 299 in which case the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT v. T.V.Sundaram (supra) was applied. 11. The question before us is limited to the applicability of Section 41(1) of the Act. The section in so far as it is relevant for our purpose is as below:- ―Profits chargeable to tax. 41. (1) Where an allowance or deduction has been made in…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. Shri Vardhman Overseas Ltd

ITA-774/2009HC Delhi23 Dec 2011
Section 260ASection 41(1)Section 68

…nefit to the assessee. Strong reliance was placed by him on the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT v. T.V.Sundaram (supra). Our attention was also drawn by him to a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Jay Engineering Works Ltd. v. CIT (2009) 311 ITR 299 in which case the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT v. T.V.Sundaram (supra) was applied. 11. The question before us is limited to the applicability of Section 41(1) of the Act. The section in so far as it is relevant for our purpose is as below:- ―Profits chargeable to tax. 41. (1) Where an allowance or deduction has been made in…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. Shri Vardhman Overseas Ltd

ITA - 774 / 2009HC Delhi23 Dec 2011
Section 260ASection 41(1)Section 68

…nefit to the assessee. Strong reliance was placed by him on the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT v. T.V.Sundaram (supra). Our attention was also drawn by him to a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Jay Engineering Works Ltd. v. CIT (2009) 311 ITR 299 in which case the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT v. T.V.Sundaram (supra) was applied. 11. The question before us is limited to the applicability of Section 41(1) of the Act. The section in so far as it is relevant for our purpose is as below:- ―Profits chargeable to tax. 41. (1) Where an allowance or deduction has been made in…

Jay Engineering Works Ltd. v. CIT (311 ITR 299) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax