Jet Lite (India) Ltd. v. CIT

185 ITR 555High Court1990#10908 most cited

What is Jet Lite (India) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Where an assessee has not claimed any amount by way of service tax as a deduction, there is no question of disallowance of any tax or dues under section 43B of the Income-tax Act.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2023.

Also referred to as

Jet Lite (India) Ltd. v. CIT · section 43B · disallowance of service tax · deduction of service tax · service tax as deduction · taxable income · Income Tax Act

Also reported as

63 Taxmann.com 62

Judgments citing Jet Lite (India) Ltd. v. CIT

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Bhilai vs. Shri Sandeep Surendran Nair, Bhilai

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by Revenue in the present appeal found to be squarely covered in favour of the assessee and thus the same are rejected

ITA 100/RPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.100/Rpr/2018 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 V. The Dcit-1(1) Shri Sandeep Surendran Bhilai Nair, Prop. M/S. Vasava Engineering Construction, 113-Friends Arcade, Shastri Nagar, Supela, Bhilai [Pan: Aczpn 2865 M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By Shri Makarand M. Joshi & Shri Aniruddha Kavimandan, Cas ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, : Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 22.08.2023 : घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.09.2023

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 253Section 43B

…se of ITO vs. Sri Tapan Das, Prop. M/s. Amkey Construction in ITA No.150/BLPR/2012 order dated 4.12.2015, wherein, we have discussed the law pronounced on it and thereafter held as under: “4. Hence, after referring to the case laws namely S. B. Foundry (1990) 185 ITR 555 (All.) and India Carbon Ltd. Vs IAC & Anr. (1993) 200 ITR 759 (Gau) it was held that the admitted factual position was that the assessee had not claimed any amount by way of service tax as a deduction, therefore, there was no question of disallowance of any tax or dues u/s 43B of the IT Act. Against the relief, as granted by the learned CIT (A),…

Pipalart Media Services LLP, Delhi vs. ITO-2(1), Lucknow-New

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 43/LKW/2021[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow29 Dec 2021AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 43B

…l, 3rd Member) (iv) Selvel Advertising P. Ltd. vs. CIT 75 Taxmann.com 249 (Kolkata I.T.A.T.) I.T.A. No.43/Lkw/2021 Assessment year:2018-19 3 Our specific attention was invited to the order of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. S. B. Foundry 185 ITR 555 (All). 3. Learned D. R., on the other hand placed reliance on the orders of the authorities below. 4. I have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. I find from the profit & loss account, placed at pages 4 to 6 of the paper book, that no such expenditure, representing GST, has been debited to the profit & los…

M/S. Bain & Company India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ITO (TDS) (International Taxation), New Delhi

ITA 2845/DEL/2016[2009-10 (F.Y. 2008-09)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2021
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha &For Respondent: Shri Umesh Takiyar, Sr. DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : D : NEW DELHI (Through Virtual Hearing) BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 Bain & Company India Pvt. Ltd., Vs ITO (TDS), 5th Floor, Building No.8A, International Taxation, DLF Cyber City, Ward-3(2), Gurgaon. New Delhi. PAN : AACCB8671R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Himanshu Sinha & Shri Bhuvan Dhupar, Advocates Revenue by : Shri Umesh Takiyar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 17.08.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 10.11.2021 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is…

Asst CIT Cen Cir 3, Thane vs. Credential Equities P. Ltd, Bhayander

In the result, the appeal of Revenue dismissed

ITA 3808/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singh: A.Y : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Awungshi Gimson
Section 131Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : A.Y : 2009-10 ACIT, Central Circle-3, Thane vs. M/s. Credential Equities Pvt. Ltd. (Appellant) Ground floor, Bhairav Shrusthti, 150 feet Road, Bhayander (W). PAN : AACCC0112C (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rakesh Joshi Revenue by : Shri Awungshi Gimson Date of Hearing : 09/09/2019 Date of Pronouncement : 28/11/2019 O R D E R PER R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of CIT(A) for assessment year 2009-10 in the matter…

Dy.C.I.T. 1, Bhilai(Cg) vs. Shri Sandeep Surendran Nair, Bhilai(Cg)

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

ITA 318/BIL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury,Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.222& 318/Rpr/2014 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11& 2011-12

For Appellant: ShriMakarand Joshi and ShriAniruddhaKavimandanFor Respondent: Smt. AnubhaTahGoel
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 43B

…Das, Prop. M/. Amkey Construction in ITA A.Y. 2010-11 & 2011-12 No.150/BLPR/2012 order dated 4.12.2015, wherein, we have discussed the law pronounced on it and thereafter held as under: “4. Hence, after referring to the case laws namely S. B. Foundry (1990) 185 ITR 555 (All.)and India Carbon Ltd. Vs IAC &Anr. (1993) 200 ITR 759 (Gau) it was held that the admitted factual position was that the assessee had not claimed any amount by way of service tax as a deduction, therefore, there was no question of disallowance of any tax or dues u/s 43B of the IT Act. Against the relief, as granted by the learned CIT (A), no…

Dy.C.I.T. 1 vs. Shri Sandeep Surendran Nair, Bhilai(Cg)

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

ITA 222/BIL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury,Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.222& 318/Rpr/2014 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11& 2011-12

For Appellant: ShriMakarand Joshi and ShriAniruddhaKavimandanFor Respondent: Smt. AnubhaTahGoel
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 43B

…Das, Prop. M/. Amkey Construction in ITA A.Y. 2010-11 & 2011-12 No.150/BLPR/2012 order dated 4.12.2015, wherein, we have discussed the law pronounced on it and thereafter held as under: “4. Hence, after referring to the case laws namely S. B. Foundry (1990) 185 ITR 555 (All.)and India Carbon Ltd. Vs IAC &Anr. (1993) 200 ITR 759 (Gau) it was held that the admitted factual position was that the assessee had not claimed any amount by way of service tax as a deduction, therefore, there was no question of disallowance of any tax or dues u/s 43B of the IT Act. Against the relief, as granted by the learned CIT (A), no…

Mafatlal Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal and cross objection are partly allowed and Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5202/MUM/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ravish Sood (Jm)

Section 14ASection 37(1)

…d no deduction is claimed while computing taxable total profit/income. 3. Refer Annexure-12 of the Tax Audit Report. 4. Reliance is placed on the following decisions: a. Jet Lite (India) Ltd v. CIT [2015] 379 ITR 185 (Delhi HC) b. CIT v. S.B.Foundry [1990] 185 ITR 555 (All. HC) c. India Carbon Ltd. v. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income tax [1993] 200 ITR 759 (Gauhati HC) 7 Maftlal Industries Limited d. Dynavision Ltd. v. ACIT [2009] 121 ITD 461 (Chennai Trib.) e. ITO v. Thakersi Babubhai & Co. [1986] 18 ITD 593 (Ahd. Trib.) f. S. Govindraja Reddiar v. ITO [1986] 19 ITD 177 (Cochin Trib.) 5. Without…

Fareed Anwar, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

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

ITA 825/JPR/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2017AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (Addl.CIT)
Section 201Section 201oSection 40Section 43B

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh dqy Hkkjr] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 825/JP/2013 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2009-10 cuke Shri Fareed Anwar L-14, The ITO, Ward 6(3), Jaipur. Vs. Krishna Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No.: ADBPA1318F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Rajeev Sogani (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by : Shri Ajay Malik (Addl.CIT) lquokbZ dh…

M/S. Housing & Urban Development Corporation Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result ground No. 3 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed accordingly

ITA 1165/DEL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Oct 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishihousing & Urban Development Dcit, Corporation Ltd., Hudco Circle-12(1), Vs. Bhawan, Lodhi Road, New Delhi, New Delhi Pan:Aaach0632A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Gagan Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A. K. Saroha, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263

…has already been made in his accounting year, deduction under section 10(2)(xv) is permissible in law and has been rightly allowed by the Tribunal. " Echoing the similar voice, Hon’ble Delhi High Court also in case of Jet Lite India private limited versus CIT 379 ITR 185 has held that according to the mercantile system of accounting, bills Page 9 of 15 received by the assessee in respect of advertisement services pertaining to the previous year and continued during the year were booked only when the liability crystallized. Merely because the expenditure related to an earlier year, it did not become a liability p…

M/S. M.G. Portfolio Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal grounds in the manner as indicated above

ITA 5510/DEL/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. DAM Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…is available at pages 79 to 98 of the assessee’s paper book. 6. Placing rejoinder to the above contentions of the ld. DR, the ld. AR submitted that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in its recent judgement in the case of Jetlite India Vs. CIT reported in 379 ITR 185 by referring to the judgment of CIT Vs. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd reported in 299 ITR 268 and thereafter CIT Vs. Nova Promoters [supra] contended that the AO without conducting any enquiry proceeded to initiate reassessment proceedings and making addition in the hands of the assessee cannot be held as correct and justified in invoking the said prov…

Jet Lite (India) Ltd. v. CIT (185 ITR 555) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax