Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT

82 ITR 363Supreme Court of India1971#89 most cited

What is Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Tax liability for an item of income or expenditure is determined solely by the provisions of the Income-tax Act. Entries in an assessee's books of account are not conclusive and do not govern the taxability or deductibility of an item, as the legal rights and obligations under the Act prevail.

654

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 1998 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT · 82 ITR 363 SC · tax liability · accounting entries · books of account · Income-tax Act provisions · tax law vs accounting · section 145 · mercantile system · book profits · section 115JB · section 37(1) · section 43B

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 1961Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 14ASection 115JBSection 143(1)Section 145
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 80hhcsection 80hhbook profitsrevenue expendituresection 80iamercantile system of accountingcapital expendituresection 115jsection 80idisallowance under section 14asection 37(1)section 115jb

Judgments citing Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT

Ircon International Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, Range-11

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 1825/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2001-2002

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…s. 1825/Del/2005, 705/Del/2006 & 3804/Del/2008 AND ITA Nos. 24 2234/Del/2005 & 3805/Del/2008 11.7 Further we find that Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, (1971) AIR 2145, 1972 SCR (1) 277, [1971] 82 ITR 363(SC) held that whether the Assessee is entitled to a particular deduction or not will depend on the provision of law relating thereto and not on the view which the assessee might take of his rights nor can the existence or absence of entries in the books of account be decisive or conclusive in the matter. 11.8 We further note that the Hon’ble Su…

The ACIT, Circle - 1, Rajahmundry vs. The Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Ltd., Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 6/VIZ/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri T.M. Shiv Kumar – AdvFor Respondent: Shri T.S.N. Murthy – CIT DR
Section 263Section 32

…of CIT Vs. Mugneeram Bangur & Corn. (Land Department) (57 ITR 299 ) (SC). Further contention is that substance of the situation to be seen rather than form. For this purpose, reliance was placed on the following judgment: Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v, CIT, 82 ITR 363 (SC), wherein it was held whether the assessee is entitled to a particular deduction or not will depend upon the provisions of law relating thereto and not on the view which the assessee might take of his rights, nor can the existence or absence of entry in his books of account be decisive or conclusive in the matter.” Sutlez Cotton Mills Ltd. v.…

The ACIT, Circle - 1, Rajahmundry vs. The Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Ltd., Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 5/VIZ/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri T.M. Shiv Kumar – AdvFor Respondent: Shri T.S.N. Murthy – CIT DR
Section 263Section 32

…of CIT Vs. Mugneeram Bangur & Corn. (Land Department) (57 ITR 299 ) (SC). Further contention is that substance of the situation to be seen rather than form. For this purpose, reliance was placed on the following judgment: Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v, CIT, 82 ITR 363 (SC), wherein it was held whether the assessee is entitled to a particular deduction or not will depend upon the provisions of law relating thereto and not on the view which the assessee might take of his rights, nor can the existence or absence of entry in his books of account be decisive or conclusive in the matter.” Sutlez Cotton Mills Ltd. v.…

The ACIT, Circle - 1, Rajahmundry vs. The Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Ltd., Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4/VIZ/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri T.M. Shiv Kumar – AdvFor Respondent: Shri T.S.N. Murthy – CIT DR
Section 263Section 32

…of CIT Vs. Mugneeram Bangur & Corn. (Land Department) (57 ITR 299 ) (SC). Further contention is that substance of the situation to be seen rather than form. For this purpose, reliance was placed on the following judgment: Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v, CIT, 82 ITR 363 (SC), wherein it was held whether the assessee is entitled to a particular deduction or not will depend upon the provisions of law relating thereto and not on the view which the assessee might take of his rights, nor can the existence or absence of entry in his books of account be decisive or conclusive in the matter.” Sutlez Cotton Mills Ltd. v.…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mosaic India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal is allowed in this ground

ITA 2325/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishii.T.A. No. 2325/Del/2015 (A.Y. 2009-10)

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…on or treatment adopted by the assessee for a particular item such as disclosing the Special Bonds issued by the GOI under the head “Investment” does not determine the taxability of such item. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. [82 ITR 363] held that, “whether the assessee is entitled to a particular deduction or not will depend on provision of law relating thereto, and not on view taken by the assessee nor can be existence or absence of entries in the books of accounts be decisive or conclusive in the matter” In the case of National Cement Mines Industries Ltd. vs. CIT [42 ITR 69],…

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

…s. Burhal Sugar Mills Co. Limited, (82 ITR 784) (All.) CIT vs. Singari Bai [1945] 13 ITR 224 (All.) Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. vs. C.I.T. 57 ITR 521 (SC) Metal Box Co. of India vs. Their workman 73 ITR 53 (SC) Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 82 ITR 363 (SC) CIT vs. Vinitec Corporation (P) Ltd. (196 CTR 369) [Delhi] CIT Tamil Nadu vs. Sitalakshmi Mills Ltd. (141 ITR 415) [Mad] ITAT Chennai & Commissioner Appeals has decided this issue favorable in AY 2004- 05 3.3.23 Similar issue came before CIT(A)-XI, Chennai in AY 2004-05 first year of adoption this policy of accounting provision for copper con…

M/S. Trust Marketing, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 742/JPR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Oct 2019AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain (CA)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 27(1)(a)Section 41(1)

…ent of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Bharat Carbon and Ribbon Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd. 239 ITR 505 (SC) and submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has reiterated its view as taken in case of Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, 82 ITR 363 (SC) by holding that the entitlement of deduction will depend on the provisions of law relating thereto and not on the view which the assessee might take of his rights nor can the existence or absence of entries in the books of account be decisive or conclusive in that matter. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the liability accrued over t…

Prism Cement Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 34, Mumbai

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

ITA 2545/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri NS JangpangiFor Respondent: Shri S.E.Dastur, AR
Section 143(3)Section 401A(9)Section 40A(9)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “C” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य एविं श्री राजेश कुमार लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 1757/Mum/2015 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Years 2010-11) The Dy. Commissioner of M/s Prism Cement Ltd. Income Tax, Central Circle- Rahejas Main Avenue, V.P 6(1) (Earlier CC-34) Road Santacruz (West), Vs. R.No. 104, First Floor, Mumbai-400 054 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. road, Mumbai-400 020 (ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) .. (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent) स्थायी लेखा िं./PAN No.…

DCIT CC 6(1) (Earlier CC-34), Mumbai vs. Prism Cement Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 1757/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri NS JangpangiFor Respondent: Shri S.E.Dastur, AR
Section 143(3)Section 401A(9)Section 40A(9)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “C” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य एविं श्री राजेश कुमार लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 1757/Mum/2015 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Years 2010-11) The Dy. Commissioner of M/s Prism Cement Ltd. Income Tax, Central Circle- Rahejas Main Avenue, V.P 6(1) (Earlier CC-34) Road Santacruz (West), Vs. R.No. 104, First Floor, Mumbai-400 054 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. road, Mumbai-400 020 (ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) .. (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent) स्थायी लेखा िं./PAN No.…

Auto Finance Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 12(3), Mumbai

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 259/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.259/Mum/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Auto Finance Enterprises Acit-Circle 12(3) 1St Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, बनाम/ 41, Nariman Bhavan, 221, Nariman Point, M. K. Road Vs. Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 020 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafa-2325-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta & Shri GovindFor Respondent: Shri Satish Chandra Rajore - Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 139(3)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 45(2)Section 74(1)Section 80

…would be open to the departmental authorities and the Tribunal, and indeed they would be under a duty, to grant that relief. The right of the assessee to relief is not restricted to the plea raised by him." (p. 712) Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363 (SC). 9 M/s Auto Finance Enterprises Assessment Year 2010-11 ". . .We are wholly unable to appreciate the suggestion that if an assessee under some misapprehension or mistake fails to make an entry in the books of account and although, under the law, a deduction must be allowed by the Income-tax Officer, the assessee will lose the right of claimi…

Unnati Inorganics Pvt. Ltd., Bhavnagar vs. The ITO, Ward-1(5), Bhavnagar

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

ITA 2474/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2474/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15)

For Appellant: Surya PrasadFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr. D.R
Section 56(2)(viib)

…of the Act. A re-valuation or otherwise, according to the learned AR does not have any impact for determination of true value. The learned AR referred to and relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC) for the proposition that the manner of entries in the books of accounts would ITA No. 2474/Ahd/17 [Unnati Inorganics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO] A.Y. 2014-15 - 9 - not be decisive or conclusive in determination of true profits and absence of entries in the books of accounts will not impinge upon the rights of the assessee in demonstrating the intrins…

Nowrosjee Wadia and Sons Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(2)(3), Mumbai

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4133/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Mr. Ronak Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Jothi Lakshmi Nayak, DR
Section 143(3)Section 234B

…g the allowability of expenditure. In this regard, reliance is place by him on the decision in CIT v. Sutlej 7 Nowrosjee Wadia and Sons ITA Nos. 4133, 4705 & 5284/Mum/2015 Cotton Mills Supply Agency Ltd. (100 ITR 706) (SC), Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. CIT (82 ITR 363) (SC). On the other hand the Ld. DR relies on the order of the AO. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. The issue relates to other payment of Rs. 78,40,391/- . We are of the considered view that the relevant documents/evidence on it would resolve the above issue. Therefore, we set aside the order o…

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in IT(TP) A No

ITA 781/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Waseem Ahmed1. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 1782/Del/2014 2. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 781/Del/2015 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. The Dcit बनाम/ 12Th Floor, Devika Tower Circle-21(1), New Vs. 6, Nehru Place, New Delhi Delhi/ 110 019 Addl.Cit Range-15 New Delhi "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacr0127N .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi, Ms.Urvashi Shodhan & Shri P.Shah, Ars ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik ChokshiFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Shah, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92D

…14 & 781/Del/2015 Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. vs. DCIT/Addl.CIT Asst.Years – 2009-10 & 2010-11 respectively 6. The Tribunal in the instant case has followed the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363. In view thereof and finding that the Tribunal's order is in consonance with the facts and circumstances of the case, so also, the statutory liability having been created in the year in question and which has no bearing on the pending proceedings initiated by the Assessee or the dispute raised therein that we find that this question cannot be term…

M/S. Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited, New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in IT(TP) A No

ITA 1782/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Waseem Ahmed1. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 1782/Del/2014 2. आयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A No. 781/Del/2015 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. The Dcit बनाम/ 12Th Floor, Devika Tower Circle-21(1), New Vs. 6, Nehru Place, New Delhi Delhi/ 110 019 Addl.Cit Range-15 New Delhi "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacr0127N .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi, Ms.Urvashi Shodhan & Shri P.Shah, Ars ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik ChokshiFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Shah, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92D

…14 & 781/Del/2015 Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. vs. DCIT/Addl.CIT Asst.Years – 2009-10 & 2010-11 respectively 6. The Tribunal in the instant case has followed the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363. In view thereof and finding that the Tribunal's order is in consonance with the facts and circumstances of the case, so also, the statutory liability having been created in the year in question and which has no bearing on the pending proceedings initiated by the Assessee or the dispute raised therein that we find that this question cannot be term…

Rmc Readmix(India) P. Ltd ( Now Amalgamated With Rism Cement Ltd), Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 34, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2006-07,

ITA 3371/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu (Vp) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S Rmc Readymix (India) The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, P. Ltd., Central Circle -34, Windsor, 7Th Floor, C.S.T Road, Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Near Vidyanagri, Kalina, Mumbai - 400020 Santacruz (E), Mumbai - 400098 Pan : Aaacr4938D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi (AR)For Respondent: Shri Rajeev Gubgotra/
Section 115JSection 143Section 2(24)(x)Section 40

…ure. Accounting treatment has nothing to do with such allowance as has been rightly pointed out by the A.R. quoting CBDT Circular and Supreme Court decision in the case of Assessment Years: 2006-07 2007-08 & 2008-09 Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co Ltd. vs. CIT (1971) 82 ITR 363. As such the A.O directed to allow the expenditure as claimed by the appellant on this issue. 7. We further notice that in the subsequent assessment years i.e. for the AY 2004-05 and 2005-06, the then Commissioners (Appeals) allowed the identical claim of the assessee by following the decision of their predecessor passed in the assessee’s own cas…

At & T Communication Services India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6322/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishiat& T Communication Services Vs. Dcit, India Pvt Ltd, Circle-2(1), Vatika Triangle, 3Rd Floor, New Delhi Sushant Lok-1, Block-A, Gurgaon Pan: Aacca8033E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Raman Chopra, CIT DR
Section 143Section 144CSection 153(1)Section 40

…ooks of accounts, we are of the considered opinion that there would be no liability to deduct tax as no income accrued to the payees.” 2. In the aforesaid case reliance was placed on the judgement of the apex court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. (82 ITR 363) wherein it was held that 3. “We are wholly unable to appreciate the suggestion that if an assessee under some misapprehension or mistake fails to make an entry in the books of account and although, under the law, a deduction must be allowed by the Income- tax Officer, the assessee will lose the right of claiming or will be debarred from being all…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Citi Financial Cosumer Finance India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3118/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

…re concerned, it is well settled that they do not clinch the issue either way, and are not determinative of the allowability or otherwise of the expenditure. The decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971 ] 82 ITR 363 and in the case of CIT v. Indian Discounts Co. Ltd. [1970] 75 ITR 191 (SC) are clear on the issue. The accounting entries in the books of accounts are occasioned by a diverse set of considerations and issues such as 41 ITA nos. 3144&3145,5514 &5191,2687&2688/Del./2010 compliance with statutory laws and mandatory accounting standards/principles and…

DCIT- 14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Commtel Networks Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3427/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negidcit-14(1)(2) Vs. M/S Commtel Networks Room No.470, 4Th Floor Private Limited Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road 23, White Castle, 34-35 Mumbai-400 020 Union Park, Chembur Mumbai-400 071 Pan/Gir No.Aaacc8966G Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 211

…f income does not result at all, there cannot be a tax, even though in book keeping an entry is made about a ‘hypothetical income.’ 24. The decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co., 46 ITR 144, Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd., (1971) 82 ITR 363, Birla Gwalior Pvt. Ltd., (1973) 89 ITR 266, 273(SC) and Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd., (1979) 116 1,5 supports our contention. Further recent decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Taparia Tools Ltd., dated 23/03/2015 reiterated the above principle. In view of the above, merely because retention money is accounted for in the books of account, th…

Hemant G. Bohra, Mumbai vs. ACIT 19(1) (Erstwhile-19(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 4197/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am Shri Hemant G. Bohra Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Shop No.15, 52/52A, Income Tax – 19(1) Room No.203, 2Nd Floor Nanubhai Desai Road Islampura Street Matru Mandir, Mumbai – 400 004 Tardeo, Mumbai – 400 007 Pan/Gir No.Adnpb4773D (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 43BSection 57

…the said Act. It is also significant to note that the assessee's entitlement to claim deduction had been held to be valid in view of an earlier judgment of the Supreme Court in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Company Limited v. Commissioner of Income-tax, (1971) 82 ITR 363. This was, therefore, a case of error in perception/judgment. Despite the same, the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in allowing the 9 Shri Hemant G. Bohra deduction. The words “could not have been raised” must, therefore, be construed liberally and not strictly. 15. It is indeed a question of exercise of…

Bank of Maharashtra, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 635/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan with Mrs. Lalitha RFor Respondent: Mrs. Kesang Y. Sherpa

…n-fact, this aspect of the controversy has also been answered by the Hon‟ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Corporation Bank Ltd. (supra) by relying on the judgement of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC). Therefore, we do not find any merits in the above objection of the Revenue. Moreover, the plea of the learned CIT-DR that nature of HTM securities is distinct from AFS and HFT securities and thus HTM securities are not stock-in-trade, is quite wrong. It cannot be denied that the securities held by the bank are stock-in-trade. Another plea of…