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 367,164 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

Langar Committee Hanuman Mandir, Malerkotla vs. Income Tax Officer, (Examption), Jalandhar

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is disposed on the aforesaid terms

ITA 516/ASR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Mar 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N.K.Choudhryi.T.A No. 516/(Asr)/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Subhash Jain & Kartik Jain (C As)For Respondent: Sh. S.S. Negi (DR)
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(iia)

…levant to state that it is the correct legal position that is relevant, and not the view that the parties may take of their rights in the matter (CIT v. C. Parakh & Co. (India) Ltd. [1956] 29 ITR 661 (SC))(also refer Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363 (SC)). That apart, it may be appreciated that not so holding, i.e., that the assessee is not entitled to any exemption u/s. 11 on account of non-registration u/s. 12AA, on which aspect there is no ambivalence in law (refer section 12A(1)), would render our own order as internally inconsistent, i.e., the same malady that inflicts the orders by the…

The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4, Puducherry vs. Kalapet Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Pondicherry

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes’’

ITA 2190/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Mrs. S. Vijayaprabha, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. T. Vasudevan, Advocate
Section 5Section 56Section 80Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

…t needs to be appreciated that it is the correct legal position that is relevant, and not the view that the parties may take of their rights in the matter (CIT v. C. Parakh & Co. (India ) Ltd. [1956] 29 ITR 661 (SC); Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363 (SC)). Finally, even where the assessee succeeds, it being only on the basis of its’ ‘principal business’, which, could vary in it’s composition from year to year, i.e., in response to the market (supply and demand) forces, the assessee- bank’s claim would necessarily require being reviewed on a year to year basis, and decided on the basis of fact…

Everest Industires Ltd, New Delhi vs. JCIT RG 1, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is treated as allowed and the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed

ITA 3804/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Ramlal Negi (Jm)

…t the accounting entries made cannot determine taxability of item of income or deductibility of item of expenditure as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT (116 ITR 1) and Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (82 ITR 363). The Learned AR further submitted that the assessee has used foreign currency loan for the purpose of business in acquiring fixed assets in India and also for other purposes. Hence, foreign exchange fluctuation loss has arisen in course of carrying on the business and the same is allowable u/s. 37(1) of the Act. Learned AR further submitted that…

Addl CIT RG 24(1), Mumbai vs. Arun Damji Gada, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed whereas appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 105/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Shri Arun Damji Gada Vs. Acit 24(1) A-103, God Gift Adarsha Pratyshakar Bhawan Dugdhalaya Lane, Bandra Kurla Complex Adarsh Nagar, Adarsh Dhughala Bandra (E) Lane, Malad (W) Mumbai – 400 050 Mumbai – 400 064 Pan/Gir No.Aabpg3923F Appellant) .. Respondent) Acit 24(1) Vs. Shri Arun Damji Gada C-13 R/Nop, 503 A-103, God Gift Adarsha Pratyshakar Bhawan Dugdhalaya Lane, Bandra Kurla Complex Adarsh Nagar, Adarsh Bandra (E) Dhughala Lane, Malad (W) Mumbai – 400 050 Mumbai – 400 064 Pan/Gir No. Aabpg3923F Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 80I

…also to be realized that mere accounting entries or lack of entries or its presentation cannot solely determinethe timing & incidence of and amount of taxation. To this extent the judgements of the Apex court in cases of Kedamath Jute Mfg Co Ltd vs CIT (1971) 82 ITR 363 (Supreme Court) , Tuticorin Alkalies Chemicals 227 ITR 172 (SC) and Sutlej Cotton Mills 116 ITR 1 (SC) are respected and to be followed without any qualifications to them in spirit and essence both. The appellant has claimed that if his projects are to be taxed on substantial completion then his expenditure of Rs.3.80 crores estimated on the basis…

Oriental Bank of Commerce vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/57/2018HC Delhi17 Jan 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

…aggrieved. 6. The assessee relies upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. Vs CIT, (2000) 245 ITR 428 (SC); Calcutta Co. Ltd. Vs CIT (1959) 37 ITR 1; and, Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd Vs Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax,(1971) 82 ITR 363. It is submitted that an identical question was urged and the assessee’s contention accepted by Page 5 of 13 ITA 57/2018 this court in Aggarwal and Modi Enterprise (Cinema Project) Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT, (2016) 381 ITR 469 (Del.). 7. Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, learned counsel for Revenue urges that order impugned is merely one of remission…

M/S. Sicgil India Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical

ITA 2839/CHNY/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 2839/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2003-04 M/S. Sicgil India Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Dhun Building, Vs. Company Circle – Vi(3), 827, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai – 600 002. [Pan: Aaacs 3767M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. A.S. Sriraman, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 68

…sion for MFL excess bill. I find that this issue has already been decided by learned CIT(A) in the case of the appellant for the assessment :-3-: year 2002-03. After considering the Hon’ble SC judgement in the case of Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Vs. CIT 82 ITR 363, the learned CIT(A) has given a direction that these amounts are deductible from the profits of the company. Respectfully following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court and appellate order of CIT(A) for the assessment year 2002-03. In the case of the appellant, the issue is decided in favour of the appellant. The addition made by the learned AO o…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 4202/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2007-08 Acit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No. 226/Del/2011 (Arising Ita No.2720/Del/2011) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.E. Dastur, Sr. Advocate and Shri Ankit Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…ised in the books of a/c for the propositions that the entire in the books of a/c are not conclusive of claim of any item as revenue deduction the reliance in this respect is placed on the decision of Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Kedarnath Jute Mills (82 ITR 363). “ The AO from the aforesaid note deduced that the assessee has taken over the operating charge of the airport under the agreement to carry out various functions like; operating, maintaining, developing, designing & constructing and management of the airport, etc., for which the assessee will enjoy benefits not in a year but during the whole per…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 2720/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2007-08 Acit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No. 226/Del/2011 (Arising Ita No.2720/Del/2011) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.E. Dastur, Sr. Advocate and Shri Ankit Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…ised in the books of a/c for the propositions that the entire in the books of a/c are not conclusive of claim of any item as revenue deduction the reliance in this respect is placed on the decision of Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Kedarnath Jute Mills (82 ITR 363). “ The AO from the aforesaid note deduced that the assessee has taken over the operating charge of the airport under the agreement to carry out various functions like; operating, maintaining, developing, designing & constructing and management of the airport, etc., for which the assessee will enjoy benefits not in a year but during the whole per…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Bgr Energy System Ltd., Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee and Revenue are partly

ITA 954/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mrs. Jharna B. Harilal, C.A

…lved before us and were wrongly taken into account by the Revenue authorities. Regarding the entries in the books of account, we may safely quote the following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363 at page 367 :- "The main contention of the learned Solicitor-General is that the assessee failed to debit the liability in its books of account and, therefore, it was debarred from claiming the same as deduction either under section 10(1) or under section ITA Nos.660 & 954/17 :- 28 -: & C.O.65/2017 10(2)(xv) of the Act. We are wholly unable to…

Bgr Energy Systems Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee and Revenue are partly

ITA 660/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mrs. Jharna B. Harilal, C.A

…lved before us and were wrongly taken into account by the Revenue authorities. Regarding the entries in the books of account, we may safely quote the following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363 at page 367 :- "The main contention of the learned Solicitor-General is that the assessee failed to debit the liability in its books of account and, therefore, it was debarred from claiming the same as deduction either under section 10(1) or under section ITA Nos.660 & 954/17 :- 28 -: & C.O.65/2017 10(2)(xv) of the Act. We are wholly unable to…

DCIT, Cir-8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Mapex Infrastructure Pvt Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1080/KOL/2015[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2017AY 2004-2005

Bench: : Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Kalyan Nath, Addl.CIT, ld.DRFor Respondent: Shri G.Banerjee, FCA, ld.AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)(ii)Section 148

…mmissioner of Income-Tax v. Berger Paints (India) Ltd. reported in [2002] 254 ITR page 503 while taking note of the old decision of the Supreme Court in case of Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. CIT and CIT v. India Discount Co. Ltd. reported in [1971] 82 ITR 363 (SC) and [1970] 75 ITR 191 (SC) held that if according to the revenue laws the assessee is entitled to treat a sum as a revenue expenditure, then that legal right of the assessee is not self estopped by the treatment given by the assessee to it in its own books of account. It appears that the authorities below have heavily relied on the account i…

M/S. Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, both the assessee’s and the Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1858/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1858/Mds/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income Refinery House, Manali, Vs. Tax, Chennai – 600 068 Company Circle-I(3), [Pan: Aaacm 4392C] Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: 07.09.2017
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 28Section 36(1)(iii)

…., after determining the facts. It is the correct legal position that is relevant, and not the view that the parties may take of their rights in the matter (CIT v. C. Parakh & Co. (India) Ltd. [1956] 29 ITR 661 (SC); Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363 (SC)). The tribunal as an appellate authority, is under bounden duty to correct the errors, if any, attending the proceedings for assessment, issuing appropriate directions. (refer, inter alia, Kapurchand Shrimal v. CIT [1991] 131 ITR 451 (SC)). As explained in CIT v. Walchand and Co. (P.) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 (SC), the tribunal is to deal with…

Analjit Singh, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 16(2), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4737/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P.Kant

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 50D

…n that entries in the books of account are not conclusive for determination of tax liability, which has to be computed in accordance with the provisions of the Act. In support he placed reliance on the following decisions: Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT: 82 ITR 363 (SC); Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT: 116 ITR 1 (SC); and Taparia Tools Ltd. V.JCIT: 372 ITR 605 (SC). Arguments on behalf of the respondent/ Revenue 70. On the other hand, Special Counsel of the Revenue, Mr. G.C. Srivastava submitted that the assessee had borrowed the funds for subscribing to the right issue and claim the interest payable on s…

The Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax-3 vs. Embryonic Properties Ltd

ITA/1067/2017HC Delhi28 Nov 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

…ngs. Besides, treatment of particular amounts is not to be based only on the manner of the assessee’s reporting or its treatment in the books but as to its true nature as ruled in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (1971) 82 ITR 363; furthermore this kind of treatment (i.e. writing off of business related debts), as a business loss, was upheld in Mohan Meakin Ltd. (supra). No question of law therefore arises. The appeal is consequently dismissed. S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J NOVEMBER 28, 2017 kks…

DCIT 10(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Mumbai International Airport P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed and revenue’s appeal is

ITA 4838/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ranjit Singh Arneja

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “B”, MUMBAI Before Shri P K Bansal, Vice President & Shri Pawan Singh, Judicial Member ITA No.4382/Mum/2015 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Mumbai International Airport P Ltd. Dy CIT 10(2)(2) Finance Department, 1st Floor, Mumbai Vs. Terminal 1B, Chatrapati Shivaji International Airport, Santacruz (E), Mumbai 400 099 PAN : AAECM6285C (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.4838/Mum/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy CIT Range 10(2)(2) Mumbai International Airport P Ltd. Mumbai Mumbai 400 099 Vs. PAN : AAECM6285C (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Assessee : Shri Vijay Mehta…

Mumbai International Airport P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed and revenue’s appeal is

ITA 4382/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ranjit Singh Arneja

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “B”, MUMBAI Before Shri P K Bansal, Vice President & Shri Pawan Singh, Judicial Member ITA No.4382/Mum/2015 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Mumbai International Airport P Ltd. Dy CIT 10(2)(2) Finance Department, 1st Floor, Mumbai Vs. Terminal 1B, Chatrapati Shivaji International Airport, Santacruz (E), Mumbai 400 099 PAN : AAECM6285C (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.4838/Mum/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy CIT Range 10(2)(2) Mumbai International Airport P Ltd. Mumbai Mumbai 400 099 Vs. PAN : AAECM6285C (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Assessee : Shri Vijay Mehta…

DCIT 8(2), Mumbai vs. Mumbai International Airport P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are statistically allowed and revenue’s

ITA 5655/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan
Section 14ASection 40

…ered the same along with the orders of the authorities below. We have also gone through various judgments as has been referred to before us as well as the CIT(A). It is a settled law, in view of the decision of Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (82 ITR 363), that assessee’s entitlement 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 existence or absence of entries in the books of accounts be decisive or conclusive in the matter. We have also gone through the decision of Hon’ble Supreme c…

Mumbai International Airport P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are statistically allowed and revenue’s

ITA 4784/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan
Section 14ASection 40

…ered the same along with the orders of the authorities below. We have also gone through various judgments as has been referred to before us as well as the CIT(A). It is a settled law, in view of the decision of Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (82 ITR 363), that assessee’s entitlement 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 existence or absence of entries in the books of accounts be decisive or conclusive in the matter. We have also gone through the decision of Hon’ble Supreme c…

DCIT 8(2), Mumbai vs. Mumbai International Airport P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are statistically allowed and revenue’s

ITA 5592/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan
Section 14ASection 40

…ered the same along with the orders of the authorities below. We have also gone through various judgments as has been referred to before us as well as the CIT(A). It is a settled law, in view of the decision of Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (82 ITR 363), that assessee’s entitlement 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 existence or absence of entries in the books of accounts be decisive or conclusive in the matter. We have also gone through the decision of Hon’ble Supreme c…

Mumbai International Airport P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are statistically allowed and revenue’s

ITA 4911/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan
Section 14ASection 40

…ered the same along with the orders of the authorities below. We have also gone through various judgments as has been referred to before us as well as the CIT(A). It is a settled law, in view of the decision of Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (82 ITR 363), that assessee’s entitlement 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 existence or absence of entries in the books of accounts be decisive or conclusive in the matter. We have also gone through the decision of Hon’ble Supreme c…