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 366,470 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

Taurian Engineering P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. JCIT (OSD) 4(3), Mumbai

ITA 3129/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No 3129/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Taurian Engineering Pvt.Ltd, Jt.Commissioner Of Income Tax 302-A, Poonam Chamberes, (Osd)-4(3), फनधभ/ 3Rd Floor, Dr.Annie Besant Road, Room No.649, 6Th Floor, Worli, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400018 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 स्थधमी रेखध सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan : Aabcm8782H (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीरधथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri J P Bairagra प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri R A Dhyani सुनवधई की तधयीख /Date Of Hearing : 02.02.2016 घोषणध की तधयीख /Date Of : 08.03.2016 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, A. M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 4.2.2013 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai Hereinafter Called As The Cit(A)) For Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Only Issue Raised In The Grounds Of Appeal By The Assessee Is Against The Upholding Of The Provisions Of Section 2(22)(E) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & Against The Confirmation Of Addition Of Rs.1,09,75,000/- Under Section 2(22)(E) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri J P BairagraFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani
Section 143(2)Section 2(22)(e)

…el); d) NH Securities Ltd V/s DCIT (2007) 11 SOT 302 (Mumba); e) CIT V/s Raj Kumar (2009) 318 ITR 462(Del); f) CIT V/s P K Badiani (1970) 76 ITR 369) (Bom); g) Anilkumar Agarwal V/s ITO (2011)138 TTJ 175) Mum); and h) Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co.Ltd V/s CIT (1971) 82 ITR 363(SC) 5. Per contra the ld DR relied heavily on the orders of authorities below and submitted that the deeming provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the Act were clearly applicable and were rightly invoked by the AO. The ld DR argued that the assessee had in fact taken advances from TISPCL and contention of the assessee that these were taken for supply…

Eih Limited., Kolkata vs. C.I.T Kol - III, Kolkata

In the result, the order passed by the Learned CIT u/s 263 of the Act is set aside and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 529/KOL/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: : Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri R.N Bajoria, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: G. Mallikarjun, CIT, ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 38Section 38(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “C” BENCH, KOLKATA Before : Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Judicial Member, and Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member ITA No. 529/Kol/2013 A.Y 2008-09 E I H Limited Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax PAN:AAACE 6898B (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant/Assessee: Shri R.N Bajoria, Sr. Advocate & Shri A.K. Gupta, FCA, ld.ARs For the Respondent/Department: G. Mallikarjun, CIT, ld.DR Date of Hearing: 11-02-2016 Date of Pronouncement: 19 -02-2016 ORDER SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM : This appeal of the assessee arises out of the order of the Learned CIT, Kolkata u/s 263 of th…

Daikin Airconditioning India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and the revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5293/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava:Asstt. Yr: 2003-04 Daikin Air Conditioning Vs. Dcit, Circle 10(1), India Pvt. 12Th Floor, New Delhi. Surya Kiran Building, 19, K.G. Marg, New Delhi-110001. Pan: Aabcd 0971 F & Asstt. Yr: 2003-04 Dcit, Circle 10(1), Vs. Daikin Air Conditioning India Pvt. 12Th Floor, New Delhi. Surya Kiran Building, 19, K.G. Marg, New Delhi-110001. ( Appellant ) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vishal Kalra Adv. Revenue By : Shri Ramesh Chandra Danday Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 11/01/2016. Date Of Order : 12/02/2016. O R D E R Per S.V. Mehrotra, A.M:

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ramesh Chandra Danday Sr. DR

…to Rs. 52151834 was claimed as revenue expenditure and the amount of Rs. 22228060 was added back. The assessee placed reliance on various decisions to submit that the entire amount was allowable as business expenditure: - Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 82 ITR 363; - Amar Raja Batteries Ltd. Vs. ACIT 272 ITR 17 (AT)(Hyd-ITAT) - Hindustan Commercial Bank Ltd. v. Re. 21 ITR 353 (All) - National Industrial Corporation Ltd. 124 Taman 413 (Delhi) - CIT v. Berger Paints (India) Ltd. 254 ITR 503 (Cal.) - Campa Beverages (P) Ltd. V. IAC 34 ITD 241 (Delhi Tribunal) 20. The AO concluded that expenditure was basically…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Daikin Air- Conditioning India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and the revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 2922/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava:Asstt. Yr: 2003-04 Daikin Air Conditioning Vs. Dcit, Circle 10(1), India Pvt. 12Th Floor, New Delhi. Surya Kiran Building, 19, K.G. Marg, New Delhi-110001. Pan: Aabcd 0971 F & Asstt. Yr: 2003-04 Dcit, Circle 10(1), Vs. Daikin Air Conditioning India Pvt. 12Th Floor, New Delhi. Surya Kiran Building, 19, K.G. Marg, New Delhi-110001. ( Appellant ) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vishal Kalra Adv. Revenue By : Shri Ramesh Chandra Danday Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 11/01/2016. Date Of Order : 12/02/2016. O R D E R Per S.V. Mehrotra, A.M:

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ramesh Chandra Danday Sr. DR

…to Rs. 52151834 was claimed as revenue expenditure and the amount of Rs. 22228060 was added back. The assessee placed reliance on various decisions to submit that the entire amount was allowable as business expenditure: - Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 82 ITR 363; - Amar Raja Batteries Ltd. Vs. ACIT 272 ITR 17 (AT)(Hyd-ITAT) - Hindustan Commercial Bank Ltd. v. Re. 21 ITR 353 (All) - National Industrial Corporation Ltd. 124 Taman 413 (Delhi) - CIT v. Berger Paints (India) Ltd. 254 ITR 503 (Cal.) - Campa Beverages (P) Ltd. V. IAC 34 ITD 241 (Delhi Tribunal) 20. The AO concluded that expenditure was basically…

Prime Focus Ltd.., Mumbai vs. D.C.I.T. (Ods) C. RG. 7, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 8364/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Amarjit Singhi.T.A. No.8364/M/2011 (Assessment Year: 2008-2009) C.O.233/M/2012 (Arising Out Of Ita No.8066/M/2011) (Ay 2008-09) Prime Focus Limited, फनाभ/ Dcit (Osd-1), 1S T Floor, Old Dubbing & Central Range, Aayakar Vs. Recording Studio Building, Bhavan, Marine Lines, Dadasaheb Phalke Chitra Mumbai – 400 020. Nagari,Filmcity Campus, Opposite Hotel Food Paradise, Filmcity, Goregaon (E), Mumbai – 400 065. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aaacp6811B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R.R. VoraFor Respondent: Shri M. Dayasagar, DR
Section 14ASection 234D

…not treat the same as a capital in nature solely on the ground that they were written off in the security premium account, a balance sheet entry. Relying on the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Company Limited (82 ITR 363), Ld Counsel for the assessee submitted that the accounting entries do not impact tax implications. Further, relying on the recent decision of the ITAT, Hyderabad in the case of Bhagyanagar India Limited (ITA No. 99 and 1345/2012), Ld Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee‟s option to write off FCCB issue expenses against the securit…

M/S.Karnataka Power Transmission vs. The Deputy Commissioner of

In the result, the appeals are allowed

ITA/750/2009HC Karnataka02 Feb 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

Section 194Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 260

…IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2016 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. PATIL AND THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S. SUJATHA ITA Nos.750 and 758-759/2009 BETWEEN M/s Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited Bangalore. ….Appellant (By Sri.V.K. Gurunathan, Advocate For Sri.S. Parthasarathi.) AND The Deputy Commissioner Of Income-tax (TDS) Circle 16(2), Bangalore. …Respondent (By Sri.K.V. Aravind, Advocate ) These Appeals are filed under Sect…

Aggarwal & Modi Enterpises Co vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/1123/2007HC Delhi21 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…with the Assessee that the amounts payable to NDMC towards liability had already accrued and deleted the addition made by the AO. The CIT (A) referred to the decision in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC). ITA Nos.353, 354, 355/2003; 767, 769, 770, 801, 876/2006; 1122, 1123/2007; 1273, 1274, 1277/2009 Page 13 of 31 19. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (A), the Revenue went in appeal before the ITAT. By an order dated 31st October 2002 the ITAT reversed the order of the CIT (A) sustaining the additions made by the AO.…

Aggarwal & Modi Enterprises Pv vs. C.I.T

ITA/770/2006HC Delhi21 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…with the Assessee that the amounts payable to NDMC towards liability had already accrued and deleted the addition made by the AO. The CIT (A) referred to the decision in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC). ITA Nos.353, 354, 355/2003; 767, 769, 770, 801, 876/2006; 1122, 1123/2007; 1273, 1274, 1277/2009 Page 13 of 31 19. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (A), the Revenue went in appeal before the ITAT. By an order dated 31st October 2002 the ITAT reversed the order of the CIT (A) sustaining the additions made by the AO.…

M/S Aggarwal & Modi Enterprise vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/355/2003HC Delhi21 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…with the Assessee that the amounts payable to NDMC towards liability had already accrued and deleted the addition made by the AO. The CIT (A) referred to the decision in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC). ITA Nos.353, 354, 355/2003; 767, 769, 770, 801, 876/2006; 1122, 1123/2007; 1273, 1274, 1277/2009 Page 13 of 31 19. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (A), the Revenue went in appeal before the ITAT. By an order dated 31st October 2002 the ITAT reversed the order of the CIT (A) sustaining the additions made by the AO.…

M/S Aggarwal & Modi Enterprise vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/876/2006HC Delhi21 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…with the Assessee that the amounts payable to NDMC towards liability had already accrued and deleted the addition made by the AO. The CIT (A) referred to the decision in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC). ITA Nos.353, 354, 355/2003; 767, 769, 770, 801, 876/2006; 1122, 1123/2007; 1273, 1274, 1277/2009 Page 13 of 31 19. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (A), the Revenue went in appeal before the ITAT. By an order dated 31st October 2002 the ITAT reversed the order of the CIT (A) sustaining the additions made by the AO.…

M/S Aggarwal & Modi Enterprises vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/1277/2009HC Delhi21 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…with the Assessee that the amounts payable to NDMC towards liability had already accrued and deleted the addition made by the AO. The CIT (A) referred to the decision in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC). ITA Nos.353, 354, 355/2003; 767, 769, 770, 801, 876/2006; 1122, 1123/2007; 1273, 1274, 1277/2009 Page 13 of 31 19. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (A), the Revenue went in appeal before the ITAT. By an order dated 31st October 2002 the ITAT reversed the order of the CIT (A) sustaining the additions made by the AO.…

M/S Aggarwal & Modi Enterprise vs. Commisisoner of Income Tax

ITA/801/2006HC Delhi21 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…with the Assessee that the amounts payable to NDMC towards liability had already accrued and deleted the addition made by the AO. The CIT (A) referred to the decision in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC). ITA Nos.353, 354, 355/2003; 767, 769, 770, 801, 876/2006; 1122, 1123/2007; 1273, 1274, 1277/2009 Page 13 of 31 19. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (A), the Revenue went in appeal before the ITAT. By an order dated 31st October 2002 the ITAT reversed the order of the CIT (A) sustaining the additions made by the AO.…

M/S Aggarwal & Modi Enterprises Pvt Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/1273/2009HC Delhi21 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…with the Assessee that the amounts payable to NDMC towards liability had already accrued and deleted the addition made by the AO. The CIT (A) referred to the decision in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC). ITA Nos.353, 354, 355/2003; 767, 769, 770, 801, 876/2006; 1122, 1123/2007; 1273, 1274, 1277/2009 Page 13 of 31 19. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (A), the Revenue went in appeal before the ITAT. By an order dated 31st October 2002 the ITAT reversed the order of the CIT (A) sustaining the additions made by the AO.…

M/S Aggarwal & Modi Enterprise vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/769/2006HC Delhi21 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…with the Assessee that the amounts payable to NDMC towards liability had already accrued and deleted the addition made by the AO. The CIT (A) referred to the decision in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC). ITA Nos.353, 354, 355/2003; 767, 769, 770, 801, 876/2006; 1122, 1123/2007; 1273, 1274, 1277/2009 Page 13 of 31 19. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (A), the Revenue went in appeal before the ITAT. By an order dated 31st October 2002 the ITAT reversed the order of the CIT (A) sustaining the additions made by the AO.…

M/S Aggarwal & Modi Enterprises vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/354/2003HC Delhi21 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…with the Assessee that the amounts payable to NDMC towards liability had already accrued and deleted the addition made by the AO. The CIT (A) referred to the decision in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC). ITA Nos.353, 354, 355/2003; 767, 769, 770, 801, 876/2006; 1122, 1123/2007; 1273, 1274, 1277/2009 Page 13 of 31 19. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (A), the Revenue went in appeal before the ITAT. By an order dated 31st October 2002 the ITAT reversed the order of the CIT (A) sustaining the additions made by the AO.…

Aggarwal & Modi Enterprises Co vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/1122/2007HC Delhi21 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…with the Assessee that the amounts payable to NDMC towards liability had already accrued and deleted the addition made by the AO. The CIT (A) referred to the decision in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC). ITA Nos.353, 354, 355/2003; 767, 769, 770, 801, 876/2006; 1122, 1123/2007; 1273, 1274, 1277/2009 Page 13 of 31 19. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (A), the Revenue went in appeal before the ITAT. By an order dated 31st October 2002 the ITAT reversed the order of the CIT (A) sustaining the additions made by the AO.…

M/S Aggarwal & Modi Enterprise vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/353/2003HC Delhi21 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…with the Assessee that the amounts payable to NDMC towards liability had already accrued and deleted the addition made by the AO. The CIT (A) referred to the decision in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC). ITA Nos.353, 354, 355/2003; 767, 769, 770, 801, 876/2006; 1122, 1123/2007; 1273, 1274, 1277/2009 Page 13 of 31 19. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (A), the Revenue went in appeal before the ITAT. By an order dated 31st October 2002 the ITAT reversed the order of the CIT (A) sustaining the additions made by the AO.…

Aggarwal & Modi Enterprises Pv vs. C.I.T

ITA/767/2006HC Delhi21 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…with the Assessee that the amounts payable to NDMC towards liability had already accrued and deleted the addition made by the AO. The CIT (A) referred to the decision in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC). ITA Nos.353, 354, 355/2003; 767, 769, 770, 801, 876/2006; 1122, 1123/2007; 1273, 1274, 1277/2009 Page 13 of 31 19. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (A), the Revenue went in appeal before the ITAT. By an order dated 31st October 2002 the ITAT reversed the order of the CIT (A) sustaining the additions made by the AO.…

M/S Aggarwal & Modi Enterprises vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/1274/2009HC Delhi21 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…with the Assessee that the amounts payable to NDMC towards liability had already accrued and deleted the addition made by the AO. The CIT (A) referred to the decision in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC). ITA Nos.353, 354, 355/2003; 767, 769, 770, 801, 876/2006; 1122, 1123/2007; 1273, 1274, 1277/2009 Page 13 of 31 19. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (A), the Revenue went in appeal before the ITAT. By an order dated 31st October 2002 the ITAT reversed the order of the CIT (A) sustaining the additions made by the AO.…

M/S Aggarwal & Modi Enterprises vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA - 1274 / 2009HC Delhi21 Jan 2016

…with the Assessee that the amounts payable to NDMC towards liability had already accrued and deleted the addition made by the AO. The CIT (A) referred to the decision in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC). 2016:DHC:494-DB ITA Nos.353, 354, 355/2003; 767, 769, 770, 801, 876/2006; 1122, 1123/2007; 1273, 1274, 1277/2009 Page 13 of 31 19. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (A), the Revenue went in appeal before the ITAT. By an order dated 31st October 2002 the ITAT reversed the order of the CIT (A) sustaining the additions…