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

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Kailash Ramavatar Goenka, Ahmedabad

ITA 67/AHD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Advocate &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 132Section 153A

…g evidence. CIT(A) referred to several IT(SS)A No.1/Ahd/2023 Kailash Ramavatar Goenka vs. ACIT and seven other appeals (By Assessee and By Revenue) Asst. Years : 2016-17 to 2019-20 judicial precedents, including Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. CIT (82 ITR 363), CIT v. Gurubachan Singh J. Juneja (171 Taxman 406), and Jay Builder v. ACIT (33 taxmann.com 62), to emphasize that only real income or profits should be subjected to tax. The CIT(A) relied on the principle that only the profit element from unaccounted sales or receipts can be brought to tax. Referring to decisions in cases like Greenfield Realty…

The Dy CIT CC-38, Mumbai vs. M/S. United Phosphourous Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 4099/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2024AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt.Renu Jauhri, Accountan Member

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Heera Ram Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…th the provisions of law. It is contended that the said expenditure is allowable u/s 37 of the Act. Reliance has been placed on decisions of the High Courts and also of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. ShoorjiVallabhdas& Co. 46 ITR 144, Kedarnath Jute 82 ITR 363; Chowringhee Sales Bureau 87 ITR 542; Berger Paints 254 ITR 503. It is submitted that the registration of the product was compulsory to make sales in the respective countries. Without such registration, the appellant company could not have launched its product for sale in those countries. The expenditure was, therefore, of revenue nature. It is su…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Thane, Ashar It Part, Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane West vs. Mahyco Monsanto Biotech (India) Private Limited, Sandozbaugh So Thane

ITA 3325/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 143(3)Section 43B

…e appellant relied on several decisions of the courts respectfully following the decision of the Supreme Court in case of Berger Paints (India) Ltd vs. CIT 266 ITR 993 and the decision of the Supreme Court in case of Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co Ltd vs CIT 82 ITR 363. Respectfully following the decision of judicial authorities, the AO was directed to delete disallowance of MVAT payment. 5. The ld.DR has contested the deletion of the impugned sum by the ld.CIT(A) holding that the amount was not eligible for deduction as it was not crystallized. Per contra, the ld AR of the assessee submitted that during the yea…

Piramal Enterprises Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Taxcircle 7(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 3436/Mum/2024 is allowed

ITA 3436/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Anikesh Banerjee & Smt. Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi & Priyank GalaFor Respondent: Shri. Krishna Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 28Section 37Section 37(1)Section 41(1)

…ring the embezzlement. The assessee had never rectified the head during filing of return of Income in pursuance of notice U/s 148 of the Act. The Ld.AR relied 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). The Hon’ble Apex Court allowed the appeal of the assessee with following observation. “The main contention of the learned Solicitor-General is that the assessee failed to debit the liability in its books of accounts and, therefore, it was debarred from claiming the same as deduction either under section 10(1) or under section 10(2)(xv) of t…

M/S. Ritu Housing Ltd, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-13(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee isallowed

ITA 185/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata30 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Judicial Member)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(6)

…on facts and the appellant's claim for depreciation, could not be said to have been defeated by such case laws and it may be held accordingly. 7. That even case law of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT reported in (1971) 82 ITR 363, cover fully the case of the appellant as accounting entries for 'goodwill", generated on amalgamation, had duly been recorded in the books of account of the appellant, and it cannot be said or held that the quantum of "goodwill" (in monetary terms), had not been accounted for/ recorded in the books of account of the appellant/transferee and hen…

Economic Explosives Limited, Nagpur vs. National E Assessment Centre, New Delhi

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 242/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…months. Therefore, the expenses relating to voluntary retirement scheme were a revenue expenditure and were an allowable deduction." Similar view is taken in courts in following decisions: UCO Bank v CIT (237 ITR 889) (SC); Kedamath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v CIT (82 ITR 363) (SC) Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. v CIT (116 ITR 1) (SC); CIT v Tata Chemicals Ltd. (256 ITR 395) (Bom); CIT v Berger Paints (India) Ltd (254 ITR 503) (Cal); CIT v Bhor Industries Ltd. (264 ITR 180) (Bom); CIT v Fenner (India) Ltd. (292 ITR 605); CIT v Saravana Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. (292 ITR 655)(Mad); and CIT v Darius Pandole (330 ITR 485) (Bom).…

Economic Explosives Limited, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1 (2), Nagpur

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 177/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…months. Therefore, the expenses relating to voluntary retirement scheme were a revenue expenditure and were an allowable deduction." Similar view is taken in courts in following decisions: UCO Bank v CIT (237 ITR 889) (SC); Kedamath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v CIT (82 ITR 363) (SC) Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. v CIT (116 ITR 1) (SC); CIT v Tata Chemicals Ltd. (256 ITR 395) (Bom); CIT v Berger Paints (India) Ltd (254 ITR 503) (Cal); CIT v Bhor Industries Ltd. (264 ITR 180) (Bom); CIT v Fenner (India) Ltd. (292 ITR 605); CIT v Saravana Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. (292 ITR 655)(Mad); and CIT v Darius Pandole (330 ITR 485) (Bom).…

Indo Copters P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-12(1), New Delhi

In the result the appeal is partly allowed as above

ITA 597/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40a

…Admittedly, the appellant/assessee had claimed this expenditure in the ITR in the computation of income statement. In support of the argument, the Ld. AR, placing reliance on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mills Ltd. (82 ITR 363), the Delhi ITAT in the case of Ernst & Young Ltd. (order dated 31.05.2018 in the ITA Nos.6561 & 6562/Del/2016) and the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of British Bank of Middle East (Order dated 19.10.2016 in the 4 Indo Copters P. Ltd. ITA No.3925 /Mum /1999), submitted that as long as the expenditure was actually incurred and was other…

JCIT(OSD) Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai vs. M/S Cholamandalam Investment and Fiance Comppany Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 515/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain, CA (Through Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 143(3)

…treatment was given in the books of accounts, could not be factor, which would deprive assessee from claiming the entire payment of interest as deduction in the year of payment. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co Ltd vs CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363, held that entries in books of accounts is not relevant to decide the issue of deductibility of any expenditure. In the present case, there is no dispute with regard to the fact that the assessee has incurred the expenditure towards finance charges and also paid during the impugned assessment year itself. Since, the assessee has already paid finan…

JCIT(OSD) Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai vs. M/S Cholamandalam Investment and Fiance Comppany Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 514/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain, CA (Through Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 143(3)

…treatment was given in the books of accounts, could not be factor, which would deprive assessee from claiming the entire payment of interest as deduction in the year of payment. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co Ltd vs CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363, held that entries in books of accounts is not relevant to decide the issue of deductibility of any expenditure. In the present case, there is no dispute with regard to the fact that the assessee has incurred the expenditure towards finance charges and also paid during the impugned assessment year itself. Since, the assessee has already paid finan…

Cholamandalam Investment &Finance Company Limited, Parrys, Chennai vs. ACIT- Corporate Circle -1(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 384/CHNY/2023[AY 2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2024

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain, CA (Through Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 143(3)

…treatment was given in the books of accounts, could not be factor, which would deprive assessee from claiming the entire payment of interest as deduction in the year of payment. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co Ltd vs CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363, held that entries in books of accounts is not relevant to decide the issue of deductibility of any expenditure. In the present case, there is no dispute with regard to the fact that the assessee has incurred the expenditure towards finance charges and also paid during the impugned assessment year itself. Since, the assessee has already paid finan…

M/S Cholamandalam Investment & Finance Company Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT-1(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 847/CHNY/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain, CA (Through Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 143(3)

…treatment was given in the books of accounts, could not be factor, which would deprive assessee from claiming the entire payment of interest as deduction in the year of payment. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co Ltd vs CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363, held that entries in books of accounts is not relevant to decide the issue of deductibility of any expenditure. In the present case, there is no dispute with regard to the fact that the assessee has incurred the expenditure towards finance charges and also paid during the impugned assessment year itself. Since, the assessee has already paid finan…

Pragati Power Corporation Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 20(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1617/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 145(2)Section 32Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 43ASection 46ASection 80I

…expenditure is debited to CWIP or fixed assets in the books of accounts. It is not disputed by the Assessing Officer that the assessee had generated electricity since FY 2013-14. k) Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg Co Ltd. vs CIT (1971) 82 ITR 363 that existence or absence of entries in the books of accounts cannot be decisive or conclusive for a particular deduction if otherwise it is allowable as per existing law. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of DCIT vs Core Health Care Ltd. (2008) 298 ITR 194 (SC) have held that the legislature has made no distinction in section 36(1)(ii) between "c…

Meenakshi Energy and Infrastructure Holdings Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 291/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.291/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Meenakshi Energy & Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Infrastructure Holdings (P) Circle 5 (1) Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aafcm6917L (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Advocate Shri A.V. Raghuram रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri K.Meghanath Chowhan,(Cit)Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/05/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 27/06/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Advocate Shri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: : Shri K.Meghanath Chowhan,(CIT)DR
Section 72(1)

…of accounting. Further, the entries in the books of account cannot determine the nature of income and what is to be seen is the real nature of income, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Company Ltd (1971) 82 ITR 363 (S.C). Since the assessee has carried out business activity of investment and finance by extending deposits with other corporate entities, interest income earned from the said inter- corporate deposits has been rightly assessed under the head income from business as against the income from other sources. Further, the assessee has rightly claimed s…

Rio Tinto India Pvt. Ltd., Haryana vs. ACIT Circle 19(1), Delhi

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

ITA 2021/DEL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2024AY 2011-12
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 254Section 92C

…t is governed by provisions of the Act and is not dependent on the treatment followed for the same in the books of accounts. For above proposition, reference is made to Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT: 116 ITR 1 (SC) and Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs. CIT: 82 ITR 363 (SC). AS-9 on accounting for leases classifies lease transactions for accounting purposes as under: (i) Finance Lease (ii) Operating Lease 5.2 Finance Lease, in AS-19, is described as a lease that transfers substantially all the risks and rewards in respect of ownership of an asset: title may or may not be transferred under such lease. An operat…

Jyoti Goyal, Bhopal vs. DCIT-1(1), Bhopal

Appeal is partly allowed as mentioned above

ITA 380/IND/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2012-13 Jyoti Goyal, Dcit, 18, Shyamla Hills, 1(1), बनाम/ Bhopal Bhopal Vs. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Abbpg3493P Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ca & Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.05.2024

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

…f accounts are not determinative or conclusive and the matter is to be examined on the touchstone of the provisions contained in the Act.” The judgements referred to by the court were its previous decision in case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. V. CIT (1971) 82 ITR 363 (S.C.), Sutlej Cotton Mills v. CIT (1979) 116 ITR 1 (S.C.), Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. V. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 172 (S.C.) and United Commercial Bank v. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 355 (S.C.). Thus, mere existence and audit of books of accounts does not mean the same are to be accepted as they are. 7.3.3 In this case, the veracity of the…

Amalgam Foods Limited, Kochi vs. The DCIT, Circle-1, Alappuzha

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 561/COCH/2022[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 May 2024AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Amalgam Foods Limited Dy. Cit, Circle-1, Alappuzha Amalgam House, Bristow Road, Vs. Willingdon Island, Kochi-682 002 [Pan:Aabca 8283D] (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : None Respondent By : Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi Date Of Hearing : 14.02.2024 : 14.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Bench: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee, Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2022 By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department [Cit(A)], Dismissing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting It’S Assessment Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 254 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Dated 26.12.2019, For Assessment Year (Ay) 2001-2002. 2. None Appeared For & On Behalf Of The Assessee-Appellant When The Appeal Was Called Out For Hearing. Taking Note Of The Request Dated 05.02.2024 By Sri R. Srinivasan, Ca, The Learned Counsel For The Assessee, That His Personal Appearance May Be Dispensed With & The Matter Decided After Considering Written Submissions, Enclosed Along With, The Hearing In The Matter Was Proceeded With.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi
Section 143(3)Section 254

…nasmuch as the same is not binding. 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. (I) Ltd. [1956] 29 ITR 661 (SC); Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363 (SC)). 6. We may finally capsule our findings. The assessee contested the denial of allowance of it’s claim for loss on account of foreign exchange fluctuation, which was for the reason that the same pertained to an earlier year/s, on the ground of crystallization of liability, on payment, during the current year. Before the Tribunal, however, it…

Kathikode Charitable Trust, Thrissur vs. Income Tax Officer, Thrissur

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes, and it’s stay petitions dismissed as infructuous

ITA 948/COCH/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Jojo, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2

…hat qua an appellate authority, 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)). 4.5 The premise of the foregoing is that the assessee should get a fair deal and, two, only tax exigible under law is to be levied/collected. The assessee, in our view, has filed the return u/s. 139(4A) in the correct form, i.e., Form-7. It is a charitable trust, even if, prior to it’s registration on 10.12.2019, a private discretionary tr…

Kathikode Charitable Trust, Thrissur vs. Income Tax Officer., Thrissur

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes, and it’s stay petitions dismissed as infructuous

ITA 947/COCH/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Jojo, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2

…hat qua an appellate authority, 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)). 4.5 The premise of the foregoing is that the assessee should get a fair deal and, two, only tax exigible under law is to be levied/collected. The assessee, in our view, has filed the return u/s. 139(4A) in the correct form, i.e., Form-7. It is a charitable trust, even if, prior to it’s registration on 10.12.2019, a private discretionary tr…

DCIT 2(2)(2), Mumbai vs. The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corp Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed wherein

ITA 4786/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

Section 10(15)(iv)Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…d of legally sustainable merits. As far as expenditure not being debited in the books of account of Indian operations is concerned, this is not really relevant in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mills Limited (82 ITR 363). As long as the expenditure is really incurred and is otherwise deductible, the deduction cannot be declined on the ground that it has not been debited in the books of accounts. We have also noted that as noted in the Assessing officer's orders itself, the requisite details were duly furnished by the assessee. Keeping all these factors in mind, a…