Mahakushal Poultries v. CIT

101 ITR 525High Court1975#4436 most cited

What is Mahakushal Poultries v. CIT authority for?

Accounts can be rejected only if cogent reasons are assigned by the Assessing Officer and it is not permissible to reject accounts based on a fall in GP rate or absence of a day-to-day stock register.

26

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Mahakushal Poultries v. CIT · rejection of books of account · cogent reasons · fall in GP rate · day-to-day stock register · section 145(3) · Assessing Officer

Also reported as

21 TTJ 740

Sections most often in play

Section 145(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 133(6)Section 234DSection 68

Issues it is cited on

section 145(1)rejection of books of accountsection 145(3)interest u/s 234asection 145section 234asection 69csection 139assistant commissionersection 133(6)speaking ordersection 142

Judgments citing Mahakushal Poultries v. CIT

D.C.I.T. Central Cricle, Raipur vs. M/S R.R.Energy Ltd., Raigarh(C.G)

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee for assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09 are allowed and cross objections filed for the assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and...

ITA 225/BIL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Jan 2018AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri G.S.Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Mishra, CITDR
Section 133(6)Section 68

…e relevant year or that day-to- day stock register was not maintained. For rejection of accounts books, cogent reasons are to have been assigned by A.O. as held in Mahakushal Poultries vs CIT (2013) 21 TTJ 740 (MP). Hon'ble Patna High Court in Md. Umer vs CIT 101 ITR 525 and Hon’ble Guwahati High Court in Alluminium Industries Pvt. Ltd 80 Taxman 184 have held that once the profit could properly deduce from the method of accounting which have been regularly employed that is the end of the matter. The Hon'ble Jabalpur Bench of ITAT in ITO vs Kanha Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd reported in (2014) 23 ITJ 355 held that in…

ITO, Bundi vs. Rameshwar Meena, Bundi

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

ITA 470/JPR/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Nov 2017AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Roshanta Meena (J.CIT)

…upon the following decisions as under:- • R.B. Bansilal Abirchand Spinning & Weaving Mills 75 ITR 260. • CIT vs. Maharaja Shree Umaid Mills Ltd. 162 ITR 565 5 ITO vs. Sh. Rameshwar Meena • DCIT V Mewar Textile Mills Ltd. 21 Tax World 821 • Mohd. Umer v. CIT 101 ITR 525 • Ajanta Construction (P.) Ltd. Vs. ACIT XXII TW 606 • DCIT Vs. Associated Stone Industries XXII TW 155 • Ghewarchand Vs. ITO XXI TW 571 • Siddheshwari Cotton Mills P. Ltd. V. CIT 117 ITR 953 • Padampath Ramgopal 76 ITR 719 • Malt Bru Ltd. 34 TW 246 • Manohar Lal V. ITO 68 TTJ 27 • Shri Gautam Textile V. ITO 72TTJ 169 5. We have considered the r…

Jaya Marketing, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 12 (3), Mumbai

ITA 5131/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm M/S. Jaya Marketing Vs. Addl Cit 12 (3) Vtm Building, Gala No.2,3,4, Aayakar Bhavan 2Nd Floor, M.K.Road Mehra Compound Andheri-Kurla Road Churchgate Mumbai - 400056 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aadfj5774D Appellant) .. Respondent) M/S. Jaya Marketing Vs. Addl Cit 12 (3) Vtm Building, Gala No.2,3,4, Mumbai – 400 020 Mehra Compound Andheri-Kurla Road Mumbai - 400056 Pan/Gir No. Aadfj5774D Appellant) .. Respondent) M/S. Jaya Marketing Vs. Acit 12 (3) Vtm Building, Gala No.2,3,4, Mumbai – 400 020 Mehra Compound Andheri-Kurla Road Mumbai - 400056 Pan/Gir No. Aadfj5774D Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 254(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM M/s. Jaya Marketing Vs. ADDL CIT 12 (3) VTM Building, Gala No.2,3,4, Aayakar Bhavan 2nd Floor, M.K.Road Mehra Compound Andheri-Kurla Road Churchgate Mumbai - 400056 Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No. AADFJ5774D Appellant) .. Respondent) M/s. Jaya Marketing Vs. ADDL CIT 12 (3) VTM Building, Gala No.2,3,4, Mumbai – 400 020 Mehra Compound Andheri-Kurla Road Mumbai - 400056 PAN/GIR No. AADFJ5774D Appellant) .. Respondent) M/s. Jaya Marketing Vs. ACIT 12 (3) VTM Building, Gala No.2,3,4, Mumbai – 400 020 Mehra Compoun…

ACIT 17(2), Mumbai vs. Varsha P. Shah, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 4489/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosaina C I T - 17(2) Smt. Varsha P. Shah Room No. 217, 2Nd Floor 234/26, 2Nd Floor, Om Niwas 1 Vs. Piramal Chambers, Parel Kartak Road, Wadala Mumbai 400012 Mumbai 400031 Pan - Aaqps4783G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Kumar SoniFor Respondent: Shri Sanjai Parikh
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 44A

…ollowed as ordinarily expressed to be accepted, unless the system does not reflect true profits. (vii) Reliance is placed on following judicial decisions :- (a) Method of accounting regularly maintained by an assessee should be accepted. Md.Umer v. CIT (1975) 101 ITR 525 (Pat) where the genuineness and regularity of the accounts are not challenged, the accounts are relevant and are prime facie proof of the entries and of the correctness thereof under section 34 of the Evidence ct. St.Teresa's Oil Mills v. State of Kerala (1970) 76 ITR 365 (Ker.) (b) Where there is no qualitative tally between the stock purchased…

Rajesh J Thakkar, Mumbai vs. DCIT 13(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA N0

ITA 2808/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2808/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Mr. Rajesh J. Thakkar, The Deputy Commissioner बनाम/ 407, Saiya House, Of Income Tax – 13(3), V. Narsi Natha Street, Room No. 427, 279, Bhat Bazar, Aaykar Bhavan, Masjid, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 009. Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaapt1856B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist, Sr. D.R
Section 10(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…lied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P. Varghese v. ITO, 131 ITA 2808/Mum/2014 5 ITR 597 (SC), in the case of Umarchand Shah & Bros v. CIT 37 ITR 271 (SC) and the decision of Hon’ble Patna High Court in the case of Md. Umer v. CIT 101 ITR 525 (Pat.). The assessee also submitted that on the one hand the A.O. has considered the income as unexplained income of the assessee, on the other hand while making disallowance u/s 14A, the A.O. stated that the disallowance is justified as the assessee has earned agricultural income. The ld. CIT(A) considered the facts and submission of the asses…

ITO, Ward - 11(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Santhal Multicast Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 2229/KOL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Dec 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2004-05

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145Section 209(1)(D)

…ative, assessee's profits are to be computed on the basis of his accounts. In such cases, proviso to section 145(1) or section 145(2) cannot be invoked. The Patna High Court has delivered a very important ruling in Md. Umer vs. CIT 1975 CTR (Pat) 13 : (1975) 101 ITR 525 (Pat). In that case, the assessee was individual, who derived income from sale of country liquor in assessment year 1966-67. Tribunal gave five reasons for the purpose of rejection of book profits as follows:- (1) The sales were not verifiable. (2) From the point of drawing of the liquor from the barrels, no account was maintained and even the n…