McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO

154 ITR 148Supreme Court of India1985#68 most cited

What is McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO authority for?

The Supreme Court held that while legitimate tax planning is permissible, transactions structured as a "colourable device" or "subterfuge" solely to avoid tax are impermissible. It mandates a judicial shift to look beyond the form to the substance of a transaction, allowing the lifting of the corporate veil in tax evasion arrangements.

741

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO · 154 ITR 148 · tax avoidance vs. tax planning · colourable device · substance over form · lifting corporate veil · tax evasion · accommodation entry · genuineness of transaction · sections 143(3) · 147 · 68 · 69C

Also reported as

22 Taxmann 113 SCC 2301 SCR 914

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 147Section 68Section 69CSection 133ASection 132(4)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

colourable deviceazadi bachao andolanlive linkentry operatorpenny stocksection 10(38)genuineness of the transactionlong term capital gainsaddition u/s 68share application moneyaccommodation entrysection 131

Judgments citing McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO

Subedar Pathak, Gorakhpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Raipur

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

ITA 338/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.338/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Subedar Pathak Devnagari, Near Indian Oil Petrol Pump, Almunium Factory Road, Gorakhpur (U.P)-273- 001 Pan: Apspp4726M ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 250

…AIR 1992 SC 1555, it has been held that fraud and collusion vitiates even the most solemn proceedings in any civilized system of jurisprudence including natural justice. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mc Dowell & Company Ltd. Vs. CTO [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC) has held that "Tax 11 Subedar Pathak Vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Raipur planning may be legitimate provided it is within the framework of law, Colourable devices cannot be part of tax planning....". 12. Therefore, in our considered view, in the present matter it is the responsibility of the revenue authorities to investigate the matter in…

Kavita Manoj Damani, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officerm Int Tax Ward 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2648/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54Section 64(1)(iv)

…another. This is nothing but the rotation of money just to evade tax. No actual transfer of money, no right to use the property changed, only title of the property has changed. As per Supreme Court Order in McDowell and Company Ltd. Vs Commercial Tax Officer, 154 ITR 148 held that the "Tax planning may be legitimate provided within the framework of law and the colourable device cannot be a part of the tax planning." In view of the above, total long term capital gain of Rs.4,21,83,273/- earned during the said transaction should be taxed under LTCG without giving any benefit of exemption claimed by the assessee u/s…

Kailash Chand Maheshwari, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

ITA 1463/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 144Section 153ASection 57Section 68Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 1463 to 1465/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 cuke Kailash Chand Maheshwari DCIT, Vs. 223 Kirti Nagar, Near Kamal and Central Circle-02, Company Tonk Road, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AKQPM5593A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri S. L.…

ACIT Cental Circle 8(2) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Subhkam Ventures (I) Private Limited, Mumbai

Appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the C

ITA 5657/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Mahendra Bishnoi
Section 10(35)Section 132Section 250Section 94(7)

…n deleting the addition of Rs. 61,01,94,438/-when the Survey action on M/s JM Financial Mutual Funds unearthed a colourable device of the tax-evasion by the assessee, when Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held in the case of McDowell & Co. Ltd Vs CTO (1985) 154 ITR 148 that colourable device within the framework of law cannot be allowed to be a part of tax planning? 5. "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the loss incurred of Rs. 61,96,50,080/-by the Assessee on the sale of mutual funds, invoking the provisions of dividend stripping under Section 94(7) of…

ACIT Central Circle 8(2) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Subhkam Ventures (I) Private Limited, Mumbai

Appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the C

ITA 5622/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Mahendra Bishnoi
Section 10(35)Section 132Section 250Section 94(7)

…n deleting the addition of Rs. 61,01,94,438/-when the Survey action on M/s JM Financial Mutual Funds unearthed a colourable device of the tax-evasion by the assessee, when Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held in the case of McDowell & Co. Ltd Vs CTO (1985) 154 ITR 148 that colourable device within the framework of law cannot be allowed to be a part of tax planning? 5. "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the loss incurred of Rs. 61,96,50,080/-by the Assessee on the sale of mutual funds, invoking the provisions of dividend stripping under Section 94(7) of…

ACIT Central Circle 8(2) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Subhkam Ventures (I) Private Limited, Mumbai

Appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the C

ITA 5620/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Mahendra Bishnoi
Section 10(35)Section 132Section 250Section 94(7)

…n deleting the addition of Rs. 61,01,94,438/-when the Survey action on M/s JM Financial Mutual Funds unearthed a colourable device of the tax-evasion by the assessee, when Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held in the case of McDowell & Co. Ltd Vs CTO (1985) 154 ITR 148 that colourable device within the framework of law cannot be allowed to be a part of tax planning? 5. "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the loss incurred of Rs. 61,96,50,080/-by the Assessee on the sale of mutual funds, invoking the provisions of dividend stripping under Section 94(7) of…

Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Chhattisgarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 144/VIZ/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri MV Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245D

…laim made by the assessee company was disallowed and brought to tax. 26. The Ld. CIT(A), before allowing relief to the assessee company, ought to have considered the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of McDowell and Co Ltd Vs Commercial Tax Office 154 ITR 148 (SC), wherein it was held that "Tax planning may be legitimate provided it is with in the frame works of Law. Colourable devices can't be part of tax planning and it is wrong to encourage or entertain the belief that it is honourable to avoid the payment of tax by resorting to dubious methods. It is the obligation of every citizen to pay taxes ho…

Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Chhattisgarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 143/VIZ/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri MV Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245D

…laim made by the assessee company was disallowed and brought to tax. 26. The Ld. CIT(A), before allowing relief to the assessee company, ought to have considered the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of McDowell and Co Ltd Vs Commercial Tax Office 154 ITR 148 (SC), wherein it was held that "Tax planning may be legitimate provided it is with in the frame works of Law. Colourable devices can't be part of tax planning and it is wrong to encourage or entertain the belief that it is honourable to avoid the payment of tax by resorting to dubious methods. It is the obligation of every citizen to pay taxes ho…

Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Chhattisgarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 142/VIZ/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri MV Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245D

…laim made by the assessee company was disallowed and brought to tax. 26. The Ld. CIT(A), before allowing relief to the assessee company, ought to have considered the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of McDowell and Co Ltd Vs Commercial Tax Office 154 ITR 148 (SC), wherein it was held that "Tax planning may be legitimate provided it is with in the frame works of Law. Colourable devices can't be part of tax planning and it is wrong to encourage or entertain the belief that it is honourable to avoid the payment of tax by resorting to dubious methods. It is the obligation of every citizen to pay taxes ho…

Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Chhattisgarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 141/VIZ/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri MV Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245D

…laim made by the assessee company was disallowed and brought to tax. 26. The Ld. CIT(A), before allowing relief to the assessee company, ought to have considered the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of McDowell and Co Ltd Vs Commercial Tax Office 154 ITR 148 (SC), wherein it was held that "Tax planning may be legitimate provided it is with in the frame works of Law. Colourable devices can't be part of tax planning and it is wrong to encourage or entertain the belief that it is honourable to avoid the payment of tax by resorting to dubious methods. It is the obligation of every citizen to pay taxes ho…

Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Chhattisgarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 140/VIZ/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 May 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri MV Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245D

…laim made by the assessee company was disallowed and brought to tax. 26. The Ld. CIT(A), before allowing relief to the assessee company, ought to have considered the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of McDowell and Co Ltd Vs Commercial Tax Office 154 ITR 148 (SC), wherein it was held that "Tax planning may be legitimate provided it is with in the frame works of Law. Colourable devices can't be part of tax planning and it is wrong to encourage or entertain the belief that it is honourable to avoid the payment of tax by resorting to dubious methods. It is the obligation of every citizen to pay taxes ho…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 12, Pune vs. Varun Jain, Pune

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

ITA 2720/PUN/2024[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 May 2025

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamorecross Objection No.14/Pun/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No.2720/Pun/2024) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Varun Jain, The Acit, P-024, Forest County, Kharadi, V Circle-12, Pune. Pune – 411014. S. Maharashtra. Pan:Aexpj0171J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2720/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Acit, Varun Jain, Circle-12, Pune. Vs. P-024, Forest County, Kharadi, Pune – 411014. Maharashtra. Pan:Aexpj0171J Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By Shri Fenil Bhatt – Ar(Virtual) Revenue By Shri Abhinay Kumbhar - Dr Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: In This Case, Revenue Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under C.O.No.14/Pun/2025 [A] & Ita No.2720/Pun/2024 [R]

Section 10(35)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148ASection 250Section 253(4)

…y norms. b. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) was justified in holding that these are allegations against JM Financial and do not implicate the assessee in any manner when Honourable Supreme Court in McDowell & Co. Ltd. vs. CTO (1985) 154 ITR 148 (SC) emphasized that tax benefits derived from colorable devices are impermissible. c. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) was justified in placing reliance on the confirmation issued by the JM Financial Asset Management Ltd dated 21/06/2023 when during the survey action, there have been admissions under oath by JM Financia…

ACIT, Central Circle-1, Thane vs. Nakul Markhedkar, Thane

ITA 786/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Ranjan - Sr. DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 56(2)(vii)

…e transactions entered by the assessee clearly lack commercial substance. Hence, it is a sham transaction. 6.12 While reaching to the above conclusion, the assessing officer relied on following case-laws: McDowell and Company Ltd., vs. Commercial Tax Officer, 154 ITR 148 (SC) The judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jiyajee Rao (SC). Vodafone International Holdings V.B. vs. Union of India & Anr. (SC). Killick Nizon Limited vs. DCIT (Bombay HC) dated 06 March 2012. 6.13 Finally, the assessing officer made an addition of Rs. 3,48,29,845 by observing as under: In view of the above, it is clear that the…

ACIT, Central Circle-1, Thane vs. Nakul Markhedkar, Thane

ITA 785/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Ranjan - Sr. DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 56(2)(vii)

…e transactions entered by the assessee clearly lack commercial substance. Hence, it is a sham transaction. 6.12 While reaching to the above conclusion, the assessing officer relied on following case-laws: McDowell and Company Ltd., vs. Commercial Tax Officer, 154 ITR 148 (SC) The judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jiyajee Rao (SC). Vodafone International Holdings V.B. vs. Union of India & Anr. (SC). Killick Nizon Limited vs. DCIT (Bombay HC) dated 06 March 2012. 6.13 Finally, the assessing officer made an addition of Rs. 3,48,29,845 by observing as under: In view of the above, it is clear that the…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Income Tax Department vs. Rashesh Manhar Bhansali, Andheri East

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5107/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

Section 10(35)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…the Act. That such use cannot be called "abuse of law", Even assuming that the transaction was pre-planned there is nothing to impeach the genuineness of the transaction. With regard to the ruling in McDowell & Co. Ltd. vs. CTO (1985) 47 CTR (SC) 126 : (1985) 154 ITR 148 (SC), it may be stated that in the later decision of this Court in Union of India vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan & Anr (2003) 184 CTR 450,263 ITR 706 (SC) it has been held that a citizen is free to carry on its business within the four corners of the law. That, mere tax planning, without any motive to evade taxes through colourable devices is not frown…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai vs. Jyothy Labs Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals bearing ITA Nos 515 & 516/Mum/2025 filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 516/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara

For Appellant: Ms.Priyanka Jain a/wFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali (SR DR)
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 274Section 80

…s been granted by the Hon’ble High Court, nor has the appeal been admitted. The Ld. DR placed full reliance on the impugned penalty order. 7. The Ld. DR further placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. McDowell & Co. Ltd. (1985) 154 ITR 148 (SC), wherein it was held that tax planning within the boundaries of law is permissible, but the benefit of Section 80-IC cannot be extended beyond the legislative intent. Further reliance was placed on the decision in Union of India v. Dharmendra Textile Processors (2008) 306 ITR 277 (SC), where the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the levy of pe…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai vs. Jyothy Labs Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals bearing ITA Nos 515 & 516/Mum/2025 filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 515/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara

For Appellant: Ms.Priyanka Jain a/wFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali (SR DR)
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 274Section 80

…s been granted by the Hon’ble High Court, nor has the appeal been admitted. The Ld. DR placed full reliance on the impugned penalty order. 7. The Ld. DR further placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. McDowell & Co. Ltd. (1985) 154 ITR 148 (SC), wherein it was held that tax planning within the boundaries of law is permissible, but the benefit of Section 80-IC cannot be extended beyond the legislative intent. Further reliance was placed on the decision in Union of India v. Dharmendra Textile Processors (2008) 306 ITR 277 (SC), where the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the levy of pe…

ACIT, Mumbai vs. Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the cross-objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3705/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acit, Reliance Industries Ltd., Room No. 559, 5Th Floor, 3Rd Floor Maker Chamber Iv, Aayakar Bhavan, New Marine Vs. Nariman Point, S.O. Lines, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacr 5055 K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Madhur Agarwal/Ms. MokshaFor Respondent: Ms. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 144BSection 144CSection 147Section 801B(9)

…cts narrated, it is crystal clear that loss made in sale of preference shares of AE is fabricated loss and arrived as a result of understanding between assessee and AEs. Consequently as per the decision of Apex Court in the case of M/s Mcdowell co. Ltd vs CTO 154 ITR 148, wherein it had held that though tax planning may be legitimate, colourable device cannot form part of tax planning, the artificial LTCL of Rs.7,26,35, 105/- made by resorting to colourable device was required to be disallowed. This resulted in irregular carry forward of LTCL to the extent of Rs. 7,26,35, 105/- Therefore I am of the view that inc…

Pradeep Wig, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-5, New Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 406/DEL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharma

…rty should be assessed in the hands of the owner. In this case, the appellant has been held to be beneficial owner after lifting of corporate veil in view of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mc Dowell & Co. Ltd vs Commercial tax Officer [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC). The judicial decisions relied upon by the appellant pertain to ownership dispute in assessing income from house property. In the present case, once it is held that the appellant was trying to evade taxes through an avoidance arrangement and corporate veil is lifted, it is held that the Assessing Officer has rightly concluded that income fro…

N.K. Industries Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

ITA 448/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumarms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: NK Industries Ltd (Cross Appeals)
Section 250

…ding loss, there is no question of applicability of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The Ld. A.R. relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. vs. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 172 (SC), Mc Dowell & Co. Ltd. (1985) 154 ITR 148 (SC), Virtual 400 ITR 409 and 370 ITR 547 (SC). The Ld. A.R. also relied upon the decision of Great Eastern Shipping related to interest which was decided by the Apex Court. 7. The Ld. DR submitted that as regards ground No.4, there was no transfer of goods and the assessee could not explain as to why the route of exchange, i.e. NSEL has been tak…