Melmould Corporation v. CIT

202 ITR 789High Court1993#2529 most cited

What is Melmould Corporation v. CIT authority for?

An assessee is permitted to change its method of valuing closing stock under Section 145, provided the new method is followed regularly and is bonafide. This aligns with accepted accounting principles allowing stock valuation at cost or market price, whichever is lower.

46

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Melmould Corporation v. CIT · Section 145 · method of accounting · valuation of stock · closing stock · change in method · cost price · market price · regularly followed · bonafide change

Also reported as

71 Taxmann 47

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 145Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 12AASection 263Section 36(1)(iv)

Issues it is cited on

recognised provident fundapproved superannuation fundsection 11 exemptionsection 80j(6a)section 12a(b)section 10(22)approved gratuity fundsection 23asection 36(1)(v)section 139(4a)retention moneysection 10(20)

Judgments citing Melmould Corporation v. CIT

DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI vs. DLF LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 715/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl.No. ITA No. AY Name of Name of Appellant Respondent 1. 713/Del/2024 2019-20 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 2. 714/Del/2024 2020-21 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 3. 715/Del/2024 2021-22 DCIT, DLF Limite…

DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI vs. DLF LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 714/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl.No. ITA No. AY Name of Name of Appellant Respondent 1. 713/Del/2024 2019-20 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 2. 714/Del/2024 2020-21 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 3. 715/Del/2024 2021-22 DCIT, DLF Limite…

DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI vs. DLF LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 713/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl.No. ITA No. AY Name of Name of Appellant Respondent 1. 713/Del/2024 2019-20 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 2. 714/Del/2024 2020-21 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 3. 715/Del/2024 2021-22 DCIT, DLF Limite…

DLF LIMITED,DELHI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 677/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl.No. ITA No. AY Name of Name of Appellant Respondent 1. 713/Del/2024 2019-20 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 2. 714/Del/2024 2020-21 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 3. 715/Del/2024 2021-22 DCIT, DLF Limite…

DLF LIMITED,DELHI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 676/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA No.713/Del/2024 & Others THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl.No. ITA No. AY Name of Name of Appellant Respondent 1. 713/Del/2024 2019-20 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 2. 714/Del/2024 2020-21 DCIT, DLF Limited [Revenue’s Circle-7(1) 9th Floor, DLF appeal] Delhi-110002 Centre, Sansad Marg H.O.Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001 PAN-AAACD3494N 3. 715/Del/2024 2021-22 DCIT, DLF Limite…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 545/PUN/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…followed in subsequent assessment years and the Assessing Officer has not doubted about the bonafideness of such change, then no disallowance is called for. 91. We find Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Molmould Corporation vs. CIT reported in (1993) 202 ITR 789 (Bom) has observed as under: “Under section 145 the assessee can adopt a method of valuation which is to be followed by it regularly. It is an accepted principle of accountancy that value of the stock can be determined at cost price or market price, whichever is lower. In the present case, the assessee has adopted the cost price as a basis for va…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 544/PUN/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…followed in subsequent assessment years and the Assessing Officer has not doubted about the bonafideness of such change, then no disallowance is called for. 91. We find Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Molmould Corporation vs. CIT reported in (1993) 202 ITR 789 (Bom) has observed as under: “Under section 145 the assessee can adopt a method of valuation which is to be followed by it regularly. It is an accepted principle of accountancy that value of the stock can be determined at cost price or market price, whichever is lower. In the present case, the assessee has adopted the cost price as a basis for va…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 543/PUN/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…followed in subsequent assessment years and the Assessing Officer has not doubted about the bonafideness of such change, then no disallowance is called for. 91. We find Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Molmould Corporation vs. CIT reported in (1993) 202 ITR 789 (Bom) has observed as under: “Under section 145 the assessee can adopt a method of valuation which is to be followed by it regularly. It is an accepted principle of accountancy that value of the stock can be determined at cost price or market price, whichever is lower. In the present case, the assessee has adopted the cost price as a basis for va…

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1155/MUM/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…followed in subsequent assessment years and the Assessing Officer has not doubted about the bonafideness of such change, then no disallowance is called for. 91. We find Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Molmould Corporation vs. CIT reported in (1993) 202 ITR 789 (Bom) has observed as under: “Under section 145 the assessee can adopt a method of valuation which is to be followed by it regularly. It is an accepted principle of accountancy that value of the stock can be determined at cost price or market price, whichever is lower. In the present case, the assessee has adopted the cost price as a basis for va…

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1154/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…followed in subsequent assessment years and the Assessing Officer has not doubted about the bonafideness of such change, then no disallowance is called for. 91. We find Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Molmould Corporation vs. CIT reported in (1993) 202 ITR 789 (Bom) has observed as under: “Under section 145 the assessee can adopt a method of valuation which is to be followed by it regularly. It is an accepted principle of accountancy that value of the stock can be determined at cost price or market price, whichever is lower. In the present case, the assessee has adopted the cost price as a basis for va…

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1153/MUM/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…followed in subsequent assessment years and the Assessing Officer has not doubted about the bonafideness of such change, then no disallowance is called for. 91. We find Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Molmould Corporation vs. CIT reported in (1993) 202 ITR 789 (Bom) has observed as under: “Under section 145 the assessee can adopt a method of valuation which is to be followed by it regularly. It is an accepted principle of accountancy that value of the stock can be determined at cost price or market price, whichever is lower. In the present case, the assessee has adopted the cost price as a basis for va…

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), PATTO PLAZA vs. ESTEEM INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, PLOT

ITA 253/PAN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji30 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavankumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Mahendra Sanghvi [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 250Section 253Section 44A

…h was valued inconsistent with opening inventories came for consideration before the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in ‘Melmould ITAT-Panaji Page 15 of 20 DCIT Vs Esteem Industries Pvt. Ltd. ITA Nos.253/PAN/2024 AY: 2012-13 Corporation Ltd. Vs CIT [1993, 202 ITR 789 (Bom)], wherein assessee changed method of closing inventory valuation to exclude taxes, duties, cess or fees etc., which was not thrusted upon, but voluntarily selected by assessee. There it was observed that, such a change adopted suo- motu definitely be different from one which is statutory inflicted, where an assessee per-se forced to make an…

ADDL CIT R G 7(1), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS INDIA LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS HINDUSTAN CIBA GIEGY LTD. ), MUMBAI

ITA 6772/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Novartis India Limited V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income –Tax - 7(2)(2) {Earlier Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} 6Th& 7Th Floor 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Inspire Bkc M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 “G” Block, Bkc Main Road Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1) V. M/S. Novartis India Limited Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.190/Mum/2011 [Arising Out Of Ita No.6772/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2002-03)] M/S. Novartis India Limited V. Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2

…38-42 of the CIT(A)’s order) observing stating as under: - “The addition on account of duty following the provisions of Section 145A is principally called for. No adjustment in the opening stock is possible as held in the case of Melmould corporation v/s CIT 202 ITR 789. Besides, tax provisions under section 145A came into effect from 1.4.98 AY 2003-04 cant be said to be transitional year. Hence, the judgement of Mahavir Aluminum Ltd 297 ITR 77 shall not apply and hence directed to verify the facts and make the addition as per aforesaid directions Aggrieved, Assessee is in appeal before us. At the time of heari…

ADDL CIT RG 7(1), MUMBAI vs. PIRAMAL ENTERPRISES LTD (FORMERLY KNWON AS PIRAMAL HEALTHCARE LTD) (AS ULTIMATE SUCCESSOR TO NICHOLAS PIRAMAL INDIA LTD), MUMBAI

ITA 5091/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. Piramal Enterprises Dy. Commissioner Of Limited (Formerly Known Income Tax, As Piramal Healthcare Range-8(2)(1), Limited) (Earlier Known As Mumbai. Nicholas Piramal India Ltd.), Vs. Piramal Tower, Agastya Corporate Park, Lbs Marg, Kamani Junction, Kurla (West), Mumbai – 400 070 Pan: Aaacn4538P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner Of M/S. Piramal Enterprises Income Tax, Limited (Formerly Known Circle-8(2)(1), As Piramal Healthcare [Erstwhile Dcit Circle- Ltd.) (As Ultimate 7(1)], Successor To Nicholas Vs. Mumbai. Piramal India Ltd.), Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013 Pan: Aaacn4538P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Priyank Gala, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P.D. Chogule, (Addl. CIT) Sr. A.R
Section 28Section 40Section 45

…CIT (A) has further erred in holding that no adjustment in the opening stock is possible by relying on the decision in ITA No.3706/M/2010 & 7 M/s. Piramal Enterprises Limited (Earlier known as Nicholas Piramal India Ltd.) case of Melmould Corporation v. CIT (202 ITR 789) and observing that decision of Mahavir Aluminium (297 ITR 77) shall not apply. 3. He failed to appreciate and ought to have held that he has no powers to set aside the issue to the AO for verification instead he should have deleted the disallowance on the basis of submissions made by the Appellant. Further, irrespective of whether the Appellant…

PIRAMAL HEALTHCARE LTD ( EARLIER KNOWNAS NICHOLAS PIRAMAL INDIA LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 7(1), MUMBAI

ITA 3706/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. Piramal Enterprises Dy. Commissioner Of Limited (Formerly Known Income Tax, As Piramal Healthcare Range-8(2)(1), Limited) (Earlier Known As Mumbai. Nicholas Piramal India Ltd.), Vs. Piramal Tower, Agastya Corporate Park, Lbs Marg, Kamani Junction, Kurla (West), Mumbai – 400 070 Pan: Aaacn4538P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner Of M/S. Piramal Enterprises Income Tax, Limited (Formerly Known Circle-8(2)(1), As Piramal Healthcare [Erstwhile Dcit Circle- Ltd.) (As Ultimate 7(1)], Successor To Nicholas Vs. Mumbai. Piramal India Ltd.), Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013 Pan: Aaacn4538P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Priyank Gala, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P.D. Chogule, (Addl. CIT) Sr. A.R
Section 28Section 40Section 45

…CIT (A) has further erred in holding that no adjustment in the opening stock is possible by relying on the decision in ITA No.3706/M/2010 & 7 M/s. Piramal Enterprises Limited (Earlier known as Nicholas Piramal India Ltd.) case of Melmould Corporation v. CIT (202 ITR 789) and observing that decision of Mahavir Aluminium (297 ITR 77) shall not apply. 3. He failed to appreciate and ought to have held that he has no powers to set aside the issue to the AO for verification instead he should have deleted the disallowance on the basis of submissions made by the Appellant. Further, irrespective of whether the Appellant…

SHRI. BABU SEBASTIAN,THRISSUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(1), THRISSUR

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

ITA 869/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasbabu Sebastain Asst. Cit, 19/348/1B, Puthur House Circle- 2(1) Poothole, Thrissur 680004 Vs. Thrissur [Pan:Ajaps9036R] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Anil D. Nair, Advocate Revenue By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 13.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2023 O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, Am This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Dated 22.6.2022 By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department [Cit(A)], Dismissing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting His Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) Dated 20.11.2019 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Short Question Arising In The Instant Appeal Is The Correct Application Of Section 145A Of The Act, Reading As Under, In The Given Facts Of The Case, I.E., Given That There Is No Change In The Assessee’S Regular Method Of Accounting & Valuation Of Inventories Of Goods, So That The Purport Is The Correct Computation Of Income By Way Of Profits & Gains Of His Business Under The Act: Method Of Accounting In Certain Cases. 145A. For The Purpose Of Determining The Income Chargeable Under The Head "Profits & Gains Of Business Or Profession",—

For Appellant: Shri Anil D. Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 145A

….36 lakhs, as against Rs.59.11 lakhs as per his accounts and, accordingly, effected an addition for Rs.9,24,301. Reliance was placed on the Page 2 ITANo. 869/Coch/2022 (AY: 2017-18) Babu Sebastain vs. Asst. CIT decision in Melmould Corporation vs. CIT [1993] 202 ITR 789 (Bom). Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal. 4. We have heard the parties, and perused the material of record. 4.1 The AO has, applying section 145A, found the assessee’s closing stock-in-trade for the year to be undervalued by Rs. 9.24 lacs. There is no dispute or quarrel on this. Why, however, we are at loss to understand, section 145A is not appl…

BG EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DDIT/ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE -1, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5/DDN/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun31 Mar 2022AY 2017-2018
For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri T.S. Mapwal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92C

…Note on Tax Audit recognizes that an appellant can take a different stand in the return of income if he has a bona fide reason. In this regard , reliance is placed on the decision of the 22 Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Melmould Corporation v. CIT (202 ITR 789) where the Court held that closing value of an asset of previous year ought to be taken as opening value of the asset for the immediately succeeding year . Relevant extracts of the decision are as under: “Thus , the value of the closing stock of the preceding year must be the value of the opening stock of the next year . The change therefore, has…

BANK OF BARODA ,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT - 2, MUMBAI

In the result, and subject to the observations made in paragraph 7 above, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1687/MUM/2020[2017-18]Status: PendingITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2022AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 263

…to the true profit if the stock is valued on one basis when it goes out without considering the value of the stock when it comes in." The above principle was followed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court judgment in the case of Melmould Corporation v. CIT [1993] 202 ITR 789 (Bom) Assessment year: 2017-18 Page 4 of 6 5. We wish to reiterate that the assessee all along was valuing its monetary items relating to non-integral operations at the exchange rate on the date of transaction (the balance in FCTR account being notional is only a proforma entry). For the current previous year in order to comply with ICDS VI whic…

BG EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DDIT/ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION ) CIRCLE-1, DEHRADUN

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

ITA 7/DDN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun14 Dec 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri V.P. Raoassessment Years: 2016-17

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. N.S. Jangpangi, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 44C

…dance Note on Tax Audit recognizes that an appellant can take a different stand in the return of income if he has a bonafide reason.In this regard, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Melmould Corporation v. CIT (202 ITR 789) where the Court held that closing value of an asset of previous year ought to be taken as opening value of the asset for the immediately succeeding year. Relevant extracts of the decision are as under: “Thus, the value of the closing stock of the preceding year must be the value of the opening stock of the next year. The change therefore, has to…

ACIT, CIRCLE- 34(1), NEW DELHI vs. MADHUR JAIN, DELHI

In the result, the solitary ground of appeal of the learned AO is dismissed

ITA 176/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Acit, Madhur Jain, Vs. Circle-34(1), C-2/4, Community Centre- New Delhi I, Ashok Vihar, Phase-Ii, New Delhi Pan: Agrpj0254C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S. S. Negi, Sr. DR
Section 142Section 143

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―E‖: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ACIT, Madhur Jain, Vs. Circle-34(1), C-2/4, Community Centre- New Delhi I, Ashok Vihar, Phase-II, New Delhi PAN: AGRPJ0254C (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri S. S. Negi, Sr. DR Assessee by: Shri Gautam Jain, Adv Date of Hearing 07/04/2021 Date of pronouncement 27/05/2021 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 01. This appeal is filed by Asst Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 34 (1), New Delhi for assessment year 2013 – 14 agai…

Showing 1–20 of 46 · Page 1 of 3

Melmould Corporation v. CIT (202 ITR 789) — Cited in 46 Judgments | BharatTax