What is Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen authority for?

Provisions for liabilities, when made on a scientific and rational basis, are allowable as a deduction under the mercantile system of accounting, even if their actual quantification and discharge are deferred to a future date.

How many judgments cite Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen?

276 judgments on BharatTax cite Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen (73 ITR 53), spanning 1996 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 37(1), Section 143(3), Section 115JB, Section 40(a)(ia), Section 44, Section 147.

Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen (73 ITR 53)

ASST CIT 2(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3882/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Jagadish ()

Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…e of Bharat Earth Movers vs. CIT reported in [2000] 245 ITR 428 • Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in [1959] 37 ITR 1 • Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen reported in [1969] 73 ITR 53 • Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P) Ltd. vs. CIT [2009] 314 ITR 62 7.2. The Ld.AO did not agree with the contention of the assessee and held as under: “In the present case 'provisions for pension, is as a result of change in accountancy policy. The liability is dependent on other relevant events to happen and is conti…

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3680/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Jagadish ()

Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…e of Bharat Earth Movers vs. CIT reported in [2000] 245 ITR 428 • Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in [1959] 37 ITR 1 • Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen reported in [1969] 73 ITR 53 • Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P) Ltd. vs. CIT [2009] 314 ITR 62 7.2. The Ld.AO did not agree with the contention of the assessee and held as under: “In the present case 'provisions for pension, is as a result of change in accountancy policy. The liability is dependent on other relevant events to happen and is conti…

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. PCIT-4,, CHENNAI

ITA 3261/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No 3261/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Limited, No. 2 Dare House, Chennai G.P.O, Parrys, Chennai-600001. V. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-4, Pcit, Chennai Room No 301, 3Rd Floor, Wanaparthy Block, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600034 [Pan: Aabcc 6633 K] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से//Assessee By प्रत्योंकों की ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : Mr. Sandeep Bagmar, R, Advocate : Mr. Shiva Srinivas, Cit : 25.11.2025 : 18.02.2026 आदेश / Order Per Manu Kumar Giri: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.11.2024 Passed By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai-4 (Hereinafter Referred To As "Pcit") U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, ("The Act") For Assessment Year (Ay) 2020- 21.

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 154Section 263Section 80G

…onal Insurance Co Ltd in ITA 674/2012 dated 05 August 2016 (Kolkata ITAT). c. Supreme Court judgement in the case of Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT (2000) 245 ITR 428. d. Supreme Court's judgement in the case of Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. V. Their Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53 (SC). e. Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P) Ltd v. CIT. Chennai ICA Nos. 3506-3510 of 2009). Further, in the show cause notice issued u/s. 143(3) of the Act the Learned AO has made further Inquiry on the said issue (Refer point 3 on Page No 166, Appellant's response in relation to IBNR/IBNER was reiterated in the show cause noti…

BHARTI TELEMEDIA LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 624/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 35ASection 4

…d rational basis are allowable as deduction while following mercantile accrual system of accounting even though its actual quantification and discharge is deferred to a future date [refer Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. 37 ITR 1 (SC), Metal Box (P) Limited (1969): 73 ITR 53 (SC), United Commercial Bank v. CIT 240 ITR 355 (SC), Bharat Earth Movers: 245 ITR 428 (SC)]. 41. As regards the allegation of the assessing officer that since the issue of quantification of AGR and consequential licence fee is pending/ disputed before the apex Court, the provision for interest for delay in payment of such licence fee made is an un…

DCIT, CIRCLE 4(2), NEW DELHI vs. M/S BHARTI TELEMEDIA LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4966/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 35ASection 4

…d rational basis are allowable as deduction while following mercantile accrual system of accounting even though its actual quantification and discharge is deferred to a future date [refer Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. 37 ITR 1 (SC), Metal Box (P) Limited (1969): 73 ITR 53 (SC), United Commercial Bank v. CIT 240 ITR 355 (SC), Bharat Earth Movers: 245 ITR 428 (SC)]. 41. As regards the allegation of the assessing officer that since the issue of quantification of AGR and consequential licence fee is pending/ disputed before the apex Court, the provision for interest for delay in payment of such licence fee made is an un…

BHARTI TELEMEDIA LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4960/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 35ASection 4

…d rational basis are allowable as deduction while following mercantile accrual system of accounting even though its actual quantification and discharge is deferred to a future date [refer Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. 37 ITR 1 (SC), Metal Box (P) Limited (1969): 73 ITR 53 (SC), United Commercial Bank v. CIT 240 ITR 355 (SC), Bharat Earth Movers: 245 ITR 428 (SC)]. 41. As regards the allegation of the assessing officer that since the issue of quantification of AGR and consequential licence fee is pending/ disputed before the apex Court, the provision for interest for delay in payment of such licence fee made is an un…

DCIT, CIRCLE 4(2), NEW DELHI vs. MS BHARTI TELEMEDIA LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4868/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 35ASection 4

…d rational basis are allowable as deduction while following mercantile accrual system of accounting even though its actual quantification and discharge is deferred to a future date [refer Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. 37 ITR 1 (SC), Metal Box (P) Limited (1969): 73 ITR 53 (SC), United Commercial Bank v. CIT 240 ITR 355 (SC), Bharat Earth Movers: 245 ITR 428 (SC)]. 41. As regards the allegation of the assessing officer that since the issue of quantification of AGR and consequential licence fee is pending/ disputed before the apex Court, the provision for interest for delay in payment of such licence fee made is an un…