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

A provision for gratuity liability, calculated on an actuarial basis and spread over a number of years, is an allowable business expense. Such a provision is considered a charge against profits rather than a reserve.

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)

Magnalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 3(2)

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7133/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mangalore Refinery & Addl. Cit-3(2), Mumbai Petrochemicals Ltd. 15Th Vs. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. Pan No. Aaacm5132A Respondent Appellant Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit-3(2) Room No. Mangalore Refinery & 674, 6Th Floor, Petrochemicals Ltd. 15Th Vs. Aayakarbhavan, M. K. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Road, Mumbai-400020. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. Pan No. Aaacm5132A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. J.D.J. Mistri, Senior Advocate & Mr. Madhur Agrawal, Advocate Revenue By : Mr.Samuel Darse, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 12/06/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/09/2018

For Appellant: Mr. J.D.J. Mistri, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Samuel Darse, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 44B

…115JB of the Act. 38. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) agreed with the reasons given by the AO and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 39. Before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee relies on the decision in Metal Box Company of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen (73 ITR 53) (SC), Bharat Earth Moves v. CIT (245 ITR 428) (SC), CIT v. Nagri Mills Co. Ltd. (33 ITR 681) (Bom). Also reliance is placed by him on the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2004-05. Mangalore Refinery On the other hand, the Ld. DR relies on the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 40. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the releva…

The Kanakamahalakshmi Co-Operative Bank Limited, Visakhapatnam vs. The ACIT, Visakhapatnam

ITA 300/VIZ/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Sept 2018AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao –AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.S. Murthy –Sr.DR

…e CIT. The Andhra Pradesh High Court after referring to the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. v. D. V. Bapat, ITO (1975) 101 ITR 292, and the judgment of the Supreme Court in Metal Box Company of India Ltd. vs. The Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53, held that the amount paid towards an unapproved gratuity fund can be deducted under sec. 37 of the I.T. Act, though not under sec. 36(1)(v). In view of this judgment of the jurisdictional High Court, in our opinion, even if any payment is made to an unapproved gratuity fund, it has to be allowed under sec. 37. By respectfully following the binding…

The Kanakamahalakshmi Co-Operative Bank Limited, Visakhapatnam vs. The ACIT, Visakhapatnam

ITA 299/VIZ/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Sept 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao –AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.S. Murthy –Sr.DR

…e CIT. The Andhra Pradesh High Court after referring to the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. v. D. V. Bapat, ITO (1975) 101 ITR 292, and the judgment of the Supreme Court in Metal Box Company of India Ltd. vs. The Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53, held that the amount paid towards an unapproved gratuity fund can be deducted under sec. 37 of the I.T. Act, though not under sec. 36(1)(v). In view of this judgment of the jurisdictional High Court, in our opinion, even if any payment is made to an unapproved gratuity fund, it has to be allowed under sec. 37. By respectfully following the binding…

The Dy. CIT, Vijayawada vs. M/S. the Gandhi Co-Op., Vijayawada

In the result, appeals of the revenue for the assessment years 2012-

ITA 461/VIZ/2016[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Sept 2018AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.199/Viz/2016 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Joint Commissioner Of Vs. The Gandhi Cooperative Income Tax (Osd), Vijayawada Urban Bank Ltd. Vijayawada [Pan :Aaaat8072G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.461/Viz/2016 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year: 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. The Gandhi Cooperative Circle-2(1), Vijayawada Urban Bank Ltd. Vijayawada [Pan :Aaaat8072G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.01/Viz/2018 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.Nos.199/Viz/2016) The Gandhi Cooperative Urban Vs. Joint Commissioner Of Income Bank Ltd., Vijayawada Tax (Osd), Vijayawada [Pan :Aaaat8072G] Cross Objection No.02/Viz/2018 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.461/Viz/2016) The Gandhi Cooperative Urban Deputy Commissioner Of Bank Ltd., Vijayawada Income Tax [Pan :Aaaat8072G] Circle-2(1), Vijayawada निर्धाऩिती की ओि से/ Assessee By : Shri C.Subrahmanyam, Ar िधजस्व की ओि से/ Revenue By : Smt U Mini Chandran, Dr सुिवधई की तधिीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2018 05.09.2018 घोषणध की तधिीख/Date Of Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Smt U Mini Chandran, DR

…CIT. The Andhra Pradesh High Court after referring to the judgement of the Bombay High Court in Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. v. D. V. Bapat, ITO (1975) 101 ITR 292, and the judgement of the Supreme Court in Metal Box Company of India Ltd. vs. The Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53, held that the amount paid towards an unapproved gratuity fund can be deducted under sec. 37 of the I.T. Act, though not under sec. 36(1)(v). In view of this judgment of the jurisdictional High Court, in our opinion, even if any payment is made to an unapproved gratuity fund, it has to be allowed under sec. 37. By respectfully following the binding…

The JCIT(OSD), Vijayawada vs. The Gandhi Coperative Urban Bank Ltd., Vijayawada

In the result, appeals of the revenue for the assessment years 2012-

ITA 199/VIZ/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Sept 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.199/Viz/2016 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Joint Commissioner Of Vs. The Gandhi Cooperative Income Tax (Osd), Vijayawada Urban Bank Ltd. Vijayawada [Pan :Aaaat8072G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.461/Viz/2016 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year: 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. The Gandhi Cooperative Circle-2(1), Vijayawada Urban Bank Ltd. Vijayawada [Pan :Aaaat8072G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.01/Viz/2018 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.Nos.199/Viz/2016) The Gandhi Cooperative Urban Vs. Joint Commissioner Of Income Bank Ltd., Vijayawada Tax (Osd), Vijayawada [Pan :Aaaat8072G] Cross Objection No.02/Viz/2018 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.461/Viz/2016) The Gandhi Cooperative Urban Deputy Commissioner Of Bank Ltd., Vijayawada Income Tax [Pan :Aaaat8072G] Circle-2(1), Vijayawada निर्धाऩिती की ओि से/ Assessee By : Shri C.Subrahmanyam, Ar िधजस्व की ओि से/ Revenue By : Smt U Mini Chandran, Dr सुिवधई की तधिीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2018 05.09.2018 घोषणध की तधिीख/Date Of Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Smt U Mini Chandran, DR

…CIT. The Andhra Pradesh High Court after referring to the judgement of the Bombay High Court in Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. v. D. V. Bapat, ITO (1975) 101 ITR 292, and the judgement of the Supreme Court in Metal Box Company of India Ltd. vs. The Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53, held that the amount paid towards an unapproved gratuity fund can be deducted under sec. 37 of the I.T. Act, though not under sec. 36(1)(v). In view of this judgment of the jurisdictional High Court, in our opinion, even if any payment is made to an unapproved gratuity fund, it has to be allowed under sec. 37. By respectfully following the binding…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Guntur vs. The Guntur District Co-Operative Central Bank Limited, Tenali

In the result, the revenue’s appeal for the assessment year 2013-14

ITA 78/VIZ/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Jul 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.77 & 78/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Years:2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively) Acit Vs. The Guntur District Circle-1(1) Cooperative Central Bank Ltd. Guntur Tenali, Guntur [Pan : Aaatt6101H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.Appala Raju, DR

Section 36(1)(v)Section 37(1)

…CIT. The Andhra Pradesh High Court after referring to the judgement of the Bombay High Court in Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. v. D. V. Bapat, ITO (1975) 101 ITR 292, and the judgement of the Supreme Court in Metal Box Company of India Ltd. vs. The Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53, held that the amount paid towards an unapproved gratuity fund can be deducted under sec. 37 of the I.T. Act, though not under sec. 36(1)(v). In view of this judgment of the jurisdictional High Court, in our opinion, even if any payment is made to an unapproved gratuity fund, it has to be allowed under sec. 37. By respectfully following the binding…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam vs. The Guntur District Co-Operative Central Bank Limited, Tenali

In the result, the revenue’s appeal for the assessment year 2013-14

ITA 77/VIZ/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.77 & 78/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Years:2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively) Acit Vs. The Guntur District Circle-1(1) Cooperative Central Bank Ltd. Guntur Tenali, Guntur [Pan : Aaatt6101H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.Appala Raju, DR

Section 36(1)(v)Section 37(1)

…CIT. The Andhra Pradesh High Court after referring to the judgement of the Bombay High Court in Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. v. D. V. Bapat, ITO (1975) 101 ITR 292, and the judgement of the Supreme Court in Metal Box Company of India Ltd. vs. The Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53, held that the amount paid towards an unapproved gratuity fund can be deducted under sec. 37 of the I.T. Act, though not under sec. 36(1)(v). In view of this judgment of the jurisdictional High Court, in our opinion, even if any payment is made to an unapproved gratuity fund, it has to be allowed under sec. 37. By respectfully following the binding…

The ACIT, Eluru vs. M/S. Jeypote Sugar Company Ltd., Chagallu

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue and the CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 268/VIZ/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleacit, Circle-1, Vs. M/S. The Jeypore Sugar Eluru. Company Ltd., D.No. 6/69, Chagallu, W.G. District. Pan No. Aaact 9942 R (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No. 50/Viz/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 268/Viz/2015) (Asst. Year : 2010-11) M/S. The Jeypore Sugar Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Company Ltd., D.No. 6/69, Eluru. Chagallu, W.G. District. Pan No. Aaact 9942 R (Applicant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.C. Das – Sr.DR

Section 36Section 36(1)(iv)Section 369(1)(iv)Section 37Section 40A(7)Section 40k

…he CIT. The Andhra Pradesh High Court after referring to the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. vs. D.V.Bapat, ITO (1975) 101 ITR 292, and the judgment of the Supreme Court in Metal Box Company of India Ltd. vs. The Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53, held that the amount paid towards an unapproved gratuity fund can be deducted under section 37 of the Income-tax Act, though not under section 37(1)(v). In view of this judgment of the jurisdictional High Court, in our opinion, even if any payment is made to an unapproved gratuity fund, it has to be allowed under section 37. By respectfully follow…

Franklin Templeton International Services (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 6(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 1778/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm M/S. Franklin Templeton Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of International Services (India) Pvt. Income Tax, Ltd., Circle 6(3)(1), Room Tower 2, 13Th Floor No.506, Aayakar Bhavan, Indiabulls Finance Centre M.K. Road, Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai – 400 020 Elphinstone (W) Mumbai – 400 013 Pan/Gir No.Aaacf6496L (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…during the year; the same should be allowed as a deduction during the year only. In this connection, reliance is placed on the following judicial precedents: Bharat Earth Movers v C1T [20091 (245 ITR 42H) • Metal Box Co. of India Ltd v. their workmen [19691 (73 ITR 53) • (SC) Calcutta Co Ltd. v C1T [19591 (37 ITR 1) (SC) • 11. In view of the above discussion, we do not find any merit for disallowance of expenditure incurred under the head ‘repairs and maintenance’ amounting to Rs.36,33,865/-. We direct accordingly. 12. Learned AR has also raised an additional ground to the effect that incase of disallowance of r…

Chennai Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Chennai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -8, Chennai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2168/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Smt. Ruby George, CITFor Respondent: 08.03.2018

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 234A(3)Section 263

…30 ITR 641 and CIT Vs. Nirav Modi reported in (2016) 390 ITR 292 (Bom) (vii) The Hon’ble Madras High Court in CIT Vs. Valliammal (D) reported in 19998 230 ITR (Mds) (viii) The Hon’ble Apex Court in Metal Box Company of India Ltd., Vs. Their Worked reported in 73 ITR 53 (1969) The Ld.AR further argued stating that in the case of the assessee provision for wage arrears had crystalized during the relevant assessment years and therefore there was no error in the order of the Ld.AO which is prejudicial to the interest of the assessee. 6. The Ld.DR on the other hand argued stating that both the issues were not discus…

Chennai Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Chennai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -8, Chennai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2167/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Smt. Ruby George, CITFor Respondent: 08.03.2018

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 234A(3)Section 263

…30 ITR 641 and CIT Vs. Nirav Modi reported in (2016) 390 ITR 292 (Bom) (vii) The Hon’ble Madras High Court in CIT Vs. Valliammal (D) reported in 19998 230 ITR (Mds) (viii) The Hon’ble Apex Court in Metal Box Company of India Ltd., Vs. Their Worked reported in 73 ITR 53 (1969) The Ld.AR further argued stating that in the case of the assessee provision for wage arrears had crystalized during the relevant assessment years and therefore there was no error in the order of the Ld.AO which is prejudicial to the interest of the assessee. 6. The Ld.DR on the other hand argued stating that both the issues were not discus…

DCIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. Rm Kv Fashion Garments Pvt Ltd, Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 761/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

…n that the question that arises is that whether this provision towards unredeemed bonus points can allowed as a deduction while computing the profits and gains of business. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Metal Box Company of India v. Their Workmen 73 ITR 53 (SC) and Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT 245 ITR 428 [2000] (SC) had laid down the principle that a provision for liability is allowable as a deduction provided that liability is a present obligation arising from the past events the settlement of which is expected to result in outflow of resources and in respect of which a reliable estimate is possib…

ACIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. M/S Rm Kv Fbrics Private Limited, Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 760/CHNY/2018[2014--15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

…n that the question that arises is that whether this provision towards unredeemed bonus points can allowed as a deduction while computing the profits and gains of business. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Metal Box Company of India v. Their Workmen 73 ITR 53 (SC) and Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT 245 ITR 428 [2000] (SC) had laid down the principle that a provision for liability is allowable as a deduction provided that liability is a present obligation arising from the past events the settlement of which is expected to result in outflow of resources and in respect of which a reliable estimate is possib…

ACIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. M/S Rm K V Silks Private Limited, Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 759/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

…n that the question that arises is that whether this provision towards unredeemed bonus points can allowed as a deduction while computing the profits and gains of business. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Metal Box Company of India v. Their Workmen 73 ITR 53 (SC) and Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT 245 ITR 428 [2000] (SC) had laid down the principle that a provision for liability is allowable as a deduction provided that liability is a present obligation arising from the past events the settlement of which is expected to result in outflow of resources and in respect of which a reliable estimate is possib…

M/S Rm Kv Fbrics Private Limited, Tirunelveli vs. ACIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 614/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

…n that the question that arises is that whether this provision towards unredeemed bonus points can allowed as a deduction while computing the profits and gains of business. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Metal Box Company of India v. Their Workmen 73 ITR 53 (SC) and Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT 245 ITR 428 [2000] (SC) had laid down the principle that a provision for liability is allowable as a deduction provided that liability is a present obligation arising from the past events the settlement of which is expected to result in outflow of resources and in respect of which a reliable estimate is possib…

M/S Rm K V Silks Private Limited, Tirunelveli vs. ACIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 613/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

…n that the question that arises is that whether this provision towards unredeemed bonus points can allowed as a deduction while computing the profits and gains of business. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Metal Box Company of India v. Their Workmen 73 ITR 53 (SC) and Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT 245 ITR 428 [2000] (SC) had laid down the principle that a provision for liability is allowable as a deduction provided that liability is a present obligation arising from the past events the settlement of which is expected to result in outflow of resources and in respect of which a reliable estimate is possib…

DCIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. Rmkv Fashion Garments Pvt. Ltd., Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1626/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

…n that the question that arises is that whether this provision towards unredeemed bonus points can allowed as a deduction while computing the profits and gains of business. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Metal Box Company of India v. Their Workmen 73 ITR 53 (SC) and Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT 245 ITR 428 [2000] (SC) had laid down the principle that a provision for liability is allowable as a deduction provided that liability is a present obligation arising from the past events the settlement of which is expected to result in outflow of resources and in respect of which a reliable estimate is possib…

DCIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. Rmkv Fashion Garments Pvt. Ltd., Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1625/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

…n that the question that arises is that whether this provision towards unredeemed bonus points can allowed as a deduction while computing the profits and gains of business. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Metal Box Company of India v. Their Workmen 73 ITR 53 (SC) and Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT 245 ITR 428 [2000] (SC) had laid down the principle that a provision for liability is allowable as a deduction provided that liability is a present obligation arising from the past events the settlement of which is expected to result in outflow of resources and in respect of which a reliable estimate is possib…

DCIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. Rmkv Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1624/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

…n that the question that arises is that whether this provision towards unredeemed bonus points can allowed as a deduction while computing the profits and gains of business. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Metal Box Company of India v. Their Workmen 73 ITR 53 (SC) and Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT 245 ITR 428 [2000] (SC) had laid down the principle that a provision for liability is allowable as a deduction provided that liability is a present obligation arising from the past events the settlement of which is expected to result in outflow of resources and in respect of which a reliable estimate is possib…

DCIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. Rmkv Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1623/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

…n that the question that arises is that whether this provision towards unredeemed bonus points can allowed as a deduction while computing the profits and gains of business. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Metal Box Company of India v. Their Workmen 73 ITR 53 (SC) and Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT 245 ITR 428 [2000] (SC) had laid down the principle that a provision for liability is allowable as a deduction provided that liability is a present obligation arising from the past events the settlement of which is expected to result in outflow of resources and in respect of which a reliable estimate is possib…

Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen

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

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen

Magnalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 3(2)

The Kanakamahalakshmi Co-Operative Bank Limited, Visakhapatnam vs. The ACIT, Visakhapatnam

The Kanakamahalakshmi Co-Operative Bank Limited, Visakhapatnam vs. The ACIT, Visakhapatnam

The Dy. CIT, Vijayawada vs. M/S. the Gandhi Co-Op., Vijayawada

The JCIT(OSD), Vijayawada vs. The Gandhi Coperative Urban Bank Ltd., Vijayawada

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Guntur vs. The Guntur District Co-Operative Central Bank Limited, Tenali

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam vs. The Guntur District Co-Operative Central Bank Limited, Tenali

The ACIT, Eluru vs. M/S. Jeypote Sugar Company Ltd., Chagallu

Franklin Templeton International Services (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 6(3)(1), Mumbai

Chennai Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Chennai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -8, Chennai

Chennai Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Chennai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -8, Chennai

DCIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. Rm Kv Fashion Garments Pvt Ltd, Tirunelveli

ACIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. M/S Rm Kv Fbrics Private Limited, Tirunelveli

ACIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. M/S Rm K V Silks Private Limited, Tirunelveli

M/S Rm Kv Fbrics Private Limited, Tirunelveli vs. ACIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli

M/S Rm K V Silks Private Limited, Tirunelveli vs. ACIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli

DCIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. Rmkv Fashion Garments Pvt. Ltd., Tirunelveli

DCIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. Rmkv Fashion Garments Pvt. Ltd., Tirunelveli

DCIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. Rmkv Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Tirunelveli

DCIT Circle 1, Tirunelveli vs. Rmkv Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Tirunelveli