Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. v. CIT

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

…he triple test prescribed in Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 314 ITR 62 (SC), is not entitled to claim deduction on account of provisioning of expenses. 6.4 Reliance is placed on the following decisions also- (i) Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 486 - “A provision can only be recognized when the obligation has already fructified.” (ii) Grace Shelter Vs. ACIT [2019] 104taxmann.com 133 (iii) Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (iv) DCIT Vs. Fag Bearing India Ltd. [2008] 115 ITD 53 (v) CIT Vs. Aman Khera [2016] 387 ITR 33 6.5 The decisions relied upon by the assessee, as submit…

IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-11(1),, DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

…he triple test prescribed in Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 314 ITR 62 (SC), is not entitled to claim deduction on account of provisioning of expenses. 6.4 Reliance is placed on the following decisions also- (i) Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 486 - “A provision can only be recognized when the obligation has already fructified.” (ii) Grace Shelter Vs. ACIT [2019] 104taxmann.com 133 (iii) Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (iv) DCIT Vs. Fag Bearing India Ltd. [2008] 115 ITD 53 (v) CIT Vs. Aman Khera [2016] 387 ITR 33 6.5 The decisions relied upon by the assessee, as submit…

DCIT, CIRCLE-11(1) vs. IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD.,,

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

…he triple test prescribed in Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 314 ITR 62 (SC), is not entitled to claim deduction on account of provisioning of expenses. 6.4 Reliance is placed on the following decisions also- (i) Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 486 - “A provision can only be recognized when the obligation has already fructified.” (ii) Grace Shelter Vs. ACIT [2019] 104taxmann.com 133 (iii) Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (iv) DCIT Vs. Fag Bearing India Ltd. [2008] 115 ITD 53 (v) CIT Vs. Aman Khera [2016] 387 ITR 33 6.5 The decisions relied upon by the assessee, as submit…

IRCON INTERNATIONAL LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

…he triple test prescribed in Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 314 ITR 62 (SC), is not entitled to claim deduction on account of provisioning of expenses. 6.4 Reliance is placed on the following decisions also- (i) Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 486 - “A provision can only be recognized when the obligation has already fructified.” (ii) Grace Shelter Vs. ACIT [2019] 104taxmann.com 133 (iii) Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (iv) DCIT Vs. Fag Bearing India Ltd. [2008] 115 ITD 53 (v) CIT Vs. Aman Khera [2016] 387 ITR 33 6.5 The decisions relied upon by the assessee, as submit…

IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD. vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE-11,,

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

…he triple test prescribed in Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 314 ITR 62 (SC), is not entitled to claim deduction on account of provisioning of expenses. 6.4 Reliance is placed on the following decisions also- (i) Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 486 - “A provision can only be recognized when the obligation has already fructified.” (ii) Grace Shelter Vs. ACIT [2019] 104taxmann.com 133 (iii) Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (iv) DCIT Vs. Fag Bearing India Ltd. [2008] 115 ITD 53 (v) CIT Vs. Aman Khera [2016] 387 ITR 33 6.5 The decisions relied upon by the assessee, as submit…

M/S MARUTI UDYOG LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL

Bench: 31St March 2000, I.E. The End Of The Relevant Accounting Year, Even Though The Assessee Has Already Incurred Liability Of Excise Duty Of Rs.12.27 Crores?

…credit. The amount cannot, in accounting principles, be debited simultaneously to two different accounts, i.e. assets as well as expenditure. Mr. Bhatia relied on the decision of this Court in Oswal Agro Mills Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2014] 363 ITR 486 (Del) which according to him answered the question squarely against the Assessee. He also referred to the decisions in Commissioner of Central Excise v. Nish Fibres 2010 (257) ELT 81 (Guj) and CCE v. Suprajit Engineering Limited 2010 (253) ELT 369 (Kar). Mr. Bhatia submitted that if Section 43B is read as a whole, it is plain that the deduct…

CIT vs. JAGDISH PRASAD GUPTA

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…way to increase the licence fee is derived from the agreements dated 15th March, 1975 and 3rd January, 1978. It is "not unconditional or arbitrary and does not apply automatically." Reliance was placed on the decision in Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. v. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 486 (Del). Reference was also made to the affidavit filed by the Assessee before the EO denying the liability to pay the enhanced licence fee as demanded by the Railways. (ii) There was no stay of the EO's order despite successive challenges by the Northern Railway in the higher forums. Therefore, in terms of the decision dated 19th April 201…

CIT vs. JAGDISH PRASAD GUPTA

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…way to increase the licence fee is derived from the agreements dated 15th March, 1975 and 3rd January, 1978. It is "not unconditional or arbitrary and does not apply automatically." Reliance was placed on the decision in Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. v. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 486 (Del). Reference was also made to the affidavit filed by the Assessee before the EO denying the liability to pay the enhanced licence fee as demanded by the Railways. (ii) There was no stay of the EO's order despite successive challenges by the Northern Railway in the higher forums. Therefore, in terms of the decision dated 19th April 201…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-10 vs. JAGDISH PRASHAD GUPTA

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…way to increase the licence fee is derived from the agreements dated 15th March, 1975 and 3rd January, 1978. It is "not unconditional or arbitrary and does not apply automatically." Reliance was placed on the decision in Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. v. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 486 (Del). Reference was also made to the affidavit filed by the Assessee before the EO denying the liability to pay the enhanced licence fee as demanded by the Railways. (ii) There was no stay of the EO's order despite successive challenges by the Northern Railway in the higher forums. Therefore, in terms of the decision dated 19th April 201…

CIT vs. JAGDISH PRASAD GUPTA

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…way to increase the licence fee is derived from the agreements dated 15th March, 1975 and 3rd January, 1978. It is "not unconditional or arbitrary and does not apply automatically." Reliance was placed on the decision in Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. v. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 486 (Del). Reference was also made to the affidavit filed by the Assessee before the EO denying the liability to pay the enhanced licence fee as demanded by the Railways. (ii) There was no stay of the EO's order despite successive challenges by the Northern Railway in the higher forums. Therefore, in terms of the decision dated 19th April 201…

CIT vs. JAGDISH PRASAD GUPTA

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…way to increase the licence fee is derived from the agreements dated 15th March, 1975 and 3rd January, 1978. It is "not unconditional or arbitrary and does not apply automatically." Reliance was placed on the decision in Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. v. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 486 (Del). Reference was also made to the affidavit filed by the Assessee before the EO denying the liability to pay the enhanced licence fee as demanded by the Railways. (ii) There was no stay of the EO's order despite successive challenges by the Northern Railway in the higher forums. Therefore, in terms of the decision dated 19th April 201…

CIT vs. JAGDISH PRASAD GUPTA

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…way to increase the licence fee is derived from the agreements dated 15th March, 1975 and 3rd January, 1978. It is "not unconditional or arbitrary and does not apply automatically." Reliance was placed on the decision in Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. v. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 486 (Del). Reference was also made to the affidavit filed by the Assessee before the EO denying the liability to pay the enhanced licence fee as demanded by the Railways. (ii) There was no stay of the EO's order despite successive challenges by the Northern Railway in the higher forums. Therefore, in terms of the decision dated 19th April 201…

JAGDISH PRASAD GUPTA

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…way to increase the licence fee is derived from the agreements dated 15th March, 1975 and 3rd January, 1978. It is "not unconditional or arbitrary and does not apply automatically." Reliance was placed on the decision in Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. v. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 486 (Del). Reference was also made to the affidavit filed by the Assessee before the EO denying the liability to pay the enhanced licence fee as demanded by the Railways. (ii) There was no stay of the EO's order despite successive challenges by the Northern Railway in the higher forums. Therefore, in terms of the decision dated 19th April 201…