How many judgments cite Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT?

126 judgments on BharatTax cite Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT (57 ITR 521), spanning 2010 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 115BBE, Section 132, Section 133A, Section 143(2), Section 147.

Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT

57 ITR 521Supreme Court of India1965#816 most cited

What is Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Income tax is levied on real income, which represents profits determined by ordinary commercial principles after permissible deductions, considering the probability of realization. This principle distinguishes real profits from statutory profits specified for other purposes under the Income-tax Act.

126

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT · 57 ITR 521 · real income theory · commercial principles · determination of income · permissible deductions · probability of realization · business income · mercantile system of accounting · statutory profits distinction

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 115BBE Section 132 Section 133A Section 143(2)Section 147 Section 11 Section 119

Issues it is cited on

section 28(iv)explanation to section 37 surrender of income right to receive principal officer section 192 section 30 section 40(a)(i)mercantile system of accounting rejection of books of account beneficial owner fees for technical services

Judgments citing Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SHRI DEEPAK MOHANLAL PURSWANI, RAJKOT

ITA 665/RJT/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. SR. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

…record here that income has to be determined on the principles of\ncommercial accountancy. There is, thus, a distinction between 'real profits' ascertained\non principles of commercial accountancy. In the case of Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd.\nv. CIT [1965] 57 ITR 521 (SC) this Court has held that income tax is on the real income.\nIn the case of a business, the profits must be arrived at on ordinary commercial\nprinciples. The scheme of the IT Act requires the determination of 'real income' on the\nbasis of ordinary commercial principles of accountancy. To determine the 'real income',\npermissible expenses are…

SEVA BHARATHI TRUST,CHAMARAJANAGARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, CHAMARAJANAGARA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1486/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri.Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Seva Bharathi Trust, Vs. Ito, Sevabharathi College Campus, Ward –1, Chennipuradamole Road, Chamarajanagara. Chamarajanagara – 571 313. Pan : Aabts 6034 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Vageesh Hegde, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel For Revenue. Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri. Vageesh Hegde, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel for Revenue

Section 11Section 119Section 12A(1)(b)Section 139

…"income" hence the same cannot be added back as is sought to be done by the Department. In this connection, reliance was placed on "Real Income Theory". 35. We find no merit in the above contention. In the case of Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1965] 57 ITR 521, this is what the Supreme Court had to say : ". . . Income-tax is a tax on the 'real income', i.e., the profits arrived at on commercial principles subject to the provisions of the Income-tax Act. The real profit can be ascertained only by making the permissible deductions. There is a clear cut distinction between . . . the real profits and statut…

OM PRAKASH GUPTA,SAWAI MADHOPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -1, JAIPUR

ITA 399/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR &

Section 115BSection 153ASection 69

…herein it was held, after referring to Morvi Industries that real\naccrual of income and not a hypothetical accrual of income ought to be\ntaken into consideration. For a similar conclusion, reference was made to\nPoona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT, [1965] 57 ITR 521 (SC) wherein it was\nheld that income tax is a tax on real income.\n\n25. Finally a reference was made to State Bank of Travancore v. CIT [1986] 158\nITR 102/24 Taxman 337 (SC) wherein the majority view was that accrual of\nincome must be real, taking into account the actuality of the situation;\nwhether the accrual had taken place or not must, in…

THE DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 , RAJKOT vs. SHRI SHAMJIBHAI SADHABHAI KANGAD, GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue, in IT(SS) No

ITA 321/RJT/2022[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआ.(खो और ज).सं./It(Ss)A Nos.11 To 20/Rjt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years:2011-12 To 2020-21 बनाम/ Shri Shamjibhai Sadhabhai Deputy Commissioner Of Kangad Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Vs. Bbz-S-60, Zanda Chowk, “Amruta Estate”, 2Nd Floor, Gandhidham-370 201 M.G. Road, Rajkot-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Adepk 3471 E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) आ.(खो और ज).सं./It(Ss)A Nos.21 To 23/Rjt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years:2014-15, 2016-17 &2017-18 बनाम/ Deputy Commissioner Of Income Shri Shamjibhai Sadhabhai Tax, Central Circle-1, “Amruta Kangad Vs. Estate”, 2Nd Floor, M.G. Road, Bbz-S-60, Zanda Chowk, Rajkot-360001 Gandhidham-370 201 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Aabca 8202 E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) आ.(खो और ज).सं./It(Ss)A Nos.15/Rjt/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year:2019-20 बनाम/ Deputy Commissioner Of Shri Hetab Shamjibhai Kangad Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Bbz-South-60, Zanda Chowk, Vs. “Amruta Estate”, 2Nd Floor, Gandhidham-370 201 M.G. Road, Rajkot-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Aqtpk 7484 M (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 153A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, राजकोट "यायपीठ, राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.(खो और ज).सं./IT(SS)A Nos.11 to 20/RJT/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years:2011-12 to 2020-21 बनाम/ Shri Shamjibhai Sadhabhai Deputy Commissioner of Kangad Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Vs. BBZ-S-60, Zanda Chowk, “Amruta Estate”, 2nd Floor, Gandhidham-370 201 M.G. Road, Rajkot-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.:ADEPK 3471 E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) आ.(खो और ज).सं./IT(SS)A Nos.21 to 23/RJT/2022 "नधा…

ITO, WARD-24(1), NEW DELHI vs. SUN-NEW CREATIONS AND MARKETIGN PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1096/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Royito, Ward 24(1) Vs. M/S Sun New Creations New Delhi & Marketing Pvt. Ltd. A-2/71, Rajouri Garden, West Delhi, New Delhi – 110027 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aacch4883P Appellant .. Respondent C.O. No. 59/Del/2025 (Assessment Year 2017-18) M/S Sun New Creations Vs. Ito, Ward 24(1) & Marketing Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi A-2/71, Rajouri Garden, West Delhi, New Delhi – 110027 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aacch4883P Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Vikas Jain, Adv, &For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…lared in its audited books of accounts, balance sheets and ITRs. 10.7 Income has to be determined from the point of view of real income taking the probability or improbability of realization in a realistic manner. Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1965) 57 ITR 521 (SC), which AO in this case has miserably failed to do so.” 8. The Ld. Senior DR failed to point out any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) has appreciated that the fact of cash deposit is regularly reflected in the books of account by way of income already P a g e | 10 ITA No.1096/Del/2021 & CO 59/Del/2025 M/s Sun New Creations an…

WEIR MINERALS (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-27(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 4713/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy[Assessment Year 2012-13]

Section 143(3)Section 234B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KHETTRA MOHAN ROY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year 2012-13] M/s. Weir Mineral (India) Pvt. Deputy Commissioner of Income Ltd. Office Unit No.912 and Tax, Circle-27(1), 914, 9th Floor, DLF Tower, Vs New Delhi A Plot No.-10, Jasola District Centre, New Delhi-110025 PAN-AAACI0519D Appellant Respondent Appellant by Shri Vishal Kalra, Adv. & Ms. Sumish Murgai, AR and Shri Kashish Gupta, CA Respondent by Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 29.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement 06.06.2025…

KEI INDUSTRIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-13(1), DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1096/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Sh. Vikas Jain, Adv, &For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. PRAKASH NIMMAGADDA, HYDERABAD, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 974/HYD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.974/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dy.Cit Vs. Shri Prakash Nimmagadda Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Acbpn4246R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/12/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order, Dated 20/03/2017 Of The Learned Cit (A)-9, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2008-09. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, CIT(DR)

Section 17(2)(c)Section 28

…) wherein it was held, after referring to Morvi Industries that real accrual of income and not a hypothetical accrual of income ought to be taken into consideration. For a similar conclusion, reference was made to Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT, [1965] 57 ITR 521 Page 25 of 43 ITA No 974 of 2017 Prakash Nimmagadda (SC) wherein it was held that income tax is a tax on real income. 25. Finally, a reference was made to State Bank of Travancore v. CIT[1986] 158 ITR 102/24 Taxman 337 (SC) wherein the majority view was that accrual of income must be real, taking into account the actuality of the situation; whe…

LORAMITRA RATH,KAIRAPARI KOTSAHI, TANGI vs. DCIT (CIRCLE-1(1), CUTTACK

The appeal is allowed

ITA 314/CTK/2023[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack05 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2015-16 Loramitra Loramitra Rath, Rath, Kairapari Kairapari Vs. Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kotsahi, Tangi, Cuttack Kotsahi, Tangi, Cuttack Cuttack Pan/Gir No. No.Aebpr 6065 H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Purnendhu Bhusan Mohanty, Ca Purnendhu Bhusan Mohanty, Ca Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr

For Appellant: Shri Purnendhu Bhusan Mohanty, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr

Section 48

…ami Lal Jain vs. CIT [1991] 190 ITR 1 (SC) 23 16 Murlidhar Himatsingka v. CIT [1966] 62 ITR 323 (SC) 24 24 Nariman B. Bharucha’s case (1981) 130 ITR 863 (Bom) 25 9 P. C. Mullick vs. CIT [1938] 6 ITR 206 (SC) 26 13 Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [1965] 57 ITR 521 (SC) 27 2 Raja Bejoy Singh Dudhuria vs. CIT [1933] 1 ITR 135 (SC) 28 13 29 Rajkot District Gopalak Co-op. Milk Producers' Union Ltd. vs. CIT 204 5 ITR 590 (Gujarat) RSM & Co. Vs. Addl. CIT (2010) 125 ITD 243 (Mum.) 30 24 Shroff Eye Centre vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi) 31 20 Somaiya Organo Chemicals Ltd. vs. CIT 216 ITR 291(Bom.) 32 5 33 State Bank of Trav…

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -7 vs. RELIGARE SECURITIES LTD.

ITA - 474 / 2024HC Delhi02 Sept 2024

Section 260A

…order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 14:35:05 ITA 474/2024 Page 5 of 6 Income Tax, [1965] 57 ITR 521 (SC) wherein it was held that income tax is a tax on real income. 25. Finally a reference was made to State Bank of Travancore v. Commissioner of Income Tax, [1986] 158 ITR 102 (SC) wherein the majority view was that accrual of income must be real, taking into account the actuality of the situation; whether the accrual had taken place or no…

PRAGATI POWER CORPORATION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 20(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1617/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 145(2)Section 32Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 43ASection 46ASection 80I

…ollowing cases:- CIT vs Shoorji Ballabhdas & Co. (1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC) Pragati Power Corporation vs. ACIT CIT vs Birla Gwalior (P) Ltd. (1973) 89 ITR 266 (SC) Morvi Industies Ltd. vs CIT (1971) 82 ITR 835 (SC) Poona Electric Supply Company Ltd. vs CIT(1965) 57 ITR 521 (SC) Kashiparekh (H.M.) & Co. Ltd. vs CIT (1960) 39 ITR 706 (Bom) State Bank of Travencore vs CIT(1986) 158 ITR 102 (Ker) Supreme Court held in this case that the question, whether there was real accrual of income to the assessee Co. in respect of the enhanced charges for supply of electricity, has to be considered by taking the probability or imp…

GRASS ASSOCIATES PVT LTD,KOCHI vs. THE ITO,CORP.WARD-13), KOCHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 71/COCH/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…r Explanation to s. 37(1). One could, invoking real income theory, argue of it being necessitated for business reasons. True, but, then, it is the real income, subject to the provisions of the Act, that is taxable (Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1965] 57 ITR 521(SC); Southern Technologies Ltd. v. Jt. CIT [2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC)). The said theory is thus is to be applied consistent with the provisions of the Act and, two, the common law. 4.3 We have, at this stage, two options, i.e., to restore the matter back to the AO for examining the deductibility of the expenditure from the standpoint of Explanation…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, DELHI vs. M/S BHISHANSAROOP RAM

ITA/953/2019HC Delhi28 Mar 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

…2) 4 SCC 451 : 1974 SCC (Tax) 140 : (1971) 82 ITR 835] that real accrual of income and not a hypothetical accrual of income ought to be taken into consideration. For a similar conclusion, reference was made to Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [(1965) 57 ITR 521 (SC)] wherein it was held that income tax is a tax on real income. 21. Finally in Godhra Electricity case [Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT, (1997) 4 SCC 530 : (1997) 225 ITR 746] a reference was made to State Bank of Travancore v. CIT [(1986) 2 SCC 11 : 1986 SCC (Tax) 289 : (1986) 158 ITR 102] wherein the majority view was that accrual…

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE -1 (1), KOCHI vs. M/S GEOFIN COMTRADE LTD, KOCHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals are allowed

ITA 968/COCH/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

For Appellant: Ms. Rohini Thampi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…ect to tax, and for which one may refer to the discussion thereon under the head ‘Theory of “real income”, as indeed ‘Applicability of section 145’ (at paras 35 to 40 of the decision). Referring to decisions in Poona Electric Company Supply Ltd. v. CIT [1965] 57 ITR 521, 530 (SC) and CWT v. Bombay Suburban Electric Supply Ltd. [1976] 103 ITR 384, 391 (Bom), holding so, the Hon'ble Apex Court further holds as under: [“38. The point to be noted is that the Income-tax is a tax on " real income", i.e., the profits arrived at on commercial principles subject to the provisions of the Income-tax Act. Therefore, if by th…

ACIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.GEOFIN COMTRADE LTD, KOCHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals are allowed

ITA 967/COCH/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

For Appellant: Ms. Rohini Thampi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

MUTHOOT AGRI PROJECTS AND HOSPITALITIES P. LTD,MAHARASTRA vs. ACIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 153/COCH/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

For Appellant: Sri.Anil D Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 56Section 57

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member and Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, Judicial Member ITA No.153/Coch/2021 : Asst.Year 2014-2015 Muthoot Agri Projects And The Asst. Commissioner of Hospitalities Private Limited Income-tax, Trivandrum. Fikrst Floor 2-A2, Sector-9 vs. Vashi, Mumbai – 407 003. [PAN: AAFCM4676A] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Sri.Anil D Nair, Advocate Respondent by: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 21.12.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 07.03.2024 O R D E R Per: Sanjay Arora, AM This is an Appeal by the Assessee agitating th…

PUNE METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE PUNE, PUNE

ITA 561/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Pune13 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Prathmesh BorkarFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari, CIT (DR)

Section 10(46)Section 129Section 143(3)

…Maharashtra. The true owner of the funds collected is in fact the Government of Maharashtra and the said receipts cannot be taxed in the hands of PMRDA. Ref : Kishanchand Lunidasing Bajaj v. CIT, [1966] 60 ITR 500 (SC). Poona Electric Co. Ltd. v. CIT, [1965] 57 ITR 521 (SC). 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned assessing officer has grossly erred treating the sums received by PMRDA as its income, without having regard to the fact that the receipts would not be taxable in the hands of PMRDA on the principles of mutuality. The sums received by PMRDA are from persons residing/ carrying o…

PUNE METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE PUNE, PUNE

ITA 560/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Pune13 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Prathmesh BorkarFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari, CIT (DR)

Section 10(46)Section 129Section 143(3)

KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(1) & TPS, THRISSUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 933/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Daskerala State Financial Dy. Cit, Circle - 1(1) & Tps Enterprises Ltd. Thrissur Bhadratha, Museum Road Vs. Chembukkavu - 680020 Thrissur [Pan:Aabct3817A] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Harikrishnanunny, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

THOMAS COOK (INDIA) LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL/ JT/ DY/CIT/ASSTT/ITO, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1218/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Ble

Section 92CSection 92C(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 752/MUM/2022 (A.Y. 2017-18) Thomas Cook (India) Limited v. Additional/Joint/Dy. /Asst., CIT National e-Assessment Centre Thomas Cook Building Delhi Dr. D.N. Road, Fort Mumbai - 400001 PAN: AAACT4050C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri J.D. Mistry Shri Madhur Agrawal & Shri Fenil Bhat Department Represented by : Shri K.C. Selvamani Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 26 & 27.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 24.11.2023 O R…

Showing 1–20 of 126 · Page 1 of 7