Rohit Pulp & Paper Mills ltd. (215 ITR 919, 922) (Bom.), Orient Trading Company Ltd. v. CIT

200 ITR 792Reported decision#17152 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2018.

Judgments citing Rohit Pulp & Paper Mills ltd. (215 ITR 919, 922) (Bom.), Orient Trading Company Ltd. v. CIT

Ashok Mohanbahi Patel, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 154/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 132Section 30Section 37

…Deoria (1965) 55 ITR 476 (All.), Sadi Ram Ganga Prasad vs CIT 172 ITR 129(ALL) (penalty for breach of law), Rohit Pulp & Paper Mills ltd. (215 ITR 919, 922) (Bom.), Orient Trading Company Ltd. vs CIT 202 ITR 481, 491 (Guj.), Agra Leatheries Ltd. vs CIT (200 ITR 792)(All.), CIT vs Jayaram Metal Industres 286 ITR 403 (409) (Karn.), CIT vs Mamta Enterprises 266 ITR 356 (Karn.) supports our view. The crux of the ratio in the aforesaid cases is that any penalty/deduction/expenditure claimed in violation of legal business/infraction of law is not an allowable deduction. Even otherwise, the word “any expenditu…

Ashok Mohanbahi Patel, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 153/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 132Section 30Section 37

…Deoria (1965) 55 ITR 476 (All.), Sadi Ram Ganga Prasad vs CIT 172 ITR 129(ALL) (penalty for breach of law), Rohit Pulp & Paper Mills ltd. (215 ITR 919, 922) (Bom.), Orient Trading Company Ltd. vs CIT 202 ITR 481, 491 (Guj.), Agra Leatheries Ltd. vs CIT (200 ITR 792)(All.), CIT vs Jayaram Metal Industres 286 ITR 403 (409) (Karn.), CIT vs Mamta Enterprises 266 ITR 356 (Karn.) supports our view. The crux of the ratio in the aforesaid cases is that any penalty/deduction/expenditure claimed in violation of legal business/infraction of law is not an allowable deduction. Even otherwise, the word “any expenditu…

Ashok Mohanbahi Patel, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 152/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 132Section 30Section 37

…Deoria (1965) 55 ITR 476 (All.), Sadi Ram Ganga Prasad vs CIT 172 ITR 129(ALL) (penalty for breach of law), Rohit Pulp & Paper Mills ltd. (215 ITR 919, 922) (Bom.), Orient Trading Company Ltd. vs CIT 202 ITR 481, 491 (Guj.), Agra Leatheries Ltd. vs CIT (200 ITR 792)(All.), CIT vs Jayaram Metal Industres 286 ITR 403 (409) (Karn.), CIT vs Mamta Enterprises 266 ITR 356 (Karn.) supports our view. The crux of the ratio in the aforesaid cases is that any penalty/deduction/expenditure claimed in violation of legal business/infraction of law is not an allowable deduction. Even otherwise, the word “any expenditu…

Ashok Mohanbahi Patel, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 151/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 132Section 30Section 37

…1 ITR 350 (Supreme Court), CIT vs Mathura Prasad H. P. Deoria (1965) 55 ITR 476 (All.), Sadi Ram Ganga Prasad vs CIT 172 ITR 129(ALL) (penalty for breach of law), Rohit Pulp & Paper Mills ltd. (215 ITR 919, 922) (Bom.), Orient Trading Company Ltd. vs CIT 202 ITR 481, 491 (Guj.), Agra Leatheries Ltd. vs CIT (200 ITR 792)(All.), CIT vs Jayaram Metal Industres 286 ITR 403 (409) (Karn.), CIT vs Mamta Enterprises 266 ITR 356 (Karn.) supports our view. The crux of the ratio in the aforesaid cases is that any penalty/deduction/expenditure claimed in violation of legal business/infraction of law is not an allowa…

Ashok Mohanbahi Patel, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 150/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 132Section 30Section 37

…1 ITR 350 (Supreme Court), CIT vs Mathura Prasad H. P. Deoria (1965) 55 ITR 476 (All.), Sadi Ram Ganga Prasad vs CIT 172 ITR 129(ALL) (penalty for breach of law), Rohit Pulp & Paper Mills ltd. (215 ITR 919, 922) (Bom.), Orient Trading Company Ltd. vs CIT 202 ITR 481, 491 (Guj.), Agra Leatheries Ltd. vs CIT (200 ITR 792)(All.), CIT vs Jayaram Metal Industres 286 ITR 403 (409) (Karn.), CIT vs Mamta Enterprises 266 ITR 356 (Karn.) supports our view. The crux of the ratio in the aforesaid cases is that any penalty/deduction/expenditure claimed in violation of legal business/infraction of law is not an allowa…

Rohit Pulp & Paper Mills ltd. (215 ITR 919, 922) (Bom.), Orient Trading Company Ltd. v. CIT (200 ITR 792) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax