What is Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

A provision for expenses, such as warranty, is a deductible liability for income tax purposes if it constitutes a present obligation arising from past events, and a reliable estimate of the amount of obligation is possible.

How many judgments cite Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT?

739 judgments on BharatTax cite Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (314 ITR 62), spanning 2009 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 37(1), Section 40(a)(ia), Section 115JB, Section 14A, Section 147.

Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (314 ITR 62)

Polyhose India Rubber Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3387/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3387, 3388 & 3389/Mds/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2008-2009, 2009-10 & 2011-12) M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, C/O. B. Sivaraman & Associates, Ca Corporate Circle-V(2), 10, E Block, Karthik Apartments, Chennai – 34. 46, Vijayaragava Road, Chennai – 600 017. Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.17/Mds/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-2010) Vs M/S. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., F-37 To F-42, Corporate Circle-5(2), Sipcot Industrial Park, Chennai – 34. Irungattukottai, Kanchipuram - 602105 Pan: Aadcp4173F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Smt. S. Vijayaprabha, Jcit "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : 26.09.2017 सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.11.2017 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: 26.09.2017

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 32

…khs claimed under the head provision for warranty because as per the Act mere provision cannot be allowed as deduction. On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) relying on the decision in the cases Rotork Controls & ITA No.17/Mds/2017 India (P) Limited [2009] reported in 314 ITR 62 (SC), Bharat Earth Movers v CIT [2000] reported in 245 ITR 428 (SC), and CIT v Sony India (P) Limited [2007] reported in 160 taxman 397 (Delhi HC) allowed the appeal of the assessee. At the outset we do not find any merit in the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on this issue. In the case Rotork Controls India P Ltd., relied by the Ld.CIT(A), the Hon’ble…

Infosys Ltd., Bangalore vs. Addl.C.I.T, Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 102/BANG/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Nov 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri H.N. Khincha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R. N. Parbat, CIT-III (D.R)

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 92ASection 92C

…venue has challenged the action of the learned CIT (Appeals) in deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer in respect of the provision for warranty by following the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P) Ltd. (314 ITR 62) which was not applicable to the case on hand. 27.2.1 We have heard the rival contentions, perused and carefully considered the material on record; including the judicial pronouncements cited. The facts of the case as emanate from the record is that in the year under consideration, the assessee made a provision for warranty at 2% of revenue amoun…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purposes

ITA 6021/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri K.N. Charry

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35DSection 43BSection 92C

…ther the system adopted by the assessee is fair and reasonable or is adopted only with a view to reducing the incidence of taxation.“ 12.3. Further reliance is also placed on the judgment of the apex Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P) Ltd. vs CIT: 314 ITR 62 wherein it has been held that:- “17. At this stage, we once again reiterate that a liability is a present obligation arising from past events, the settlement of which is expected to result in an outflow of resources and in respect of which a reliable estimate is possible of the amount of obligation.” ITA No.-6021/Del/2012 12.4. Ld. AR submitted…

JCIT, Bangalore vs. M/ Sdell International Services India (P) Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, IT(TP)A No

ITA 1026/BANG/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Oct 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR), ITAT, Bengaluru

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147

…als) accordingly deleted the addition made by the AO. The CIT(A) was of the view that provision for warranty as made by the assessee company was in conformity with the ruling of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, 223 CTR 425. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(Appeals), the revenue has raised ground No.3 before the Tribunal. 19. The ld. DR pointed out that the AO has clearly brought out in the order of assessment that provision made by the assessee on account of liability towards warranty claim was not made by the assessee on a scientific basis and this finding has not…

JCIT vs. M/S Dell International Services India

In the result, IT(TP)A No

ITA 1838/BANG/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Oct 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR), ITAT, Bengaluru

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147

…als) accordingly deleted the addition made by the AO. The CIT(A) was of the view that provision for warranty as made by the assessee company was in conformity with the ruling of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, 223 CTR 425. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(Appeals), the revenue has raised ground No.3 before the Tribunal. 19. The ld. DR pointed out that the AO has clearly brought out in the order of assessment that provision made by the assessee on account of liability towards warranty claim was not made by the assessee on a scientific basis and this finding has not…

Fractal Analytics P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 9(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1024/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar JainFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar

Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 37(1)

…uantification is not precisely possible at the time of incurring the liability would not make an ascertained liability a contingent. Almost to the similar effect is the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2009] 314 ITR 62/180 Taxman 422. [Paras 9.3.3 and 9.3.4] ■ Considering the facts of the present case in the backdrop of the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in Bharat Earth Movers (supra) and Rotork Controls India (P.) Ltd. (supra), it becomes vivid that the mandate of these cases is applicable with full force to the deductibility of the discount on incurring…

At & T Global Network Services (I) Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No 1059/Del/2015 is partly allowed

ITA 1059/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiat & T Global Network Services Dcit, (India) Pvt Ltd., Circle-2(1), Vs. Vatika Lok-1, Block-A, Gurgaon New Delhi Pan:Aafca8810L (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, At & T Global Network Services Circle-2(1), (India) Pvt Ltd., Vs. New Delhi Vatika Lok-1, Block-A, Gurgaon Pan:Aafca8810L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, CAFor Respondent: Shri C N Swain CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 32Section 35ASection 36Section 37(1)

…to next year. Hence, in accordance with the mercantile provisions it should be allowed in the year of creation itself.The assessee has also drawn reference to the principles laid down by the Hon‘ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Rotork Controls India (P) Ltd (314 ITR 62) and M/s Bharat Earth Movers (245 ITR 428). We agree with the argument of the assessee that the provision for yearend accruals is made in compliance of accounting standards issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of 11 | P a g e AT & T Global Network Services ( India) Private Limited V DCIT , Circle -2 (1) New Delhi ITA 1059 Del 2015 (A)…

M/S. at & T Global Network Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2538/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiat & T Global Network Services Dcit, (India) Pvt Ltd., Circle-2(1), Vs. Vatika Lok-1, Block-A, Gurgaon New Delhi Pan:Aafca8810L (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, At & T Global Network Services Circle-2(1), (India) Pvt Ltd., Vs. New Delhi Vatika Lok-1, Block-A, Gurgaon Pan:Aafca8810L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, CAFor Respondent: Shri N C Swain CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 32Section 36

…appellant's business functions and should be allowed, since it is a year on year unavoidable feature. In this regard attention is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Rotork Controls India (P) Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (314 ITR 62) wherein the Apex Court after analyzing the provisions of the Act and accounting principles in detail laid the controversy to rest by holding that warranty expenses provided by the assessee on scientific basis in compliance with the accrual basis of accounting are allowable as deduction in the relevant financial year and no disallowance in this re…

John Crane Sealing Systems India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, both the assessee’s and Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 785/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.621/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Ragunathan Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: 19.06.2017

Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH ‘D’, CHENNAI "ी संजय अरोड़ा, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" । BEFORE SHRI SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.621/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, John Crane Sealing Systems (India) Corporate circle-2(2), Vs. Pvt. Ltd., Room No.512, 5th Floor, No.1, Ground Floor, Casa Blanca, Chennai – 600 034. No.6, Casa Major Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. [PAN: AAACJ 2131J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)…

DCIT, Chennai vs. John Crane Sealing Systems (India) Private Limited, Chennai

In the result, both the assessee’s and Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 621/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.621/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Ragunathan Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: 19.06.2017

Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH ‘D’, CHENNAI "ी संजय अरोड़ा, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" । BEFORE SHRI SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.621/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, John Crane Sealing Systems (India) Corporate circle-2(2), Vs. Pvt. Ltd., Room No.512, 5th Floor, No.1, Ground Floor, Casa Blanca, Chennai – 600 034. No.6, Casa Major Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. [PAN: AAACJ 2131J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)…

DCIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. Kail Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5716/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunathan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra KarkhanisFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningeshen

Section 14A

…ent made by the Assessing Officer to the book profit. 14. The Learned Counsel for the assessee before us vehemently supported the orders of the Ld.CIT(A) and further placed reliance on the following decisions: - (1) M/S. Rotork Controla India (P) Ltd v. CIT [314 ITR 62 (SC)] (2) CIT v. Becton Dickinson India (Purchase) Ltd. [(2013) 29 taxmann.com 80 (Delhi)] (3) Anchor Electricals (P.) Ltd v. DCIT [(2017) 81 taxmann.com 250 (Mumbai –Trib.)] (4) DCIT v. M/s. Century Appliances Private Limited [ITA.No.5132/Mum/2015] dated 16.06.2017. 15. Heard both the parties, perused the orders of the authorities below and the d…

DCIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. Kali Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1855/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunathan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra KarkhanisFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningeshen

Section 14A

…ent made by the Assessing Officer to the book profit. 14. The Learned Counsel for the assessee before us vehemently supported the orders of the Ld.CIT(A) and further placed reliance on the following decisions: - (1) M/S. Rotork Controla India (P) Ltd v. CIT [314 ITR 62 (SC)] (2) CIT v. Becton Dickinson India (Purchase) Ltd. [(2013) 29 taxmann.com 80 (Delhi)] (3) Anchor Electricals (P.) Ltd v. DCIT [(2017) 81 taxmann.com 250 (Mumbai –Trib.)] (4) DCIT v. M/s. Century Appliances Private Limited [ITA.No.5132/Mum/2015] dated 16.06.2017. 15. Heard both the parties, perused the orders of the authorities below and the d…

DCIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. Kali Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4415/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunathan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra KarkhanisFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningeshen

Section 14A

…ent made by the Assessing Officer to the book profit. 14. The Learned Counsel for the assessee before us vehemently supported the orders of the Ld.CIT(A) and further placed reliance on the following decisions: - (1) M/S. Rotork Controla India (P) Ltd v. CIT [314 ITR 62 (SC)] (2) CIT v. Becton Dickinson India (Purchase) Ltd. [(2013) 29 taxmann.com 80 (Delhi)] (3) Anchor Electricals (P.) Ltd v. DCIT [(2017) 81 taxmann.com 250 (Mumbai –Trib.)] (4) DCIT v. M/s. Century Appliances Private Limited [ITA.No.5132/Mum/2015] dated 16.06.2017. 15. Heard both the parties, perused the orders of the authorities below and the d…

F.L.Smidth Minerals P Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for ay 2005-06 and for ay 2007-08

ITA 1698/CHNY/2015[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Aug 2017AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1697 & 1698/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2005-06 & 2007-08 M/S. Flsmidth Minerals P Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Since Merged With Flsmidth Pvt. Ltd.) Vs. Company Circle –Ii(1), Flsmidth House, V Floor, New Block, 34, Egatoor, Kelambakkam, 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai – 34. Chennai – 600 103. [Pan: Aaacf 1122D]

For Appellant: ShriG. Baskar, Advocate

Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 14A(1)Section 40

…ision for warranty in the assessment made for ay 2005-06, the CIT(A) held that the issue of provision for warranty is a recurring issue, the Hon’ble Madras High Court relying on the decision of the Apex Court (in the case of Rotork Control India Ltd Vs CIT 314 ITR 62) has held issue in favour of the assessee vide TCA No. 38 of 2010 dated 03.06.2013, in the assessee’s own assessment year 2003-04. Therefore, respectfully following the orders of the High Court in the assessee’s own case, the CIT(A) directed the AO to allow the provision for warranty in the assessment year 2005-06. Aggrieved against this findi…

F.L.Smidth Minerals P Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for ay 2005-06 and for ay 2007-08

ITA 1697/CHNY/2015[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Aug 2017AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1697 & 1698/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2005-06 & 2007-08 M/S. Flsmidth Minerals P Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Since Merged With Flsmidth Pvt. Ltd.) Vs. Company Circle –Ii(1), Flsmidth House, V Floor, New Block, 34, Egatoor, Kelambakkam, 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai – 34. Chennai – 600 103. [Pan: Aaacf 1122D]

For Appellant: ShriG. Baskar, Advocate

Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 14A(1)Section 40

…ision for warranty in the assessment made for ay 2005-06, the CIT(A) held that the issue of provision for warranty is a recurring issue, the Hon’ble Madras High Court relying on the decision of the Apex Court (in the case of Rotork Control India Ltd Vs CIT 314 ITR 62) has held issue in favour of the assessee vide TCA No. 38 of 2010 dated 03.06.2013, in the assessee’s own assessment year 2003-04. Therefore, respectfully following the orders of the High Court in the assessee’s own case, the CIT(A) directed the AO to allow the provision for warranty in the assessment year 2005-06. Aggrieved against this findi…

Noble Consolidated Glazings Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 26/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Jul 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Nagendra Kumar, Dy. CITFor Respondent: 22.06.2017

Section 143(3)

…ser, (say) within six months or a year. This is akin to warranty clauses that accompany product sales, for which, therefore, a suitable provision is allowed (refer: Rotork Controls Indis (P.) Ltd. v. CIT 7 Noble Consolidated Glazings Ltd. v. Dy.CIT [2009] 314 ITR 62 (SC)). What is the empirical data in this regard in the present case is not known. Does the defect liability, i.e., assuming so, extend only to the amount retained? The assessee has, as it appears, completed the work, admittedly as per the quality norms and, in any case, raised the bill only on the basis of the work completed. Then, again, the lia…

ACIT, Tirunelveli vs. M/S. Rm. K.V. Associates, Tirunelveli

In the result, all the appeals raised by the Revenue as well as by the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 2706/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Shri K. Ravi, JCIT

…nst this, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 22. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. The ld.A.R strongly placed reliance on the judgements of Supreme Court in the case of ROTORK CONTROLS INDIA P. LTD Vs. CIT reported in [2009] 314 ITR 62 (SC) and in the case of Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT in [2000] 245 ITR 428 (SC). In the present case, the assessee being a retailer in textile goods, floated scheme of giving 1% discount, which makes a purchase of `100/- and above, he is eligible for discount of 1% in the next purchase. The floated scheme is as follows:- i) That the minute a custom…

ACIT, Tirunelveli vs. M/S. Rm. K.V. Fabrics, Tirunelveli

In the result, all the appeals raised by the Revenue as well as by the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 2704/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Shri K. Ravi, JCIT

…nst this, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 22. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. The ld.A.R strongly placed reliance on the judgements of Supreme Court in the case of ROTORK CONTROLS INDIA P. LTD Vs. CIT reported in [2009] 314 ITR 62 (SC) and in the case of Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT in [2000] 245 ITR 428 (SC). In the present case, the assessee being a retailer in textile goods, floated scheme of giving 1% discount, which makes a purchase of `100/- and above, he is eligible for discount of 1% in the next purchase. The floated scheme is as follows:- i) That the minute a custom…

M/S. Rm. K.V. Fabrics, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, all the appeals raised by the Revenue as well as by the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 2471/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Shri K. Ravi, JCIT

…nst this, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 22. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. The ld.A.R strongly placed reliance on the judgements of Supreme Court in the case of ROTORK CONTROLS INDIA P. LTD Vs. CIT reported in [2009] 314 ITR 62 (SC) and in the case of Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT in [2000] 245 ITR 428 (SC). In the present case, the assessee being a retailer in textile goods, floated scheme of giving 1% discount, which makes a purchase of `100/- and above, he is eligible for discount of 1% in the next purchase. The floated scheme is as follows:- i) That the minute a custom…

M/S. Rm K.V. Silks, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, all the appeals raised by the Revenue as well as by the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 2469/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Shri K. Ravi, JCIT

…nst this, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 22. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. The ld.A.R strongly placed reliance on the judgements of Supreme Court in the case of ROTORK CONTROLS INDIA P. LTD Vs. CIT reported in [2009] 314 ITR 62 (SC) and in the case of Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT in [2000] 245 ITR 428 (SC). In the present case, the assessee being a retailer in textile goods, floated scheme of giving 1% discount, which makes a purchase of `100/- and above, he is eligible for discount of 1% in the next purchase. The floated scheme is as follows:- i) That the minute a custom…

Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

What is Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

Polyhose India Rubber Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

Infosys Ltd., Bangalore vs. Addl.C.I.T, Bangalore

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

JCIT, Bangalore vs. M/ Sdell International Services India (P) Ltd., Bangalore

JCIT vs. M/S Dell International Services India

Fractal Analytics P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 9(3)(2), Mumbai

At & T Global Network Services (I) Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

M/S. at & T Global Network Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

John Crane Sealing Systems India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

DCIT, Chennai vs. John Crane Sealing Systems (India) Private Limited, Chennai

DCIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. Kail Ltd, Mumbai

DCIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. Kali Ltd, Mumbai

DCIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. Kali Ltd, Mumbai

F.L.Smidth Minerals P Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

F.L.Smidth Minerals P Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

Noble Consolidated Glazings Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

ACIT, Tirunelveli vs. M/S. Rm. K.V. Associates, Tirunelveli

ACIT, Tirunelveli vs. M/S. Rm. K.V. Fabrics, Tirunelveli

M/S. Rm. K.V. Fabrics, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

M/S. Rm K.V. Silks, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai