Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. CIT

156 ITR 585Supreme Court of India1985#884 most cited

What is Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

A liability for gratuity, even if actuarially valued and claimed as ascertained, is deductible under Section 37 only for amounts actually paid, especially when no formal provision for the amount has been made.

119

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. CIT · Section 37(1) · gratuity deduction · actuarial valuation · ascertained liability · actual payment · no provision for gratuity · 156 ITR 585 · SC 1985

Also reported as

23 Taxmann 37

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 115JBSection 195Section 37(1)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 44
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 4(3)section 205section 36(1)(v)section 10(23c)(iv)advancement of general public utilitysection 52proviso to section 2(15)mliput to usecomputer softwaresection 10(23c)section 40a

Judgments citing Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. CIT

The District Co-Operative Central Bank Ltd., Eluru vs. The ACIT, Eluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 524/VIZ/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(v)Section 40A(7)(b)

…decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court/High Court in the following cases and brought to tax: 1. Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. CIT 227 ITR 172 (SC) 2. 37 ITR 66 (SC) Indian Molaysis Company Private Ltd. 3. Shree Sajjan Mills Private Limted 156 ITR 585 4. Mysore Lamps 185 ITR 96 (KR) 23. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the A.O. While confirming the addition of the A.O., the Ld. CIT(A) held that the debt in question for which the overdue interest is claimed, is not M/s. The District Co-operativ…

The District Co-Operative Central Bank Ltd., Eluru vs. The ACIT, Visakhapatnam

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 515/VIZ/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(v)Section 40A(7)(b)

…decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court/High Court in the following cases and brought to tax: 1. Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. CIT 227 ITR 172 (SC) 2. 37 ITR 66 (SC) Indian Molaysis Company Private Ltd. 3. Shree Sajjan Mills Private Limted 156 ITR 585 4. Mysore Lamps 185 ITR 96 (KR) 23. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the A.O. While confirming the addition of the A.O., the Ld. CIT(A) held that the debt in question for which the overdue interest is claimed, is not M/s. The District Co-operativ…

The ITO, Ward-2, Eluru vs. M/S the District Co-Operative Central Bank Ltd., Eluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 78/VIZ/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jan 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(v)Section 40A(7)(b)

…decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court/High Court in the following cases and brought to tax: 1. Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. CIT 227 ITR 172 (SC) 2. 37 ITR 66 (SC) Indian Molaysis Company Private Ltd. 3. Shree Sajjan Mills Private Limted 156 ITR 585 4. Mysore Lamps 185 ITR 96 (KR) 23. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the A.O. While confirming the addition of the A.O., the Ld. CIT(A) held that the debt in question for which the overdue interest is claimed, is not M/s. The District Co-operativ…

M/S the District Co-Operative Central Bank Ltd., Eluru vs. The ITO, Ward-2, Eluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 50/VIZ/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jan 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(v)Section 40A(7)(b)

…decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court/High Court in the following cases and brought to tax: 1. Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. CIT 227 ITR 172 (SC) 2. 37 ITR 66 (SC) Indian Molaysis Company Private Ltd. 3. Shree Sajjan Mills Private Limted 156 ITR 585 4. Mysore Lamps 185 ITR 96 (KR) 23. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the A.O. While confirming the addition of the A.O., the Ld. CIT(A) held that the debt in question for which the overdue interest is claimed, is not M/s. The District Co-operativ…

M/S the District Co-Operative Central Bank Ltd., Eluru vs. The ITO, Ward-2, Eluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 49/VIZ/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(v)Section 40A(7)(b)

…decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court/High Court in the following cases and brought to tax: 1. Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. CIT 227 ITR 172 (SC) 2. 37 ITR 66 (SC) Indian Molaysis Company Private Ltd. 3. Shree Sajjan Mills Private Limted 156 ITR 585 4. Mysore Lamps 185 ITR 96 (KR) 23. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the A.O. While confirming the addition of the A.O., the Ld. CIT(A) held that the debt in question for which the overdue interest is claimed, is not M/s. The District Co-operativ…

The ACIT., Circle - 1, Eluru vs. M/S the District Co-Operative Central Bank Ltd., Eluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 476/VIZ/2012[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jan 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(v)Section 40A(7)(b)

…decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court/High Court in the following cases and brought to tax: 1. Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. CIT 227 ITR 172 (SC) 2. 37 ITR 66 (SC) Indian Molaysis Company Private Ltd. 3. Shree Sajjan Mills Private Limted 156 ITR 585 4. Mysore Lamps 185 ITR 96 (KR) 23. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the A.O. While confirming the addition of the A.O., the Ld. CIT(A) held that the debt in question for which the overdue interest is claimed, is not M/s. The District Co-operativ…

M/S Vodafone East Limited (Formerly Known As Vodafone Essar East Limited), Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-7, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 431/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…e Section, yet a strict construction of a provision does not rule out the application of the principles of reasonable construction to give effect to the purpose and intention of any particular provision of the Act. (See : Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1985] 156 ITR 585/23 Taxman 37 (SC). From a bare reading of Sectin 36(1)(v) of the Act, it is manifest that the real intention behind the provision is that the employer should not have any control over the funds of the irrevocable trust created exclusively for the benefit of the employees. In the instant case, it is evident from the findings recorded by the Commis…

M/S. Vodafone Essar East Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 7, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 673/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…e Section, yet a strict construction of a provision does not rule out the application of the principles of reasonable construction to give effect to the purpose and intention of any particular provision of the Act. (See : Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1985] 156 ITR 585/23 Taxman 37 (SC). From a bare reading of Sectin 36(1)(v) of the Act, it is manifest that the real intention behind the provision is that the employer should not have any control over the funds of the irrevocable trust created exclusively for the benefit of the employees. In the instant case, it is evident from the findings recorded by the Commis…

M/S. Vodafone Essar East Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 7, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 485/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…e Section, yet a strict construction of a provision does not rule out the application of the principles of reasonable construction to give effect to the purpose and intention of any particular provision of the Act. (See : Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1985] 156 ITR 585/23 Taxman 37 (SC). From a bare reading of Sectin 36(1)(v) of the Act, it is manifest that the real intention behind the provision is that the employer should not have any control over the funds of the irrevocable trust created exclusively for the benefit of the employees. In the instant case, it is evident from the findings recorded by the Commis…

DCIT, Circle - 7, Kolkata vs. Vodafone Essar East Limited, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 482/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…e Section, yet a strict construction of a provision does not rule out the application of the principles of reasonable construction to give effect to the purpose and intention of any particular provision of the Act. (See : Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1985] 156 ITR 585/23 Taxman 37 (SC). From a bare reading of Sectin 36(1)(v) of the Act, it is manifest that the real intention behind the provision is that the employer should not have any control over the funds of the irrevocable trust created exclusively for the benefit of the employees. In the instant case, it is evident from the findings recorded by the Commis…

ACIT, Circle - 7, Kolkata vs. Vodafone Essar East Ltd., Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 377/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…e Section, yet a strict construction of a provision does not rule out the application of the principles of reasonable construction to give effect to the purpose and intention of any particular provision of the Act. (See : Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1985] 156 ITR 585/23 Taxman 37 (SC). From a bare reading of Sectin 36(1)(v) of the Act, it is manifest that the real intention behind the provision is that the employer should not have any control over the funds of the irrevocable trust created exclusively for the benefit of the employees. In the instant case, it is evident from the findings recorded by the Commis…

M/S. Vodafone Essar East Ltd., Kolkata vs. Addl. CIT, Range - 7, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 357/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…e Section, yet a strict construction of a provision does not rule out the application of the principles of reasonable construction to give effect to the purpose and intention of any particular provision of the Act. (See : Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1985] 156 ITR 585/23 Taxman 37 (SC). From a bare reading of Sectin 36(1)(v) of the Act, it is manifest that the real intention behind the provision is that the employer should not have any control over the funds of the irrevocable trust created exclusively for the benefit of the employees. In the instant case, it is evident from the findings recorded by the Commis…

M/S. Vodafone Essar East Ltd., Kolkata vs. JCIT, Range - 7, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 356/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…e Section, yet a strict construction of a provision does not rule out the application of the principles of reasonable construction to give effect to the purpose and intention of any particular provision of the Act. (See : Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1985] 156 ITR 585/23 Taxman 37 (SC). From a bare reading of Sectin 36(1)(v) of the Act, it is manifest that the real intention behind the provision is that the employer should not have any control over the funds of the irrevocable trust created exclusively for the benefit of the employees. In the instant case, it is evident from the findings recorded by the Commis…

ACIT, Circle - 7, Kolkata vs. Hutchison Telecom East Limited, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 343/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…e Section, yet a strict construction of a provision does not rule out the application of the principles of reasonable construction to give effect to the purpose and intention of any particular provision of the Act. (See : Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1985] 156 ITR 585/23 Taxman 37 (SC). From a bare reading of Sectin 36(1)(v) of the Act, it is manifest that the real intention behind the provision is that the employer should not have any control over the funds of the irrevocable trust created exclusively for the benefit of the employees. In the instant case, it is evident from the findings recorded by the Commis…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ntpc Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4867/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2017AY 2005-06

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

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32(1)(iia)

…rd revision were not undertaken, there would have been a ITA 507/2013 Page 20 likelihood of the higher figure not being realized after tariff finalization. 22. There is authority, in the form of Supreme Court judgments in Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd v. CIT, (1985) 156 ITR 585, Bharat Earth Movers Ltd v. CIT, (2000) 245 ITR 428 and Metal Box Company of India Ltd v. Their Workmen, (1969) 73 ITR 53, that a provision made on a reasonable basis, it would be in the nature of an ascertained liability and that in a mercantile system of accounting, provision for liability ascertained during the course of the relevant accountin…

CIT vs. Jagdish Prasad Gupta

ITA/933/2011HC Delhi18 Aug 2017

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

Section 260A

…ent demands were actually a claim for damages. It was, therefore no better than a contingent liability. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT v. Goverdhan Ltd. [1968] 69 ITR 675 (SC); Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, M.P. [1985] 156 ITR 585 (SC); CIT v. ITA 711/2011 & batch matters Page 22 of 39 Indian Smelting & Refinery Co. Ltd. [1998] 230 ITR 194 (Bom.) as affirmed in Indian Smelting & Refinery v. CIT [2001] 116 TAXMANN 606 (SC); Indian Molasses Co. (Privat…

CIT vs. Jagdish Prasad Gupta

ITA/935/2011HC Delhi18 Aug 2017

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

Section 260A

…ent demands were actually a claim for damages. It was, therefore no better than a contingent liability. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT v. Goverdhan Ltd. [1968] 69 ITR 675 (SC); Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, M.P. [1985] 156 ITR 585 (SC); CIT v. ITA 711/2011 & batch matters Page 22 of 39 Indian Smelting & Refinery Co. Ltd. [1998] 230 ITR 194 (Bom.) as affirmed in Indian Smelting & Refinery v. CIT [2001] 116 TAXMANN 606 (SC); Indian Molasses Co. (Privat…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-10 vs. Jagdish Prashad Gupta

ITA/424/2016HC Delhi18 Aug 2017

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

Section 260A

…ent demands were actually a claim for damages. It was, therefore no better than a contingent liability. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT v. Goverdhan Ltd. [1968] 69 ITR 675 (SC); Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, M.P. [1985] 156 ITR 585 (SC); CIT v. ITA 711/2011 & batch matters Page 22 of 39 Indian Smelting & Refinery Co. Ltd. [1998] 230 ITR 194 (Bom.) as affirmed in Indian Smelting & Refinery v. CIT [2001] 116 TAXMANN 606 (SC); Indian Molasses Co. (Privat…

CIT vs. Jagdish Prasad Gupta

ITA/787/2011HC Delhi18 Aug 2017

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

Section 260A

…ent demands were actually a claim for damages. It was, therefore no better than a contingent liability. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT v. Goverdhan Ltd. [1968] 69 ITR 675 (SC); Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, M.P. [1985] 156 ITR 585 (SC); CIT v. ITA 711/2011 & batch matters Page 22 of 39 Indian Smelting & Refinery Co. Ltd. [1998] 230 ITR 194 (Bom.) as affirmed in Indian Smelting & Refinery v. CIT [2001] 116 TAXMANN 606 (SC); Indian Molasses Co. (Privat…

CIT vs. Jagdish Prasad Gupta

ITA/1535/2010HC Delhi18 Aug 2017

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

Section 260A

…ent demands were actually a claim for damages. It was, therefore no better than a contingent liability. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT v. Goverdhan Ltd. [1968] 69 ITR 675 (SC); Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, M.P. [1985] 156 ITR 585 (SC); CIT v. ITA 711/2011 & batch matters Page 22 of 39 Indian Smelting & Refinery Co. Ltd. [1998] 230 ITR 194 (Bom.) as affirmed in Indian Smelting & Refinery v. CIT [2001] 116 TAXMANN 606 (SC); Indian Molasses Co. (Privat…