What is Southern Technologies Ltd. v. JCIT authority for?

The case concerns the allowability of deductions for provisions made under Section 36 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, especially those related to bad and doubtful debts. It distinguishes such deductions from the recognition of interest income on non-performing assets (NPAs).

How many judgments cite Southern Technologies Ltd. v. JCIT?

353 judgments on BharatTax cite Southern Technologies Ltd. v. JCIT (320 ITR 577), spanning 2010 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Southern Technologies Ltd. v. JCIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 36(1)(vii), Section 14A, Section 1961, Section 115JB, Section 37(1), Section 143(3).

Southern Technologies Ltd. v. JCIT (320 ITR 577)

M/S. Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 392/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 51

…of actual write-off of debts in the loan account of the debtors, is covered in favour of the appellant Bank in the following cases,- (i) Vijaya Bank Vs CIT (2010) (323 ITR 166) (SC) (ii) UCO Bank Vs CIT (240) (ITR 355) (SC) (iii) Southern Technologies Vs CIT (352 ITR 577) (SC) (iv) Canara Bank Vs DCIT (2022 (1) TMI 124) (Trib.- Bangalore) (i.e Appellants own case) 7.4 The assessee further argued that the issue that the bad debt written off should be first adjusted against the credit balance in the Provisions account and only the excess can be claimed as deduction, is also covered in favour of the appellant Bank i…

M/S. Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 391/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 51

…of actual write-off of debts in the loan account of the debtors, is covered in favour of the appellant Bank in the following cases,- (i) Vijaya Bank Vs CIT (2010) (323 ITR 166) (SC) (ii) UCO Bank Vs CIT (240) (ITR 355) (SC) (iii) Southern Technologies Vs CIT (352 ITR 577) (SC) (iv) Canara Bank Vs DCIT (2022 (1) TMI 124) (Trib.- Bangalore) (i.e Appellants own case) 7.4 The assessee further argued that the issue that the bad debt written off should be first adjusted against the credit balance in the Provisions account and only the excess can be claimed as deduction, is also covered in favour of the appellant Bank i…

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 7, New Delhi vs. Ptc India Financial Services Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

ITA 7433/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 234BSection 36(1)(viii)Section 37

…les laid down therein have been followed in Oil and Natural Gas Corpn Ltd. (2010) 230 CTR (SC) 313. The Ld. AR further submitted that the decisions in Indian Molasses Co. P. Ltd. vs. CIT (1959) 371 ITR 66 (SC) and in Southern Technologies Ltd. vs. JCIT (2010) 320 ITR 577 (SC) referred to by the Ld. CIT(A) are not on the treatment of Forex Gain/Loss. According to the Ld. AR Instruction No. 03/2010 issued by the CBDT is applicable only where there is trading in forex derivatives and is not applicable on loss arising on account of Mark-to-Market reinstatement of derivative contracts. Mark-to Market losses on account…

Ptc India Financial Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 19(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

ITA 7273/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 234BSection 36(1)(viii)Section 37

…les laid down therein have been followed in Oil and Natural Gas Corpn Ltd. (2010) 230 CTR (SC) 313. The Ld. AR further submitted that the decisions in Indian Molasses Co. P. Ltd. vs. CIT (1959) 371 ITR 66 (SC) and in Southern Technologies Ltd. vs. JCIT (2010) 320 ITR 577 (SC) referred to by the Ld. CIT(A) are not on the treatment of Forex Gain/Loss. According to the Ld. AR Instruction No. 03/2010 issued by the CBDT is applicable only where there is trading in forex derivatives and is not applicable on loss arising on account of Mark-to-Market reinstatement of derivative contracts. Mark-to Market losses on account…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ptc India Financial Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

ITA 2175/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 234BSection 36(1)(viii)Section 37

…les laid down therein have been followed in Oil and Natural Gas Corpn Ltd. (2010) 230 CTR (SC) 313. The Ld. AR further submitted that the decisions in Indian Molasses Co. P. Ltd. vs. CIT (1959) 371 ITR 66 (SC) and in Southern Technologies Ltd. vs. JCIT (2010) 320 ITR 577 (SC) referred to by the Ld. CIT(A) are not on the treatment of Forex Gain/Loss. According to the Ld. AR Instruction No. 03/2010 issued by the CBDT is applicable only where there is trading in forex derivatives and is not applicable on loss arising on account of Mark-to-Market reinstatement of derivative contracts. Mark-to Market losses on account…

M/S. Ptc India Financial Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15

ITA 2162/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2013-14 & Asstt. Year 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 234BSection 36(1)(viii)Section 37

…les laid down therein have been followed in Oil and Natural Gas Corpn Ltd. (2010) 230 CTR (SC) 313. The Ld. AR further submitted that the decisions in Indian Molasses Co. P. Ltd. vs. CIT (1959) 371 ITR 66 (SC) and in Southern Technologies Ltd. vs. JCIT (2010) 320 ITR 577 (SC) referred to by the Ld. CIT(A) are not on the treatment of Forex Gain/Loss. According to the Ld. AR Instruction No. 03/2010 issued by the CBDT is applicable only where there is trading in forex derivatives and is not applicable on loss arising on account of Mark-to-Market reinstatement of derivative contracts. Mark-to Market losses on account…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Cuddallore vs. M/S Villupuram District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Villupuram

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 981/CHNY/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

…accordance with law and as provided in the provisions of Section 36(1)(viia) of the Act. 14.2 Moreover, before Tribunal the issue was revision proceedings u/s.263 of the Act, initiated by the CIT. The case law of Southern Technologies Ltd., vs. JCIT, [2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC) has dealt with the issue as under:- Analysis of Section 36(1)(viia) Section 36(1)(vii) provides for a deduction in the computation of taxable profits for the debt established to be a bad debt. Section 36(1)(viia) provides for a deduction in respect of any provision for bad and doubtful debt made by a Scheduled Bank or Non- Scheduled Bank in…

The Villupuram District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Villupuram vs. ACIT, Circle-I, Cuddalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 858/CHNY/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

…accordance with law and as provided in the provisions of Section 36(1)(viia) of the Act. 14.2 Moreover, before Tribunal the issue was revision proceedings u/s.263 of the Act, initiated by the CIT. The case law of Southern Technologies Ltd., vs. JCIT, [2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC) has dealt with the issue as under:- Analysis of Section 36(1)(viia) Section 36(1)(vii) provides for a deduction in the computation of taxable profits for the debt established to be a bad debt. Section 36(1)(viia) provides for a deduction in respect of any provision for bad and doubtful debt made by a Scheduled Bank or Non- Scheduled Bank in…

The Villupuram District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Villupuram vs. ACIT, Circle-II, Cuddalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 857/CHNY/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

…accordance with law and as provided in the provisions of Section 36(1)(viia) of the Act. 14.2 Moreover, before Tribunal the issue was revision proceedings u/s.263 of the Act, initiated by the CIT. The case law of Southern Technologies Ltd., vs. JCIT, [2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC) has dealt with the issue as under:- Analysis of Section 36(1)(viia) Section 36(1)(vii) provides for a deduction in the computation of taxable profits for the debt established to be a bad debt. Section 36(1)(viia) provides for a deduction in respect of any provision for bad and doubtful debt made by a Scheduled Bank or Non- Scheduled Bank in…

The Villupuram District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Villupuram vs. DCIT, Villupuram Circle, Villupruam

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 856/CHNY/2020[202-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

…accordance with law and as provided in the provisions of Section 36(1)(viia) of the Act. 14.2 Moreover, before Tribunal the issue was revision proceedings u/s.263 of the Act, initiated by the CIT. The case law of Southern Technologies Ltd., vs. JCIT, [2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC) has dealt with the issue as under:- Analysis of Section 36(1)(viia) Section 36(1)(vii) provides for a deduction in the computation of taxable profits for the debt established to be a bad debt. Section 36(1)(viia) provides for a deduction in respect of any provision for bad and doubtful debt made by a Scheduled Bank or Non- Scheduled Bank in…

The Villupuram District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Villupuram vs. DCIT, Villupuram Circle, Villupuram

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 855/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

…accordance with law and as provided in the provisions of Section 36(1)(viia) of the Act. 14.2 Moreover, before Tribunal the issue was revision proceedings u/s.263 of the Act, initiated by the CIT. The case law of Southern Technologies Ltd., vs. JCIT, [2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC) has dealt with the issue as under:- Analysis of Section 36(1)(viia) Section 36(1)(vii) provides for a deduction in the computation of taxable profits for the debt established to be a bad debt. Section 36(1)(viia) provides for a deduction in respect of any provision for bad and doubtful debt made by a Scheduled Bank or Non- Scheduled Bank in…

The Villupuram District Central Coopertative Bank Ltd., Villupuram vs. DCIT, Villupuram Circle, Villupuram

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 854/CHNY/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

…accordance with law and as provided in the provisions of Section 36(1)(viia) of the Act. 14.2 Moreover, before Tribunal the issue was revision proceedings u/s.263 of the Act, initiated by the CIT. The case law of Southern Technologies Ltd., vs. JCIT, [2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC) has dealt with the issue as under:- Analysis of Section 36(1)(viia) Section 36(1)(vii) provides for a deduction in the computation of taxable profits for the debt established to be a bad debt. Section 36(1)(viia) provides for a deduction in respect of any provision for bad and doubtful debt made by a Scheduled Bank or Non- Scheduled Bank in…

The Cuddalore District Central Co-Op Bank Ltd., Cuddalore vs. DCIT Cuddalore Circle, Cuddalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2645/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

…accordance with law and as provided in the provisions of Section 36(1)(viia) of the Act. 14.2 Moreover, before Tribunal the issue was revision proceedings u/s.263 of the Act, initiated by the CIT. The case law of Southern Technologies Ltd., vs. JCIT, [2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC) has dealt with the issue as under:- Analysis of Section 36(1)(viia) Section 36(1)(vii) provides for a deduction in the computation of taxable profits for the debt established to be a bad debt. Section 36(1)(viia) provides for a deduction in respect of any provision for bad and doubtful debt made by a Scheduled Bank or Non- Scheduled Bank in…

Kaizen Cold Formed Steel Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corp Circle-4(2), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 172/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.172/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S.Kaizen Cold Formed Steel Pvt.Ltd, Acit बनाम 14A, Ennore High Road, Corporate Circle-4(2), / Vs. Thiruvottiyur, Chennai-600 019. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadck-7625-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. V.Madhunika (Advocate)-Ld.Ar !"थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R.Raghupathy (Jcit)- Ld.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05-10-2023 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Ms. V.Madhunika (Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri R.Raghupathy (JCIT)- Ld.DR

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36

…overable. However, it is submitted that the 1st Respondent does not have the authority or the power to prescribe method by which a bad debt is written off. It is submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Southern Technologies Ltd. v. JCIT [2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC) and TRF Ltd v. CIT [2010] 323 ITR 397 (SC) have categorically held that for the purpose of writing off a bad debt, it would suffice if the assessee had debited the same to Profit and Loss Account, credited the same to the Bad Reserve Debts Account and maintain a Sundry Debtors list. Therefore, in this context, it is submitted that the Appell…

Good Homes Pvt Ltd, Kochi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Corporate Circle 1(1), Kochi

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 884/COCH/2022[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Aug 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shriabyt.Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.A.Gopalakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.AR

Section 133ASection 147Section 148

…ct income of the reporting enterprise, and which is also so of the Act, i.e., to bring the real income, subject to the provisions of the Act, to tax (Poona Electricity Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1965] 57 ITR 521 (SC); Southern Technologies Ltd. v. Jt. CIT [2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC)), and it incidentally also explains the credence by the Act to the well accepted norms and principles of commercial accounting (Challappalli Sugars Ltd. v. CIT [1975] 98 ITR 167 (SC)). As afore-stated, it is only when one gains, i.e., in economic terms, at the expense of another, that a charge on some suitable parameter, from one to another,…

Ajit Associates Private Limited, Ernakulam vs. JCIT, Corporate Range - 1, Kochi

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 870/COCH/2022[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Aug 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shriabyt.Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.A.Gopalakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.AR

Section 133ASection 147Section 148

…ct income of the reporting enterprise, and which is also so of the Act, i.e., to bring the real income, subject to the provisions of the Act, to tax (Poona Electricity Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1965] 57 ITR 521 (SC); Southern Technologies Ltd. v. Jt. CIT [2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC)), and it incidentally also explains the credence by the Act to the well accepted norms and principles of commercial accounting (Challappalli Sugars Ltd. v. CIT [1975] 98 ITR 167 (SC)). As afore-stated, it is only when one gains, i.e., in economic terms, at the expense of another, that a charge on some suitable parameter, from one to another,…

Amreli Jilla Madhyasth Sahkari Bank Limited, Amreli vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Rajkot

In the result ground number 1 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 55/RJT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot26 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Ld. Sr. D.R

Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(viia)

…ng on the decision of Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Bharuch district Central Cooperative Bank 59 SOT 150. In appeal, Ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by relying on the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Southern Technologies Ltd 320 ITR 577. I.T.A No. 55/Rjt/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No 3 Amrelli Jilla Madhyasth Sahkari Bank Ltd. vs. ACIT 4. Before us, the counsel for the assessee submitted that deduction was claimed by the assessee as per NPA guidelines of RBI. Further, it was submitted that section 36(1)(viia) of the Act makes no distinction between provision for bad assets and pro…

M/S. Bharat Aluminium Company Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2741/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Kanchan Kaushal, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 80I

…scertained liability so as to attract clause (b) or (c) of Explanation 1 to Section 115JB(2) of the Act. Revenue has contested and argued to the contrary. Decision of the Supreme Court in Southern Technologies Ltd. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, [2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC), was referred. 12. In order to appreciate the controversy, we would like to reproduce the provisions of Section 115JB of the Act as applicable to the assessment year 2007-08 reads:- [Special provision for payment of tax by certain companies. 115JB. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of this Act, where in the cas…

M/S. Bharat Aluminium Company Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3568/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Kanchan Kaushal, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 80I

…scertained liability so as to attract clause (b) or (c) of Explanation 1 to Section 115JB(2) of the Act. Revenue has contested and argued to the contrary. Decision of the Supreme Court in Southern Technologies Ltd. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, [2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC), was referred. 12. In order to appreciate the controversy, we would like to reproduce the provisions of Section 115JB of the Act as applicable to the assessment year 2007-08 reads:- [Special provision for payment of tax by certain companies. 115JB. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of this Act, where in the cas…

M/S. Bharat Aluminium Company Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5118/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jul 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Kanchan Kaushal, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 80I

…scertained liability so as to attract clause (b) or (c) of Explanation 1 to Section 115JB(2) of the Act. Revenue has contested and argued to the contrary. Decision of the Supreme Court in Southern Technologies Ltd. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, [2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC), was referred. 12. In order to appreciate the controversy, we would like to reproduce the provisions of Section 115JB of the Act as applicable to the assessment year 2007-08 reads:- [Special provision for payment of tax by certain companies. 115JB. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of this Act, where in the cas…

Southern Technologies Ltd. v. JCIT

What is Southern Technologies Ltd. v. JCIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Southern Technologies Ltd. v. JCIT

M/S. Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

M/S. Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 7, New Delhi vs. Ptc India Financial Services Ltd, New Delhi

Ptc India Financial Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 19(2), New Delhi

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ptc India Financial Services Ltd., New Delhi

M/S. Ptc India Financial Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Cuddallore vs. M/S Villupuram District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Villupuram

The Villupuram District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Villupuram vs. ACIT, Circle-I, Cuddalore

The Villupuram District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Villupuram vs. ACIT, Circle-II, Cuddalore

The Villupuram District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Villupuram vs. DCIT, Villupuram Circle, Villupruam

The Villupuram District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Villupuram vs. DCIT, Villupuram Circle, Villupuram

The Villupuram District Central Coopertative Bank Ltd., Villupuram vs. DCIT, Villupuram Circle, Villupuram

The Cuddalore District Central Co-Op Bank Ltd., Cuddalore vs. DCIT Cuddalore Circle, Cuddalore

Kaizen Cold Formed Steel Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corp Circle-4(2), Chennai

Good Homes Pvt Ltd, Kochi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Corporate Circle 1(1), Kochi

Ajit Associates Private Limited, Ernakulam vs. JCIT, Corporate Range - 1, Kochi

Amreli Jilla Madhyasth Sahkari Bank Limited, Amreli vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Rajkot

M/S. Bharat Aluminium Company Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

M/S. Bharat Aluminium Company Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

M/S. Bharat Aluminium Company Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi