What is State Bank of Travancore v. CIT authority for?

Under the mercantile system of accounting, interest income accrues and is taxable in the year it arises, even for "sticky" or doubtful loans, as the right to receive the income is paramount, not its actual receipt, provided there is an agreement for payment.

How many judgments cite State Bank of Travancore v. CIT?

222 judgments on BharatTax cite State Bank of Travancore v. CIT (158 ITR 102), spanning 1999 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does State Bank of Travancore v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 14A, Section 37(1), Section 115JB, Section 36(1)(vii), Section 147.

State Bank of Travancore v. CIT (158 ITR 102)

ASST CIT 2(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3882/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Jagadish ()

Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…wed by the appellant unless a portion of this amount is written off as bad debt. It is a real income and hence has to be taxed as such under the mercantile system followed by the appellant. Reliance in this regard is placed on State Bank of Travancore vs. CIT 158 ITR 102, 155 (SC) which was followed in Western India Oil Distributing Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 206 ITR 359 (Bom). It was held in this decision that the concept of real income should not be so read as to defeat the provisions of the Act. Extension of the concept of real income to a field so as to negate accrual after the amount had become receivable is contrary…

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3680/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Jagadish ()

Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…wed by the appellant unless a portion of this amount is written off as bad debt. It is a real income and hence has to be taxed as such under the mercantile system followed by the appellant. Reliance in this regard is placed on State Bank of Travancore vs. CIT 158 ITR 102, 155 (SC) which was followed in Western India Oil Distributing Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 206 ITR 359 (Bom). It was held in this decision that the concept of real income should not be so read as to defeat the provisions of the Act. Extension of the concept of real income to a field so as to negate accrual after the amount had become receivable is contrary…

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 1697/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 250

…thus it is not the 'real income' of the appellant company and cannot be taxed. 9.2 Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee relied upon the following case laws in support of the claim that only real income could be taxed. i) State Bank of Travancore v. CIT [1986] 158 ITR 102 (SC) & CIT v. Shiv Prakash Janak Raj & Co. (P.) Ltd. [1996] 88 Taxman 536/222 ITR 183 (SC) ii) Rajkot District Gopalak Co-op. Milk Producers' Union Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 204 UR 590 (Guj.) "Keeping in view of the ruling of the above case, it is submitted before your goodself for appreciation that, for the interest to be treated as 'income' of the ass…

M/S COAL INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA

ITA 1407/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 1Section 115JSection 250

…thus it is not the 'real income' of the appellant company and cannot be taxed. 9.2 Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee relied upon the following case laws in support of the claim that only real income could be taxed. i) State Bank of Travancore v. CIT [1986] 158 ITR 102 (SC) & CIT v. Shiv Prakash Janak Raj & Co. (P.) Ltd. [1996] 88 Taxman 536/222 ITR 183 (SC) ii) Rajkot District Gopalak Co-op. Milk Producers' Union Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 204 UR 590 (Guj.) "Keeping in view of the ruling of the above case, it is submitted before your goodself for appreciation that, for the interest to be treated as 'income' of the ass…

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

ITA 622/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 250

…thus it is not the 'real income' of the appellant company and cannot be taxed. 9.2 Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee relied upon the following case laws in support of the claim that only real income could be taxed. i) State Bank of Travancore v. CIT [1986] 158 ITR 102 (SC) & CIT v. Shiv Prakash Janak Raj & Co. (P.) Ltd. [1996] 88 Taxman 536/222 ITR 183 (SC) ii) Rajkot District Gopalak Co-op. Milk Producers' Union Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 204 UR 590 (Guj.) "Keeping in view of the ruling of the above case, it is submitted before your goodself for appreciation that, for the interest to be treated as 'income' of the ass…

M/S JINDAL EQUIPMENT LEASING CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms

C.A. No.-000152-000152 - 2026Supreme Court09 Jan 2026

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 47

…come Tax, Bombay City I v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co.13, State Bank of Travancore v. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Kerala14, Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd v. 10 14 Tax Cases 22 11 (2004) 9 SCC 438 12 (1954) 26 ITR 27 (SC) 13 (1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC) 14 (1986) 158 ITR 102 (SC) 10 Commissioner of Income-Tax15 and Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Excel Industries Ltd. and another16. Even if the fair market value of the shares allotted in the amalgamated company on the date of allotment exceeds the book value of the shares in the amalgamating company, such appreciation is purely notional. Real income would ar…

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

…{ "clean_text": "आयकर अपीलिय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR\n\nडा० एस. सीतललक्ष्मी, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री राठौड कमलेश जयंतभाई, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष\nBEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI,\n\nआयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos.395 to 401/JP/2025\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2013-14 to 2019-20\n\nOm Prakash Gupta Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-01, Jaipur\n\nस्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईएस सं./ PAN/GIR No.: ABNPG3260C\n\nनिर्यारचती की ओर से / Assessee by : Shri Tarun Mittal, CA &\n Shri Harshit Agarwal, CA,\nराजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Shr…

GOVINDASAMY BHARATHIRAJA,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-4(2), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 258/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.258/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. Mr. Govindasamy Bharathiraja, The Ito, Old 4, New 6, Balaji Colony, Non-Corporate Ward-4(2), 3Rd Cross Street, Velachery, Chennai. Chennai-600 042. [Pan: Albpb 2971 K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143Section 144Section 69Section 69A

…they cannot run contrary to the statutory provisions or whittle down their effect. In Kerala Financial Corporation v. CIT [1994] 210 ITR 129 (SC); AIR 1994 SC 2416, following the opinion of Mukharji J. at paragraph 42 in State Bank of Travancore v. CIT [1986] 158 ITR 102 (SC); AIR 1986 SC 757, that circulars "cannot detract from the Act", the apex court held that a circular of the Board under section 119 cannot override or detract from the Act inasmuch as, what section 119 has empowered is to issue orders, instructions or directions for the proper administration of the Act or for such other purpose specified in s…

ACIT, CIRCLE-46(1), NEW DELHI vs. DABUR INVEST CORP., DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and appeal

ITA 2454/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraिनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 बनाम Acit, Dabur Invest Corp., 4Th Floor, Punjab Bhawan, Circle-46(1), Room No.106, Vs. Drum Shape Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aadfd2529D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 बनाम Acit, Dabur Invest Corp., 4Th Floor, Punjab Bhawan, Circle-46(1), Room No.106, Vs. Drum Shape Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aadfd2529D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 बनाम Dabur Invest Corp., Jcit, 4Th Floor, Punjab Bhawan, Vs. Range-46, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aadfd2529D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 बनाम Dabur Invest Corp., Jcit, 4Th Floor, Punjab Bhawan, Vs. Range-46, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aadfd2529D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

…ITA Nos.2453, 2454, 2447 & 2448/DEL/2022 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 बनाम ACIT, Dabur Invest Corp., 4th Floor, Punjab Bhawan, Circle-46(1), Room No.106, Vs. Drum Shape Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN No.AADFD2529D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 बनाम ACIT, Dabur Invest Corp., 4th Floor, Punjab Bhawan, Circle-46(1), Room No.106, Vs. Drum Shape Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi. New Delhi. P…

DABUR INVEST CORP,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, RANGE-46, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and appeal

ITA 2447/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraिनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 बनाम Acit, Dabur Invest Corp., 4Th Floor, Punjab Bhawan, Circle-46(1), Room No.106, Vs. Drum Shape Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aadfd2529D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 बनाम Acit, Dabur Invest Corp., 4Th Floor, Punjab Bhawan, Circle-46(1), Room No.106, Vs. Drum Shape Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aadfd2529D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 बनाम Dabur Invest Corp., Jcit, 4Th Floor, Punjab Bhawan, Vs. Range-46, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aadfd2529D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 बनाम Dabur Invest Corp., Jcit, 4Th Floor, Punjab Bhawan, Vs. Range-46, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aadfd2529D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

…ITA Nos.2453, 2454, 2447 & 2448/DEL/2022 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 बनाम ACIT, Dabur Invest Corp., 4th Floor, Punjab Bhawan, Circle-46(1), Room No.106, Vs. Drum Shape Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN No.AADFD2529D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 बनाम ACIT, Dabur Invest Corp., 4th Floor, Punjab Bhawan, Circle-46(1), Room No.106, Vs. Drum Shape Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi. New Delhi. P…

VIJAY KUMAR SACHDEVA,NOIDA vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 2992/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Vijay Kumar Sachdeva Vs. Acit C/O. Laxmi Remote (India) Ciorcle-34(1), E- Block Pvt. Ltd. Pratyakshkarbhawan, B-201, Phase-Ii, Civic Centre, Noida New Delhi Pan: Aaxps6507P Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Satya Pal Gogia, Advocate Revenue By Sh. Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09/05/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-34, New Delhi, (‘Ld. Cit(A)’

…nly in the year under assessment even till date it has never 2 Vijay Kumar Sachdeva Vs. ACIT been received by the assessee and not been paid by the Company which is against the ruling of State Bank of Travancore VS Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) (1986) 158 ITR 102(SC) more over the first appellate authority has not taken any initiative to find out this facts. 4. That the A/A as well as the first appellate authority has not gone into the issue and not even consider the submission of the assessee before passing the order that why the commission was require to be reversed whereas the assesee has replied the s…