Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT

116 ITR 1Supreme Court of India1979#177 most cited

What is Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

A gain arising from the cancellation of a forward exchange contract entered into for the acquisition of a capital asset constitutes a capital receipt. Income-tax liability for such transactions is determined by the specific provisions of the Income Tax Act, independent of the accounting treatment in the books of account.

409

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd · 116 ITR 1 · capital receipt · foreign exchange gain · forward contract · capital asset · Section 43A · income tax liability · accounting treatment · capital gains

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 115JBSection 143(3)Section 32Section 143(2)Section 142(1)Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 43aeligible businessbook profitssection 115jsection 115jbrevenue expendituresection 80iamercantile system of accountingamalgamationsection 37(1)section 80isection 43

Judgments citing Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT

COUNTRY CLUB HOSPITALITY & HOLIDAYS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1480/HYD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2011-12
Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250

…139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The A.O., after considering the relevant submissions of the assessee and also taking note of certain judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Vs. CIT (1979) 116 ITR 1 (SC) disallowed forex loss on convertible bonds for Rs. 7,30,66,667/- on the ground that, the said loss is capital in nature, because the assessee has taken FCCB loans and used for capital expenditure and therefore, amortization of expenditure towards forex loss is capital expenditure only. The A.O. had also disallowed belated payment of employees’…

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

…and Marked-to-market loss is not notional or contingent in nature, but 'crystallized loss'allowable as deduction under section 37 of the Act in view of the decision in CIT v. Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd [312 ITR 254 (SC)] and Sutlej Cotton Mills Limited [116 ITR 1 (SC)]. It is stated that CBDT Instruction No 3/2010 is neither binding on the assessee nor appellate authorities in view of the decisions in the following cases: (a) Customs Calcutta vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd [(2004) 165 ELT 257 (SC)] (b) Vikrant Tyres vs First ITO [(1993) 202 ITR 454 (Kar)] (c) CIT vs Hero Cycles (P) Ltd [(1997) 228 ITR 463 (S…

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

ITA 623/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2012-13
Section 115JSection 250

…and Marked-to-market loss is not notional or contingent in nature, but 'crystallized loss'allowable as deduction under section 37 of the Act in view of the decision in CIT v. Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd [312 ITR 254 (SC)] and Sutlej Cotton Mills Limited [116 ITR 1 (SC)]. It is stated that CBDT Instruction No 3/2010 is neither binding on the assessee nor appellate authorities in view of the decisions in the following cases: (a) Customs Calcutta vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd [(2004) 165 ELT 257 (SC)] (b) Vikrant Tyres vs First ITO [(1993) 202 ITR 454 (Kar)] (c) CIT vs Hero Cycles (P) Ltd [(1997) 228 ITR 463 (S…

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

…and Marked-to-market loss is not notional or contingent in nature, but 'crystallized loss'allowable as deduction under section 37 of the Act in view of the decision in CIT v. Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd [312 ITR 254 (SC)] and Sutlej Cotton Mills Limited [116 ITR 1 (SC)]. It is stated that CBDT Instruction No 3/2010 is neither binding on the assessee nor appellate authorities in view of the decisions in the following cases: (a) Customs Calcutta vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd [(2004) 165 ELT 257 (SC)] (b) Vikrant Tyres vs First ITO [(1993) 202 ITR 454 (Kar)] (c) CIT vs Hero Cycles (P) Ltd [(1997) 228 ITR 463 (S…

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

ITA 467/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 250

…and Marked-to-market loss is not notional or contingent in nature, but 'crystallized loss'allowable as deduction under section 37 of the Act in view of the decision in CIT v. Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd [312 ITR 254 (SC)] and Sutlej Cotton Mills Limited [116 ITR 1 (SC)]. It is stated that CBDT Instruction No 3/2010 is neither binding on the assessee nor appellate authorities in view of the decisions in the following cases: (a) Customs Calcutta vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd [(2004) 165 ELT 257 (SC)] (b) Vikrant Tyres vs First ITO [(1993) 202 ITR 454 (Kar)] (c) CIT vs Hero Cycles (P) Ltd [(1997) 228 ITR 463 (S…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI vs. LURGI INDIA INTERNATIONAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed as above

ITA 5826/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: allowing carry forward of losses.”

Section 142(1)Section 37Section 79

…as squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Woodward Governor of India, 312 ITR 254, which was followed by the Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order. Further, he also placed reliance on the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd (1979) 116 ITR 1. 10. With respect to the issue of denial of carry forward of loss under section 79 of the Act, the Ld. Counsel submitted that the case of the assessee was squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of AMCO Power Systems Ltd. 379 ITR 375. Further, he submitted that the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the…

VODAFONE IDEA LTD. (EARLIER KNWON AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LTD.),MUMBAI vs. ACIT,. CIRCLE-26(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, all above said grounds are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8361/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shriyogesh Kumar U.S.Vodafone Idea Ltd Vs. Acit, (Earlier Known As Vodafone Circle-26(2), Mobile Services Ltd) New Delhi 10Th Floor, Birla Centurion, Century Mills Compound, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbai, Maharastra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacb2100P

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S. K,. Jadav, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…for the purpose of the Act. The liability under the Act is governed by provisions of the Act and is not dependent on the treatment followed for the same in the books of accounts. For above proposition, I reference is made to Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT: 116 ITR 1 (SC) and Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs. CIT: 82 ITR 363 (SC). AS-9 on accounting for leases classifies lease transactions for accounting purposes as under: (i) Finance Lease (ii) Operating Lease 5.2 Finance Lease, in AS-19, is described as a lease that transfers substantially all the risks and rewards in respect of ownership of an asset, title ma…

OCL INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4068/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandraआअसं.4068/िद"ी/2015(िन.व. 2007-08) Dalmia Bharat Ltd., (Successor In The Interest Of Ocl India Ltd.) 11Th & 12Th Floor, Hansalaya Building, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aabco-8750-F बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Circle 19(1), C R Building New Delhi 110095 आअसं.3767/िद"ी/2015(िन.व. 2007-08) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Aayakar Bhawan, Uditnagar, Rourkela, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Dist. Sundargarh, Odisha 769012 बनाम Vs. Dalmia Bharat Ltd., Successor Of Ocl India Ltd., 11Th & 12Th Floor, Hansalaya Building, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aabco-8750-F

For Appellant: S/Shri Vijay Shah, Navin Verma &For Respondent: Shri Amaninder Singh Dhindsa &
Section 43(5)Section 43ASection 53A

…gain arising on cancellation of forward contract entered into in relation to purchase of capital asset shall be treated as capital receipt. In support of his argument, he placed reliance on the decision rendered in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT 116 ITR 1 (SC). He further placed reliance on the decision of Special Bench of the Tribunal in Apollo Tyers Ltd. vs ACIT 89 ITD 235 (Del. SB) to contend that dominate intention, motive and purpose of entering into forward exchange contract and cancellation thereof was to provide hedging mechanism 4 ITA Nos 4068 & 3767/Del/2015 (AY 2007-08) against enhanceme…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S OCL INDIA PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3767/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandraआअसं.4068/िद"ी/2015(िन.व. 2007-08) Dalmia Bharat Ltd., (Successor In The Interest Of Ocl India Ltd.) 11Th & 12Th Floor, Hansalaya Building, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aabco-8750-F बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Circle 19(1), C R Building New Delhi 110095 आअसं.3767/िद"ी/2015(िन.व. 2007-08) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Aayakar Bhawan, Uditnagar, Rourkela, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Dist. Sundargarh, Odisha 769012 बनाम Vs. Dalmia Bharat Ltd., Successor Of Ocl India Ltd., 11Th & 12Th Floor, Hansalaya Building, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aabco-8750-F

For Appellant: S/Shri Vijay Shah, Navin Verma &For Respondent: Shri Amaninder Singh Dhindsa &
Section 43(5)Section 43ASection 53A

…gain arising on cancellation of forward contract entered into in relation to purchase of capital asset shall be treated as capital receipt. In support of his argument, he placed reliance on the decision rendered in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT 116 ITR 1 (SC). He further placed reliance on the decision of Special Bench of the Tribunal in Apollo Tyers Ltd. vs ACIT 89 ITD 235 (Del. SB) to contend that dominate intention, motive and purpose of entering into forward exchange contract and cancellation thereof was to provide hedging mechanism 4 ITA Nos 4068 & 3767/Del/2015 (AY 2007-08) against enhanceme…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, SURAT, SURAT vs. SAHAJANAND MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, SURAT

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed whereas CO of assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 366/SRT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kammble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.364 & 366/Srt/2025 Ays: (2020-21 & 2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Dcit, Vs. Sahajanand Medical Technologies Central Circle – 4, Limited, Surat 221, C-Wing, Kanakia Atrium Andheri Kurla Road, Jb Nagar, Andheri East, Mumbai - 400059 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aafcs7694L (Appellant) (Respondent) Co. No.11/Srt/2025 (Ay 2018-19) [Arising Out Of Ita No.366/Srt/2025] Sahajanand Medical Technologies Vs. Dcit, Limited, Central Circle – 4, 221, C-Wing, Kanakia Atrium Andheri Surat Kurla Road, Jb Nagar, Andheri East, Mumbai - 400059 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aafcs7694L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rajesh C. Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravinder Sindhu, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 28/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/09/2025

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 35(1)(iv)Section 80G

…me. It is only in the nature of notional or hypothetical income, which cannot be even otherwise subject to tax. The ld. AR has also relied on the various decisions including decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT, [1979] 116 ITR 1 (SC) ITA No.364 & 366/SRT/2025/AY 2020-21 & 2018-19 & Co. No.11/SRT/2025/AY 2018-19 Sahajanand Medical Technologies Ltd. 5.4 We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. We have also deliberated upon the case laws relied upon by ld. AR. The undisputed fact of the case is that the appellant company had advanced lo…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, SURAT, SURAT vs. SAHAJANAND MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, SURAT

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed whereas CO of assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 364/SRT/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kammble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.364 & 366/Srt/2025 Ays: (2020-21 & 2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Dcit, Vs. Sahajanand Medical Technologies Central Circle – 4, Limited, Surat 221, C-Wing, Kanakia Atrium Andheri Kurla Road, Jb Nagar, Andheri East, Mumbai - 400059 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aafcs7694L (Appellant) (Respondent) Co. No.11/Srt/2025 (Ay 2018-19) [Arising Out Of Ita No.366/Srt/2025] Sahajanand Medical Technologies Vs. Dcit, Limited, Central Circle – 4, 221, C-Wing, Kanakia Atrium Andheri Surat Kurla Road, Jb Nagar, Andheri East, Mumbai - 400059 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aafcs7694L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rajesh C. Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravinder Sindhu, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 28/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/09/2025

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 35(1)(iv)Section 80G

…me. It is only in the nature of notional or hypothetical income, which cannot be even otherwise subject to tax. The ld. AR has also relied on the various decisions including decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT, [1979] 116 ITR 1 (SC) ITA No.364 & 366/SRT/2025/AY 2020-21 & 2018-19 & Co. No.11/SRT/2025/AY 2018-19 Sahajanand Medical Technologies Ltd. 5.4 We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. We have also deliberated upon the case laws relied upon by ld. AR. The undisputed fact of the case is that the appellant company had advanced lo…

NATWEST MARKETS PLC - INDIA BRANCH,KOLKATA vs. CIT (IT & TP), CIR- 1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 997/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Commissioner Of Income Tax Natwest Markets Plc-India (International Taxation & Branch Transfer Pricing) 907, Regus, 9Th Floor, Ps Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, Vs. Arcadia, 4A, Abanindra Nath 2Nd Floor, 110, Shanti Pally, Thakur Sarani, Kolkata-700016 Kolkata-700107, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacct8020E Assessee By : Shri Percy Pardiwala, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sandeep Lakra, Dr Date Of Hearing: 31.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Lakra, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…come in the hands of two different persons. Therefore, for this reason also the addition has to be deleted. The ld. AR also placed reliance to corroborate his contention on the decision of R Dalmia (supra) and similarly, in in Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT 116 ITR 1 (SC) and Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Limited Vs. CIT 93 Taxmann502 (SC) Hon'ble Apex Court held that the entries in the books of accounts would not establish the taxability of the receipt. Considering the above fact, we are inclined to hold that the interest credited in the bank account of the assessee which is in respect of Indian b…

OCEAN SPARKLE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1030/HYD/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Sri Sourabh Soparkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 801A

…e, first of all, the method of accounting followed by the assessee is not relevant to determining the income for the purpose of taxation which is very clear from the decision of Hon’bnle Supreme Court in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Limited vs., CIT [1979] 116 ITR 1 (SC). Further, as per AS- 11 issued by the ICAI, it is mandatory for the assessee to recognise, any difference, gain or loss on account of restatement of liability, as income or as expenses for reporting period. Since the assessee is following mercantile system of accounting and further AS-11 mandates recognition of difference in monetary transacti…

ACIT SPL. RANGE-7, NEW DELHI vs. PRUDENT-AGRI COMMODITIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue partly allowed

ITA 1743/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumara.Y.: 2014-15 Acit, Special Range-7, Prudent Agri Commodities C.R. Building, New Delhi Vs India Pvt. Ltd., (Earlier M/S Sunder Agri Commodities India Pvt. Ltd.) 68/2, Rnm Centre, Janpath New Delhi – 110 001 (Pan: Aascs3922N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Kapoor, Adv., Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv., Sh. Sumit Lal Chandani, Adv. & Sh. Shivam Yadav, Adv. Department By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing : 26.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.07.2025 Order Per Shamim Yahya, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-Xxv, New Delhi Dated 21.12.2018 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Company E-Filed Its Return Of Income For Ay 2014-15 On 26.11.2014 Declaring An Income Of Rs. 1,06,26,080/- The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Assessment Under Cass & Statutory Notice U/S. 143(2) Of The Act Was Issued On 28.08.2015. Thereafter, Notice Under Section 142(1) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Was Issued On 06.06.2016 & 12.09.2016

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 10(35)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 37

…ed in the business." Thus in the above case, the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court clearly indicates that the forex loss is a 'loss'.  With regard to foreign currency exchange loss, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd (116 ITR 1) [SC] has held that a loss occasioned by devaluation being one brought about by an act of sovereign state is a business loss. In this case, the taxpayer, an Indian company, had a cotton mill in Pakistan where it carried on business of manufacturing and selling cotton fabrics. It was taxed on the Pakistan profit calculated in terms of INR based on t…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES (HOLDING) PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

The Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1344/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit Vs. Aricent Technologies (Holding) Cricle-3(1), R. No. Pvt. Ltd. 380B, 5, Jain Mandir Marg (Annexe) C. R. Building, I. P. Connaught Place Estate, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aacck8280B Appellant Respondent

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ricent Technologies (Holding) Pvt. ltd. into account as per the provision of the Act not as per the mere books entry. The said view has been fortified in the Judgments of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co Ltd vs CIT: 82 ITR 363 (SC), Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs CIT: 116 ITR 1 (SC) and, Asian Hotels Ltd. V. CIT [2023] 155 taxmann.com 247 (Delhi HC)]. 18. In view of the above discussions, we find no merits in the Grounds of appeal of the Revenue and find no reasons to interfere with the findings and the conclusion of the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open cour…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CORPORATE CIRCLE 1 1, CHENNAI vs. IL AND FS TAMILNADU POWER COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

ITA 1694/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon'Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1332/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2018-19 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1694/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2018-19 Il & Fs Tamil Nadu Power Company Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Old No.21, New No.2, Kpr Tower, 4Th Floor, Greams Road, S.O, Nungambakkam Chennai-600 006. [Pan: Aabcf1176A] Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1694/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai Il & Fs Tamil Nadu Power Company Limited, Old No.21, New No.2, Kpr Tower, 4Th Floor, Greams Road, S.O, Nungambakkam Chennai-600 006. [Pan: Aabcf1176A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri.Ashwin, Ca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Shivanand K Kalakeri, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.04.2025 आदेश / Order Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M : The Below Mentioned Appeals Have Been Filed By The Appellant Assessee & Revenue For Ay-2018-19 Contesting The Order Of Ld. First Appellate Authority Indicated In Column-E, Herein Below:- S. No. A Appeal Nos. B Ays C Appellant D Cit(A) Order Details E Respondent F 1

For Appellant: Shri.Ashwin, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand K Kalakeri, CIT

…o protect the foreign currency exposure, the appellant is required to enter into forward exchange contracts. In support of its contentions the Ld. Counsel placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sutlej Cotton Company Limited 116 ITR 1 and Tata Locomotive and Engineering Company Limited 60 ITR 405. 6.0 The Ld. DR vehemently argued in favour of order of the Ld.AO and the action of Ld. CIT(A) in affirming it. 7.0 We have heard rival submissions in the light of material available on records. The principal issue seminal to the controversy is regarding Page - 4 - of 33 treatment of im…

IL&FS TAMILNADU POWER COMPANY LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORP CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1332/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1332/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2018-19 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1694/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2018-19 Il & Fs Tamil Nadu Power Company Deputy Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax, Old No.21, New No.2, Kpr Tower, Corporate Circle-1(1), 4Th Floor, Greams Road, Chennai S.O, Nungambakkam Chennai-600 006. [Pan: Aabcf1176A] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1694/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Il & Fs Tamil Nadu Power Company Tax, Limited, Corporate Circle-1(1), Old No.21, New No.2, Kpr Tower, Chennai 4Th Floor, Greams Road, S.O, Nungambakkam Chennai-600 006. [Pan: Aabcf1176A] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri.Ashwin, Ca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Shivanand K Kalakeri, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri.Ashwin, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand K Kalakeri, CIT

…o protect the foreign currency exposure, the appellant is required to enter into forward exchange contracts. In support of its contentions the Ld. Counsel placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sutlej Cotton Company Limited 116 ITR 1 and Tata Locomotive and Engineering Company Limited 60 ITR 405. 6.0 The Ld. DR vehemently argued in favour of order of the Ld.AO and the action of Ld. CIT(A) in affirming it. 7.0 We have heard rival submissions in the light of material available on records. The principal issue seminal to the controversy is regarding Page - 4 - of 33 ITA No.1332 &…

NAVRATAN MANAGEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY.COMM CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(4) MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 3586/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 2(14)Section 250Section 56(2)(via)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(viia)

…xamined on the touchstone of provisions contained in the Act (See - Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 333 (SC):; Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 172/93 Тахтап 502 (SC): Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 116 ITR 1 (SC) and United Commercial Bank v. CIT [1999] 240 ITR 355/106 Taхтап 601 (SC)." 10.8.4 Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Taparia Tools held that merely because a different treatment was given in the books of accounts cannot be a factor which would deprive the Assessee from claiming the entire expenditure as a deduction. It has been held repeated…

UTILITY SUPPLY PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(4) MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 3585/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Dhaval Shah, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Smiti Samant, Ld. D.R
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 56(2)(via)Section 56(2)(viia)

…be examined on the touchstone of provisions contained in the Act [See Kedamath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC); Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 172/93 Тахтап 502 (SC); Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 116 ITR 1 (SC) and United Commercial Bank v. CIT [1999] 240 ITR 355/106 Тахтап 601 (SC)." 11.8.4 Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Taparia Tools held that merely because a different treatment was given in the books of accounts cannot be a factor which would deprive the Assessee from claiming the entire expenditure as a deduction. It has been held repeated…

SCOTT EDIL ADVANCE RESEARCH LABORATORIES AND EDUCATION LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 857/CHANDI/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Mar 2025AY 2016-17
Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

…tem given in\nbooks of accounts, rather, the same is to be decided as per the facts and underlying\ntaxation principles. He in this respect has further placed reliance upon the following case\nlaws:\ni. Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 116 ITR 1, wherein it\nwas held that :\n“It is settled that the way in which entries are made by the assessee is not\ndeterminative of the question whether the assessee earned any profit or suffered any\nloss. The assessee may, by making entries which are not in conformity with the proper\naccountancy principles, conceal profit or show loss and the entries m…

Showing 1–20 of 409 · Page 1 of 21

...