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 367,154 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
Read the full judgment

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

Concentrix Services India Private Limited (Formerly Known As Minacs Private Limited, Minacs Limited & Adity Birla Minacs Worldwide Limited ), Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-10(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 5260/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2023AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri Ajit Pal Singh Daia
Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 92(1)Section 92B

…es have held that foreign exchange fluctuation loss suffered on account of circulating capital or revenue account should be treated as revenue expenditure in the year in which the devaluation takes place when the method of accounting followed is mercantile. • 116 ITR 1 (SC) • 154 ITR 460 (Cal) • 90 ITR 323 (Ker) • 97 ITD 125 (Ahd) (TM) @ 151 para 8.28 Accordingly, this itself establishes that the Appellant has adopted the system of accounting which is fair and reasonable and supported by the Accounting Standard AS -11, Rule 115 and various authorities and not adopted to avoid incidence of income tax. And in an…

M/S. Bharat Electronics Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Circle-1, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 394/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Bharat Electronics The Assistant Ltd., Commissioner Of Registered Office, Income Tax, Outer Ring Road Ltu, Nagawara, Circle – 1, Vs. Bangalore – 560 045. Bangalore. Pan: Aaacb5985C Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Richa .B, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 43A

…s or gain, arising from such conversion of the liability at the closing rate should be recognized in the profit & loss account for the reporting period. 16. Also, the Appellant wishes to place the reliance in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 116 ITR 1 held as under: "The law may, therefore, now be taken to be well-settled that where profit or loss arises to an assessee on account of appreciation or depreciation in the value of foreign currency held by it, on conversion into another currency, such profit or loss would ordinarily be a trading profit or loss if the foreign currency is held by the a…

Abhishek Shelters Ltd, Badlapur vs. ITO, Ward-1(5), Mumbai

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

ITA 607/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail (Jm)

…hat income tax does not recognize hypothetical or notional income which is not received or accrued to the assessee. We rely upon the Judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sutlez Cotton Mills Ltd., vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal (1979) 116 ITR 1 (SC), in which it was held as under: "It is now well settled that the way in which entries are made by an assessee in his books of account is not determinative of the question whether the assessee has earned any profit or suffered any loss. The assessee may, by making entries which are not in conformity with the proper principles of accountancy, c…

Acc Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT (Ltu), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by department is dismissed

ITA 800/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Dcit (Ltu) 121, Cement House, M.K. Road 29Th Floor, Center-1 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Mumbai - 400005 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. Cit – 3(4) V. M/S. Acc Limited 29Th Floor, Center-1 Cement House,121, M.K. Road World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…th Jute Manufacturing Company Ltd. 82 ITR 362; in the case of TutcorinAlali Chemicals Ltd. in 227 ITR 172; in the case of Godhra Electricity Company in 91 Taxman 91; in the case of Bokaro Steel Ltd in 263 ITR 315 and in the case of Sutlet Cotton Mills Ltd. in 116 ITR 1 and submitted that it would be totally incorrect to say that an assessee who raises internal invoices would be entitled to benefit of Sec 80IA and an assessee who does not raise internal invoices would not be entitled to such benefit. 13.2. The assessee further submitted that Sec. 80IA(8) itself contemplates a situation where goods or services are…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax-3(4), Mumbai-400005 vs. M/S. Acc Limited, Mumbai-400020

In the result, appeal filed by department is dismissed

ITA 1171/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Dcit (Ltu) 121, Cement House, M.K. Road 29Th Floor, Center-1 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Mumbai - 400005 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. Cit – 3(4) V. M/S. Acc Limited 29Th Floor, Center-1 Cement House,121, M.K. Road World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…th Jute Manufacturing Company Ltd. 82 ITR 362; in the case of TutcorinAlali Chemicals Ltd. in 227 ITR 172; in the case of Godhra Electricity Company in 91 Taxman 91; in the case of Bokaro Steel Ltd in 263 ITR 315 and in the case of Sutlet Cotton Mills Ltd. in 116 ITR 1 and submitted that it would be totally incorrect to say that an assessee who raises internal invoices would be entitled to benefit of Sec 80IA and an assessee who does not raise internal invoices would not be entitled to such benefit. 13.2. The assessee further submitted that Sec. 80IA(8) itself contemplates a situation where goods or services are…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Jammu vs. Gravita Metal Inc, Kathua

ITA 594/ASR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri. P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mehra, CIT DR
Section 10Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(xviii)

…ill depend on the provision of law relating thereto and not on the view which the assessee might take of his rights nor can the existence or absence of entries in the books of account be decisive or conclusive in the matter. Satluj Cotton Mills Vs CIT (1979) 116 ITR 1 (SC) But it is now well settled that the way in which entries are made by an assessee in his books of account is not determinative of the question whether the assessee has earned any profit or suffered any loss. The assessee may, by making entries which are not in conformity with the proper accountancy principles, conceal profit or show loss and th…

Measage Gravita Metal Inc, Kathua vs. Income Tax Officer Ward- 1(4), Kathua

ITA 587/ASR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri. P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mehra, CIT DR
Section 10Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(xviii)

…ill depend on the provision of law relating thereto and not on the view which the assessee might take of his rights nor can the existence or absence of entries in the books of account be decisive or conclusive in the matter. Satluj Cotton Mills Vs CIT (1979) 116 ITR 1 (SC) But it is now well settled that the way in which entries are made by an assessee in his books of account is not determinative of the question whether the assessee has earned any profit or suffered any loss. The assessee may, by making entries which are not in conformity with the proper accountancy principles, conceal profit or show loss and th…

DCIT 7(3), Mumbai vs. Wyeth Ltd ( Formerly Known As Wyeth Lederle Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3508/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jun 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blepfizer Limited V. Acit- Special Range 23 (Earlier Known As Wyeth Lederle Limited) [Now The Dcit-Circle 7(3)] The Capital, G-Block Aayakar Bhavan Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai- 400020 Bandra (E), Mumbai -400012 Pan: Aaacp3334M (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit- Ltu V. M/S. Wyeth Limited 28Th Floor, Centre - 1 (Formerly Known As Wyeth Lederle Ltd) Rbc Mahindra Towers World Trade Centre 4Th Floor, A- Wing Cuffe Parade, Mumbai Dr G.M. Bhosale Road Worli, Mumbai- 400055 Pan: Aaacw2641Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vishal Kalra Department Represented By : Smt. Sujatha Iyangar

Section 43(6)Section 80H

…examined on the touchstone of provisions contained in the Act [See - Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363 (SC); Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 172/93 Taxman 502 (SC); Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 116 ITR 1 (SC) and United Commercial Bank v. CIT [1999] 240 ITR 355/106 Taxman 601 (SC). 20. At the most, an inference can be drawn that by showing this expenditure in aspread over manner in the books of account, the assessee had initially intended to make such an option. However, it abandoned the same before reaching the crucial stage, inasmuch as, in the i…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-5(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S M.Pallonji Shipping Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly uphold the decision of the CIT(A) on this issue. The cross objections filed by the assessee in this regard is dismissed

ITA 2981/MUM/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(2)Section 57Section 92C

…an given to the AE is not its core activity. Accordingly, the assessee prayed that the foreign exchange gain ought to be treated as non tonnage income. The assessee in this regard relied on the following decisions:- (1) Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd vs CIT (19 79) 116 ITR 1 (SC) (2) CIT vs Woodward Governor India P Ltd (2009) 312 ITR 254 (SC) (3) CIT vs Dempo & Co P Ltd (994) 206 ITR 291 (SC) 6 ITA 2981/Mum/2022 M. Pallonji Shipping Pvt Ltd 6. The Ld.CIT(A) called on the assessee to furnish the break-up of the net foreign exchange gain as computed by the assessee and the assessee submitted the following details in t…

M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1116/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 2Section 3

…ever, if the contract entered into for the purpose of capital liability with reference to the acquisition of capital asset within India, that loss is a capital loss. This issue has been considered by following judgements:- • Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT – 116 ITR 1 (SC) (1979) • CIT vs. Tata Locomotive and Engineering Company Ltd. – 60 ITR 405 (1966)(SC) • CIT vs. V.S.Dempo & Co Pvt. Ltd (206 ITR 291) (1994) (HC-Bombay) • CIT vs Woodward Governor India P. Ltd (312 ITR 254) (2009) (SC). ITA Nos.1048 & 1112 to 1116/Bang/2019 Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., Bangalore Page 49 of 60 • CIT vs. Tata Iron &…

M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1115/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 2Section 3

…ever, if the contract entered into for the purpose of capital liability with reference to the acquisition of capital asset within India, that loss is a capital loss. This issue has been considered by following judgements:- • Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT – 116 ITR 1 (SC) (1979) • CIT vs. Tata Locomotive and Engineering Company Ltd. – 60 ITR 405 (1966)(SC) • CIT vs. V.S.Dempo & Co Pvt. Ltd (206 ITR 291) (1994) (HC-Bombay) • CIT vs Woodward Governor India P. Ltd (312 ITR 254) (2009) (SC). ITA Nos.1048 & 1112 to 1116/Bang/2019 Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., Bangalore Page 49 of 60 • CIT vs. Tata Iron &…

M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1114/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 2Section 3

…ever, if the contract entered into for the purpose of capital liability with reference to the acquisition of capital asset within India, that loss is a capital loss. This issue has been considered by following judgements:- • Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT – 116 ITR 1 (SC) (1979) • CIT vs. Tata Locomotive and Engineering Company Ltd. – 60 ITR 405 (1966)(SC) • CIT vs. V.S.Dempo & Co Pvt. Ltd (206 ITR 291) (1994) (HC-Bombay) • CIT vs Woodward Governor India P. Ltd (312 ITR 254) (2009) (SC). ITA Nos.1048 & 1112 to 1116/Bang/2019 Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., Bangalore Page 49 of 60 • CIT vs. Tata Iron &…

M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1113/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 2Section 3

…ever, if the contract entered into for the purpose of capital liability with reference to the acquisition of capital asset within India, that loss is a capital loss. This issue has been considered by following judgements:- • Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT – 116 ITR 1 (SC) (1979) • CIT vs. Tata Locomotive and Engineering Company Ltd. – 60 ITR 405 (1966)(SC) • CIT vs. V.S.Dempo & Co Pvt. Ltd (206 ITR 291) (1994) (HC-Bombay) • CIT vs Woodward Governor India P. Ltd (312 ITR 254) (2009) (SC). ITA Nos.1048 & 1112 to 1116/Bang/2019 Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., Bangalore Page 49 of 60 • CIT vs. Tata Iron &…

M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1112/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 2Section 3

…ever, if the contract entered into for the purpose of capital liability with reference to the acquisition of capital asset within India, that loss is a capital loss. This issue has been considered by following judgements:- • Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT – 116 ITR 1 (SC) (1979) • CIT vs. Tata Locomotive and Engineering Company Ltd. – 60 ITR 405 (1966)(SC) • CIT vs. V.S.Dempo & Co Pvt. Ltd (206 ITR 291) (1994) (HC-Bombay) • CIT vs Woodward Governor India P. Ltd (312 ITR 254) (2009) (SC). ITA Nos.1048 & 1112 to 1116/Bang/2019 Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., Bangalore Page 49 of 60 • CIT vs. Tata Iron &…

Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range - 1, Bangalore vs. M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1048/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 2Section 3

…ever, if the contract entered into for the purpose of capital liability with reference to the acquisition of capital asset within India, that loss is a capital loss. This issue has been considered by following judgements:- • Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT – 116 ITR 1 (SC) (1979) • CIT vs. Tata Locomotive and Engineering Company Ltd. – 60 ITR 405 (1966)(SC) • CIT vs. V.S.Dempo & Co Pvt. Ltd (206 ITR 291) (1994) (HC-Bombay) • CIT vs Woodward Governor India P. Ltd (312 ITR 254) (2009) (SC). ITA Nos.1048 & 1112 to 1116/Bang/2019 Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., Bangalore Page 49 of 60 • CIT vs. Tata Iron &…

Kamineni Health Services Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 90/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2013-14 Kamineni Health Services Vs. Dy. C. I. T. (P) Ltd, Hyderabad Circle 2(1) Pan:Aaack8313R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Advocate Sashank Dundu Revenue By: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 22/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/03/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 7Th Nov.2017 Of The Learned Cit (A)-2, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2013-14. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Healthcare. It Filed Its Return Of Income For The Impugned A.Y Declaring Nil Income After Setting Off Of Business Loss Of Rs.48,33,667/- Under The Normal Provision & Book Profits U/S 115Jb Amounting To Rs. 1,38,45,489/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Through Cass & Statutory Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Were Issued To The Assessee To Page 1 Of 16

For Appellant: Advocate Sashank DunduFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…f foreign exchange in respect of outstanding loan amount to be added to the actual cost of acquisition of assets for the purpose of depreciation for the relevant A.Y. 8.2 We find the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd vs. CIT (1979) 116 ITR 1 has held that the additional liability on account of fluctuation in the foreign Page 9 of 16 ITA 90 of 2018 Kamineni Health Services P Ltd exchange rate in respect of liability incurred for the import of machinery by the assessee would not constitute revenue expenditure. 8.3 We find the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Padamjee Pulp and…

Lenovo (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward- 4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for above terms

ITA 281/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Kincha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sankar K Ganeshan, CIT (D.R)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92CSection 92C(3)

…remaining on the last day of the financial year is not notional or contingent and, therefore, can be allowed as a deduction.” The Appellant further wishes to place reliance on the following rulings to substantiate its claim: i. Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. [1979] 116 ITR 1 (SC) ii. Oil & Natural Gas Corpn. Ltd. [2010] 189 Taxman 292 (SC) iii. International Combustion (I) (P.) Ltd. [1982] 11 Taxman 128 (Cal HC) iv. Acer India Private Limited (ITA 473/ Bang/ 2016) (Bang-ITAT) v. Amrit Steels Ltd. [2001] 79 ITD 498 (Delhi ITAT) vi. Dow Agrosciences India (P.) Ltd. [2017] 88 taxmann.com 676 (Mumbai ITAT) vii. Oil & Natur…

DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 3178/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…th Jute Manufacturing Company Ltd. 82 ITR 362; in the case of TutcorinAlali Chemicals Ltd. in 227 ITR 172; in the case of Godhra Electricity Company in 91 Taxman 91; in the case of Bokaro Steel Ltd in 263 ITR 315 and in the case of Sutlet Cotton Mills Ltd. in 116 ITR 1 and submitted that it would be totally incorrect to say that an assessee who raises internal invoices would be entitled to benefit of Sec 80IA and an assessee who does not raise internal invoices would not be entitled to such benefit. 13.2. The assessee further submitted that Sec. 80IA(8) itself contemplates a situation where goods or services are…

DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3177/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…th Jute Manufacturing Company Ltd. 82 ITR 362; in the case of TutcorinAlali Chemicals Ltd. in 227 ITR 172; in the case of Godhra Electricity Company in 91 Taxman 91; in the case of Bokaro Steel Ltd in 263 ITR 315 and in the case of Sutlet Cotton Mills Ltd. in 116 ITR 1 and submitted that it would be totally incorrect to say that an assessee who raises internal invoices would be entitled to benefit of Sec 80IA and an assessee who does not raise internal invoices would not be entitled to such benefit. 13.2. The assessee further submitted that Sec. 80IA(8) itself contemplates a situation where goods or services are…

DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3176/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 55A

…h Jute Manufacturing Company Ltd. 82 ITR 362; in the case of Tutcorin Alali Chemicals Ltd. in 227 ITR 172; in the case of Godhra Electricity Company in 91 Taxman 91; in the case of Bokaro Steel Ltd in 263 ITR 315 and in the case of Sutlet Cotton Mills Ltd. in 116 ITR 1 and submitted that it would be totally incorrect to say that an assessee who raises internal invoices would be entitled to benefit of Sec 80IA and an assessee who does not raise internal invoices would not be entitled to such benefit. 27 ITA NO.3135& 3136/MUM/2019 (A.Y: 2009-10) M/s. ACC Limited 13.2. The assessee further submitted that Sec. 80IA(…