Taparia Tools Ltd. v. JCIT

260 ITR 102High Court2003#1532 most cited

What is Taparia Tools Ltd. v. JCIT authority for?

Under the mercantile system of accounting, revenue and expenses are matched on an accrual basis, comparing income earned and expenses incurred irrespective of cash flow. If the Department seeks to substitute an assessee's chosen method of accounting, the burden is on the Department to prove that the existing method is incorrect or distorts profits.

74

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Taparia Tools Ltd. v. JCIT · 260 ITR 102 · Section 145 · mercantile system of accounting · accrual basis · matching concept · burden of proof · substitution of accounting method · completed contract method · distortion of profits · income tax accounting methods

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 132Section 153ASection 144Section 145Section 153B(1)(b)Section 153DSection 250

Issues it is cited on

section 14a(1)project completion methodpercentage completion methodsection 28(iv)section 53amercantile system of accountingright to receivewithholding taxinterest on securitiesrule of consistencydeemed dividendicds

Judgments citing Taparia Tools Ltd. v. JCIT

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. WADHWAGROUP HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and that of the\nassessee is partly allowed

ITA 2323/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal & Shalini R. Jain, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT D/R
Section 14ASection 14A(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 57

…ven a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the\nआयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण\nINCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nI.T.A. No. 1988/Mum/2024\nI.T.A. No. 2323/Mum/2024\n16\nauthorities below. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of\nTaparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (Bombay), has held as\nunder:-\n“Therefore, under the Mercantile System of Accounting, in order to determine the\nnet income of an accounting year, the revenue and other incomes are matched with\nthe cost of resources consumed [expenses]. Under the Mercantile System of\nAccounting, this Matching is required to be done on accrual basis. Under this…

WADHWAGROUP HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and that of the\nassessee is partly allowed

ITA 1988/MUM/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2025AY 2020-2021
For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal & Shalini R. Jain, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT D/R
Section 14ASection 14A(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 57

…a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the\n\nआयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण\nINCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nI.T.A. No. 1988/Mum/2024\nI.T.A. No. 2323/Mum/2024\n\n16\nauthorities below. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of\nTaparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (Bombay), has held as\nunder:-\n“Therefore, under the Mercantile System of Accounting, in order to determine the\nnet income of an accounting year, the revenue and other incomes are matched with\nthe cost of resources consumed [expenses]. Under the Mercantile System of\nAccounting, this Matching is required to be done on accrual basis. Under this…

LODHA FOUNDATION, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 12/JPR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck 7751L ...... Appellant Vs. Acit, Central Circle, Kota ...... Respondent Acit, Circle-2, Kota ...... Appellant Vs. M/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck7751L ...... Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR, Ld. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250

…for the Revenue to continue with this litigation when it was quite clear that not only was it fruitless (on merits) but also that it may not have added anything much to the public coffers” In the decision of the Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Taparia Tools Ltd. 260 ITR 102 (Bom), it has been held that “In every case of substitution of one method by another method, the burden is on the Department to prove that the method in vogue is not correct and it distorts the profits of a particular year. Under the mercantile system of accounting based on the concept of accrual, the method of accounting followed by the assessee…

LODHA FOUNDATION, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 11/JPR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck 7751L ...... Appellant Vs. Acit, Central Circle, Kota ...... Respondent Acit, Circle-2, Kota ...... Appellant Vs. M/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck7751L ...... Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR, Ld. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250

…for the Revenue to continue with this litigation when it was quite clear that not only was it fruitless (on merits) but also that it may not have added anything much to the public coffers” In the decision of the Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Taparia Tools Ltd. 260 ITR 102 (Bom), it has been held that “In every case of substitution of one method by another method, the burden is on the Department to prove that the method in vogue is not correct and it distorts the profits of a particular year. Under the mercantile system of accounting based on the concept of accrual, the method of accounting followed by the assessee…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. KAIZEN ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., KOTA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 390/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck 7751L ...... Appellant Vs. Acit, Central Circle, Kota ...... Respondent Acit, Circle-2, Kota ...... Appellant Vs. M/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck7751L ...... Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR, Ld. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250

…for the Revenue to continue with this litigation when it was quite clear that not only was it fruitless (on merits) but also that it may not have added anything much to the public coffers” In the decision of the Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Taparia Tools Ltd. 260 ITR 102 (Bom), it has been held that “In every case of substitution of one method by another method, the burden is on the Department to prove that the method in vogue is not correct and it distorts the profits of a particular year. Under the mercantile system of accounting based on the concept of accrual, the method of accounting followed by the assessee…

KAIZEN ENTREPRISES PVT. LTD.,KOTA vs. ACIT-DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 156/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck 7751L ...... Appellant Vs. Acit, Central Circle, Kota ...... Respondent Acit, Circle-2, Kota ...... Appellant Vs. M/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck7751L ...... Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR, Ld. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250

…for the Revenue to continue with this litigation when it was quite clear that not only was it fruitless (on merits) but also that it may not have added anything much to the public coffers” In the decision of the Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Taparia Tools Ltd. 260 ITR 102 (Bom), it has been held that “In every case of substitution of one method by another method, the burden is on the Department to prove that the method in vogue is not correct and it distorts the profits of a particular year. Under the mercantile system of accounting based on the concept of accrual, the method of accounting followed by the assessee…

DCIT(CC)-8(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. 63 MOONS TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, claim of deduction was not allowed

ITA 3178/MUM/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Bleita No. 3175/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2008-09) Dcit (Cc)-8(3), Mumbai 63 Moons Technologies Limited Cts No. 256-257, F.T. Tower, Vs Suren Road, Chakala, Andheri, Mumbai-400093. Pan: Aaacf 5737 C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sukhsagar SyalFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT/DR
Section 132Section 14ASection 153ASection 40

…-rata basis. The decision relied upon are as under:- 1. Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. vs CIT 225 ITR802(SC) 2. National Engineering Industries Ltd. vs. CIT 12361 TR577(Cal) 3. CIT vs Tungabhadra Industries Ltd. 207 ITR553 4. Taparia Tools, 260 ITR 102(Bom) Further the submission, as regards the different treatment in books of accounts and income tax computation is that entries made by the assessee in books of accounts are not determinative of the question whether the assessee has earned any profit or suffered any loss. In his regard, decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Suttej Cot…

DCIT (CC)-8(3), MUMBAI vs. 63 MOONS TECHNOLOGIES LTD Q, MUMBAI

Accordingly, claim of deduction was not allowed

ITA 3175/MUM/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Bleita No. 3175/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2008-09) Dcit (Cc)-8(3), Mumbai 63 Moons Technologies Limited Cts No. 256-257, F.T. Tower, Vs Suren Road, Chakala, Andheri, Mumbai-400093. Pan: Aaacf 5737 C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sukhsagar SyalFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT/DR
Section 132Section 14ASection 153ASection 40

…-rata basis. The decision relied upon are as under:- 1. Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. vs CIT 225 ITR802(SC) 2. National Engineering Industries Ltd. vs. CIT 12361 TR577(Cal) 3. CIT vs Tungabhadra Industries Ltd. 207 ITR553 4. Taparia Tools, 260 ITR 102(Bom) Further the submission, as regards the different treatment in books of accounts and income tax computation is that entries made by the assessee in books of accounts are not determinative of the question whether the assessee has earned any profit or suffered any loss. In his regard, decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Suttej Cot…

DCIT 2(2), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and 2007 – 08 is partly allowed

ITA 4952/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm A.Y.2006-07 [ By Assessee] &

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

…. Thus, it was claimed that the amortization of premium is in the nature of deferred revenue expenditure and is deductible in terms of the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of Taparia tools Ltd versus joint Commissioner of income tax (2003) 260 ITR 102 and the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd versus CIT (1997) 225 ITR 802. It was also contested that securities of the bank are in the nature of stock in trade and as held in the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of United Commercial Bank Versus Cit 240 ITR 355 that a ba…

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

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 3868/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

…us, it was claimed that the amortization of premium is in the nature of deferred revenue expenditure and is deductible in terms of the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of Taparia tools Ltd versus joint Commissioner of income tax (2003) 260 ITR 102 and the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd versus CIT (1997) 225 ITR 802. It was also contested that securities of the bank are in the nature of stock in trade and as held in the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of United Commercial Bank Versus Cit 240 ITR 355 th…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR vs. MINERAL EXPLORATION CONSULTANCY LTD., NAGPUR

In the result, Ground No.1, 3 & 4 of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 53/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.53/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 The Deputy M/S.Mineral Corporation Commissioner Of Income V Corporation Limited, Tax, S (Name Changed As Mineral Circle-2, Nagpur. Exploration Consultancy Limited), Dr.Ambedkar Bhawan, 2Nd Floor, High Land Drive Road, Seminary Hills, Nagpur – 440006. Pan: Aabcm9165C Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By Shri Ashutosh Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28/03/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) Dated 23.12.2022 For A.Y.2018-19 Passed Under Section 250 Of The M/S.Mineral Corporation Corporation Limited [R]

Section 250

…pellate Authority (FAA).After considering the reply of the assessee- company, FAA held that issue of the claim of expenditure under the mercantile system of accounting was considered by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd., (260 ITR 102), that the claim for expenses of particular year should be made against the income of the same period, that the assessee by accounting prior period expenses pertaining to an earlier year had not adhered to the principles of mercantile system of accounting, that claim of this nature resulted in distorting the profit of the year. Finally, following…

LAKSHYA REALINFRA PVT. LTD.,NOIDA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 15(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4293/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri M. Balaganeshlakshya Realinfra Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, Unit No. 703-704, 7Th Floor, Circle-15(1), P-6, Ocean Complex, Opp Gip New Delhi Mall, Sector-18, Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aabcl5225G Assessee By : Sh. Sandeep Sapra, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Raja Rajeshwari R., Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23/05/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31/07/2023

For Appellant: Sh. Sandeep Sapra, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Raja Rajeshwari R., Sr. DR
Section 57

…were completed during the impugned years, resulted into distortion of the correct profits, as per the project completion method followed. While reaching this conclusion, the ITAT discussed the then Bombay High Court decision in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. (260 ITR 102), now affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India) wherein the principle of matching concept had been upheld. Similarly as can be seen from the assessment order and from the financial statements filed before me, the appellant capitalized total expenditure under various heads amounting to Rs.19,53,24,096/-. Expenses of similar nature amounting…

M/S BEC INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED,DURG vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), BHILAI

In the result ground no. 3 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 66/RPR/2020[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Raipur24 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.66/Rpr/2020 (Assessment Year: 2014-2015) M/S Bec Infra Private Limited, Vs Circle-3(1), Raipur 47, Motilal Nehru Nagar, Durg Pan No. :Aagcm 0049 N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Nilesh Jain, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. Dr सुनिाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/04/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/04/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A)-Ii, Raipur, Dated 31.12.2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. At The Outset, Ld. Sr. Dr Submitted That The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 59 Days, Which Can Be Further Extended Since The Claim Of The Assessee That The Order Was Served After 38 Days Of Delay Was Not Supported By Any Documentary Evidence. As Per Appeal Memo In Form No.36, The Date Of Service Of Communication Of The Order Was 7Th February, 2020 & The Appeal Was Filed On 08.06.2020. On This Aspect, The Ld. Ar Submitted That This Was The Covid-19 Period & The Hon’Ble Apex Court Has Already Directed To Extend The Limitation For That Period, Therefore, The Delay May Be Condoned. The Submission Of The Ld. Ar Found Satisfactory & Acceptable & Accordingly, The Delay In Filing The Present Appeal By The Assessee Is Condoned.

For Appellant: Shri Nilesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 14A

…q) The disallowance u/s.14A is uncalled for in view of assessee’s reply dated 07/11/2016 (para-19) r) Appellant relies on following citations: (a) CIT vs. UP State Industrial Development Corpn. (1997) 225 ITR 703 (SC) (b) Taparia Tools Ltd. vs. Jt. CIT (2003) 260 ITR 102 (Bombay) s) It is humbly prayed that the additions confirmed by Id. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) may be deleted in the interest of justice. 10. Ld. Sr. DR on the contrary submitted that the drawing and designing expenses claimed by the assessee was part of the contract agreement and therefore separate claim of the same which is in contrad…

M/S THE STATE BANK OF PATIALA,PATIALA vs. ACIT, PATIALA

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

ITA 510/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 The State Bank Of India Asst. Cit Circle-Patiala, (Successor To State Bank Of Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Patiala), Patiala-147001 Dgm & Cfo, Sbi, Local Head Office – Chandigarh, 2Nd Floor, Sector 17A, Chandigarh- 160017. Pan No. Aaccs 0143 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Ketan Ved & Mr. Ninadpatade, Ars Revenue By : Dr. Kishor Dhule, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 09/03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/03/2023

For Appellant: Mr. Ketan Ved &For Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 2Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

…ision of the Bombay High Court in the case of the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of 18 The State Bank of India The State Bank of India ITA Nos. 510, 538 & 1259/CHANDI/2017 ITA Nos. 510, 538 & 1259/CHANDI/2017 Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (Bombay). Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (Bombay). Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (Bombay). It is to be clarified that the matching concept theory It is to be clarified that the matching concept theory It is to be clarified that the matching concept theory referred by the CIT DR in the referred by the CIT DR in the…

DCIT CENT. CIR 8(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S 63 MOON TECHNOLOGIES INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1509/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1509/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit –Cc-8(3) बिधम/ M/S. 63 Moon Room No. 656 6Th Floor, Technologies India Ltd Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Ft Tower, Cts No. 256- Mumbai- 400020. 257, Suren Road, Chakala, Andheri (E) Mumbai- 400093. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacf5737C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Sukhsagar Syal Revenue By: Smt Riddhi Mishra (Cit-Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 16/11/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-56, Mumbai Dated 31.03.2022 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Are As Under: - “1. Whether On The Facts & Under The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Deleting The Disallowance Made By The Ao Without Appreciating The Fact He Proportionate Claim Of The Premium On Zccbs Written During The Tenure Of Zero Coupon Convertible Bonds Was Is In Nature Of Interest?" 1.1 “Whether On The Facts & Under The Circumstances The Case & In Law, The Id. Cit(A) Was Justified In Deleting Disallowance Without Appreciating The Fact That The Claim

For Appellant: Shri Sukhsagar SyalFor Respondent: Smt Riddhi Mishra (CIT-DR)
Section 115JSection 14A

…ro-rata basis. The decision relied upon are as under: 1. Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. vs CIT 225 ITR 802(SC) 2. National Engineering Industries Ltd. vs. CIT 1236 ITR 577(Cal) 3. CIT vs Tungabhadra Industries Ltd. 207 ITR 553 4, Taparia Tools, 260 ITR 102(Bom) Further the submission, as regards the different treatment in books of accounts and income tax computation is that entries made by the assessee in books of accounts are not determinative of the question whether the assessee has earned any profit or suffered any loss. In his regard, decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Suttej Cott…

LIFECELL INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3334/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jan 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3334/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Lifecell International Assistant Commissioner Of Private Ltd., V. Income Tax, No. 26, Vandalur Corporate Circle 4(1), Kelambakkam Main Road, Chennai. Keelakkottaiyur, Chennai. [Pan: Aaeca-7997-B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Ajith Kumar Choradia, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.01.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Ajith Kumar Choradia, CAFor Respondent: Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT

…t by provisions of the Companies Act." (p. 424)’’. 17. Subsequently the Hon’ble Supreme Court reiterated the same principle in the case of CIT vs. Bilahari Investment (P) Ltd, 299 ITR 1. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd vs. JCIT, 260 ITR 102 had explained the concept of matching principle as under:- "The mercantile system of accounting is based on accrual. Basically, it is a double entry system of accounting. Under the mercantile system of accounting, profits arising or accruing at the date of the transaction are liable to be taxed notwithstanding the fact that they are not actually…

GUJARAT MINERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4, NOW CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1657/AHD/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Nov 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumar & Asstt.Year: 2005-06 Gujarat Mineral Development Dcit/Jcit, Cir.4 Corporation Ltd. Vs Ahmedabad. “Khanji Bhavan” 132Ft Ring Road University Ground, Ahmedabad. Asstt.Year: 2005-06 Dcit/Jcit, Cir.4 Gujarat Mineral Development Ahmedabad. Vs Corporation Ltd. “Khanji Bhavan” 132Ft Ring Road University Ground, Ahmedabad. (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, With Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri James Kurian, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 30/08/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/11/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Guptathe Present Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee, Pertain To The Same Assessment Year & Are Against Orders Passed By The

For Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

…, 225 ITR 802 from which he noted that the Hon’ble Apex Court had held that there was a continuous benefit to the business of the company over the entire period. He further relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd., 260 ITR 102 taking the same view. The relevant findings of the Ld.CIT(A) at page 40 para 21.2 – 21.5 of the order is as under; “21.2 I have considered the facts of the case and the submissions of the Ld.A.R. carefully. I find considerable force in the argument of the Ld.A.R. that the expenditure incurred for diverting the river does not result in ITA No.174…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT MINERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1471/AHD/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Nov 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumar & Asstt.Year: 2005-06 Gujarat Mineral Development Dcit/Jcit, Cir.4 Corporation Ltd. Vs Ahmedabad. “Khanji Bhavan” 132Ft Ring Road University Ground, Ahmedabad. Asstt.Year: 2005-06 Dcit/Jcit, Cir.4 Gujarat Mineral Development Ahmedabad. Vs Corporation Ltd. “Khanji Bhavan” 132Ft Ring Road University Ground, Ahmedabad. (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, With Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri James Kurian, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 30/08/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/11/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Guptathe Present Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee, Pertain To The Same Assessment Year & Are Against Orders Passed By The

For Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

…, 225 ITR 802 from which he noted that the Hon’ble Apex Court had held that there was a continuous benefit to the business of the company over the entire period. He further relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd., 260 ITR 102 taking the same view. The relevant findings of the Ld.CIT(A) at page 40 para 21.2 – 21.5 of the order is as under; “21.2 I have considered the facts of the case and the submissions of the Ld.A.R. carefully. I find considerable force in the argument of the Ld.A.R. that the expenditure incurred for diverting the river does not result in ITA No.174…

GUJARAT MINERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT.CIT.,CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1747/AHD/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Nov 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumar & Asstt.Year: 2005-06 Gujarat Mineral Development Dcit/Jcit, Cir.4 Corporation Ltd. Vs Ahmedabad. “Khanji Bhavan” 132Ft Ring Road University Ground, Ahmedabad. Asstt.Year: 2005-06 Dcit/Jcit, Cir.4 Gujarat Mineral Development Ahmedabad. Vs Corporation Ltd. “Khanji Bhavan” 132Ft Ring Road University Ground, Ahmedabad. (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, With Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri James Kurian, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 30/08/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/11/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Guptathe Present Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee, Pertain To The Same Assessment Year & Are Against Orders Passed By The

For Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

…, 225 ITR 802 from which he noted that the Hon’ble Apex Court had held that there was a continuous benefit to the business of the company over the entire period. He further relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd., 260 ITR 102 taking the same view. The relevant findings of the Ld.CIT(A) at page 40 para 21.2 – 21.5 of the order is as under; “21.2 I have considered the facts of the case and the submissions of the Ld.A.R. carefully. I find considerable force in the argument of the Ld.A.R. that the expenditure incurred for diverting the river does not result in ITA No.174…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE vs. CENTURY REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 740/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar, D.R

…ayments are made in full and final settlement of the invoices, meaning the full and final settlement of the work concluded. 6.11 At this point of time, it is appropriate to take support of the judgement in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT, reported in 260 ITR 102 (Born) and approved in 26 taxmann.com 253 (SC), the Hon. Bombay High Court has held as under: “Under the mercantile system of accounting, in order to determine the net income of an accounting year, the revenue and other incomes are matched with the cost of resources consumed (expenses). Under the mercantile system of accounting, the matching is…

Showing 1–20 of 74 · Page 1 of 4