Taparia Tools Ltd. v. JCIT

260 ITR 102High Court2003#1527 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 366,314 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

Century Real Estate Holdings Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 580/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…

DCIT Cent. Cir 8(3), Mumbai vs. M/S 63 Moon Technologies India Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1515/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Sukhsagar SyalFor Respondent: M/s. Vatsalaa Jha
Section 250

…basis. The decision relied upon are as under:- i) Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. vs CIT 225 ITR 802(SC); ii) National Engineering Industries Ltd. vs. CIT 1236 ITR 577(Cal); iii) CIT vs Tungabhadra Industries Ltd. 207 ITR 553; iv) 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 Co…

DCIT-2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S State Bank of India (Successor to State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, whereas the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly for statistical purposes

ITA 3033/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant (Account Member) & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () I.T.A. No. 3033/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2015-16) I.T.A. No. 2873/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2015-16) Dcit-2(2)(1), Vs. M/S State Bank Of India Mumbai (Successor To State Room No. 545, Bank Of Bikaner & 5Th Floor, Ayakar Jaipur) Bhavan Financial Reporting & Mumbai-400020 Taxation, 3Rd Floor, Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…sponding liability to pay which does not exist in the present case as the obligation of the issuer to pay arises only on the coupon date. The learned CIT DR also relied on the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (Bombay). It is to be clarified that the matching concept theory referred by the CIT DR in the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. (supra) has been reversed by the Supreme Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2015] 372 ITR 605 (SC). We noted that this ground of appeal is covered in favour of the assess…

State Bank of India (Successor to State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur), Mumbai vs. ACIT -Circle 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, whereas the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly for statistical purposes

ITA 2873/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant (Account Member) & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () I.T.A. No. 3033/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2015-16) I.T.A. No. 2873/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2015-16) Dcit-2(2)(1), Vs. M/S State Bank Of India Mumbai (Successor To State Room No. 545, Bank Of Bikaner & 5Th Floor, Ayakar Jaipur) Bhavan Financial Reporting & Mumbai-400020 Taxation, 3Rd Floor, Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…sponding liability to pay which does not exist in the present case as the obligation of the issuer to pay arises only on the coupon date. The learned CIT DR also relied on the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (Bombay). It is to be clarified that the matching concept theory referred by the CIT DR in the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. (supra) has been reversed by the Supreme Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2015] 372 ITR 605 (SC). We noted that this ground of appeal is covered in favour of the assess…

M/S Kable First Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1696/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Aliasger Rampurwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Narayana, K.R., Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 4o

…erous clients for subscription for data base services and charges for annual maintenance support services. The assessee in the present case follows mercantile system of accounting .The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. v. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 has described the mercantile system of accounting, which reads as follows: "The mercantile system of accounting is based on accrual. Basically, it is a Double Entry System of accounting. Under the ITA Nos. 1694 to 1696/Bang/2018 Page 7 of 17 mercantile system of accounting, profits arising or accruing at the date of the transaction are liable to…

M/S Kable First Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1695/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Aliasger Rampurwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Narayana, K.R., Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 4o

…erous clients for subscription for data base services and charges for annual maintenance support services. The assessee in the present case follows mercantile system of accounting .The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. v. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 has described the mercantile system of accounting, which reads as follows: "The mercantile system of accounting is based on accrual. Basically, it is a Double Entry System of accounting. Under the ITA Nos. 1694 to 1696/Bang/2018 Page 7 of 17 mercantile system of accounting, profits arising or accruing at the date of the transaction are liable to…

M/S Kable First India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1694/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Aliasger Rampurwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Narayana, K.R., Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 4o

…erous clients for subscription for data base services and charges for annual maintenance support services. The assessee in the present case follows mercantile system of accounting .The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. v. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 has described the mercantile system of accounting, which reads as follows: "The mercantile system of accounting is based on accrual. Basically, it is a Double Entry System of accounting. Under the ITA Nos. 1694 to 1696/Bang/2018 Page 7 of 17 mercantile system of accounting, profits arising or accruing at the date of the transaction are liable to…

Tata Housing Development Company Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- 8(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee ITA

ITA 3491/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhm/S Tata Housing Vs. Dcit – 8(3)(1) Development Company Room No. 615, Ltd.,E Block, Voltas Aayakar Bhavan, Compound, Tb Kadam Mk Marg, Marg, Chinchpokli, Mumbai – 400020. Mumbai – 400033. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaact0191Q Appellant .. Respondent Dcit – 8(3)(1) Vs. M/S. Tata Housing Room No. 615, Aayakar Development Company Bhavan, Ltd.,E Block, Voltas Mk Marg, Compound, Tb Kadam Mumbai – 400020. Marg, Chinchpokli, Mumbai – 400033. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaact0191Q Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri.Madhur Agarwal.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Ajay Kumar. CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

…ing income and when there is no reorganization of income then there can be no allowability of the corresponding expenditure - otherwise it would result in distortion of the matching principle - as held by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Taparia Tools 260 ITR 102 (Bom) - therefore, since it cannot be linked with the recognization of revenue - in a project completion ITA No. 3491 & 3533/Mum/2019 Tata Housing Development Co. Ltd, Mumbai method - it cannot be allowed till the project is complete and revenue recognized - thus this ground of appeal is dismissed. Reliance placed by Ld. Counsel on the following…

63 Moons Technologies Ltd. (Formerly Known As Financial Technologies (India) Ltd.), Mumbai vs. DCIT, Cent. Cir. - 8(3), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 4775/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan A.KariaFor Respondent: Shri Vatsalya Saxena
Section 14ASection 14A(1)Section 40Section 92C

…ad over the term of the bond. The assessee seeks to draw attention to last para of para 7 on page 578, and para 8, 9, 10 and 11 on page 578 and 579 of paper book 2. The assessee further relies on judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Taparia Tools, 260 ITR 102 (Bom), copy enclosed at page 581 to 598 of paper book 3. The assessee in the said case had issued debentures with upfront fee plus redemption premium and the issue was allowability of the same. The findings in the said judgment are from page 589 to 598 of paper book 3, and it was held that the upfront fee and redemption premium have to be apporti…

DCIT 1(2), Mumbai vs. Maharshtra State Electricity Board, Mumbai

In the result , the Cross Objections preferred by the assessee for the Asst Year 2004-05 is partly allowed and Cross Objections preferred by the assessee for the Asst Year 2005-06 is allowed

ITA 1649/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2021AY 2004-05
Section 143(3)Section 69

…e ground that the same was capital in nature. 7.1.Before the FAA ,during the appellate proceedings the assessee submitted that treatment given to the intangible assets was in accordance with the electricity rules. It relied upon the case of Tapadia Tools Ltd.(260 ITR 102).It was also stated that similar issue was decided in favour of the assessee by the then FAA while deciding the appeal for A.Y. 97-98. The FAA ,after considering the submission of the assessee and the assessment order, held that the details of the calculation of amounts written off towards intangible assets were not available, that the assessee w…

M/S. Ceebros Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, CC - 1 (2), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3372/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. Abani Kanta Nayak, CITFor Respondent: 09.02.2021
Section 36(1)(ii)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…on of ITAT, Mumbai Special 6 Bench in the case of Wallstreet Construction Ltd. Vs JCIT 101 ITD 156 to support his finding. The Assessing Officer has also distinguished the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s.Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs., JCIT 260 ITR 102 relied upon by the assessee on the ground although, interest expenditure is revenue in nature, but because asset was not put to use in the relevant assessment year, as per proviso to section 36(1)(iii) of the Act, said interest expenditure should be added to the cost of asset. Further, the Assessing Officer has also rejected arguments of the as…

M/S Green Pearl Electronics P Ltd, Kancheepuram vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 2 (1), Chennai

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

ITA 891/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Justice P.P.Bhatt & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं /I.T.A.Nos.890 & 891/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/S.Green Pearl Electronics P.Ltd. Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 211/1, East Potheri Village Street, Income Tax, Kattankulathur, Corporate Circle-2(1), Kanchipuram-603 203. Chennai-34. Pan: Aancs 0865M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. G.Johnson, Addl.CIT

…ed that since there was enduring benefit from the expenditure. be said expenditure is capital in nature. Reliance was placed upon Assam Bengal Cement v- CIT[1955)27 ITR 34 (sc) on the meaning of capital expenditure and on Taparia Toots Ltd v. Joint CIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (Bom ) and CIT v. Kanyakumari Dist.Co- op.Spg.Mills Ltd.(2003) 264 ITR 684 for the same purpose. 6. The counsel for the respondent-assessee has however placed reliance upon Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd v. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 802 (sc), C’T v. Printpack Machinery 248 ITR 684 (Delhi), Empire Jute Company v. CIT 124 itr 1 (SC) CIT vs…

M/S Green Pearl Electronics P Ltd, Kancheepuram vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 2 (1), Chennai

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

ITA 890/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Justice P.P.Bhatt & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं /I.T.A.Nos.890 & 891/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/S.Green Pearl Electronics P.Ltd. Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 211/1, East Potheri Village Street, Income Tax, Kattankulathur, Corporate Circle-2(1), Kanchipuram-603 203. Chennai-34. Pan: Aancs 0865M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. G.Johnson, Addl.CIT

…ed that since there was enduring benefit from the expenditure. be said expenditure is capital in nature. Reliance was placed upon Assam Bengal Cement v- CIT[1955)27 ITR 34 (sc) on the meaning of capital expenditure and on Taparia Toots Ltd v. Joint CIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (Bom ) and CIT v. Kanyakumari Dist.Co- op.Spg.Mills Ltd.(2003) 264 ITR 684 for the same purpose. 6. The counsel for the respondent-assessee has however placed reliance upon Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd v. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 802 (sc), C’T v. Printpack Machinery 248 ITR 684 (Delhi), Empire Jute Company v. CIT 124 itr 1 (SC) CIT vs…

Saint Gobain India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC - 6 (1), Chennai

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

ITA 2489/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2489/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. Saint Gobain India Pvt.Ltd. Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Sigapi Achi Building, 7Th Floor, Income Tax, 18/3, Rukmini Lakshmipathy Road, Corporate Circle-6(1), Egmore, Chennai-600 008. Chennai. Pan:Aabcs4338M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Suresh Periasamy, JCIT
Section 115JSection 195Section 35DSection 37Section 40a

…the fee and service charges does not fall within the purview of the expenditure specified under section 35D of the Act and cannot be deferred to future years. 2.8 The CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the Supreme Court in the case of Taparia Tools Limited 260 ITR 102 held that revenue expenditure incurred in particular year has to be allowed in that year and department cannot deny the same. 2.9 The CIT(A) erred in stating that the appellant has claimed deduction under section 35D of Rs.80,43,477 without appreciating that it is the deduction allowed by the AO consequent to the disallowances made in the earlier…

DCIT Cen Cir 4(3), Mumbai vs. Growmore Leasing & Investment Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 6213/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.6092, 6093 & 6091/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Growmore Leasing & बिधम/ Dcit Cen Cir 4(3) Investment Ltd. Room No. 1921, Air India Vs. 32 Madhuli Apartment, 3Rd Bldg, 19Th Floor, Nariman Floor, Dr. A. B. Rd, Worli, Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400018. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.6213, 6214 & 6215/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Dcit Cen Cir 4(3) बिधम/ Growmore Leasing & Room No. 1921, Air India Investment Ltd. Vs. Bldg, 19Th Floor, Nariman 32 Madhuli Apartment, 3Rd Point, Mumbai-400021. Floor, Dr. A. B. Rd, Worli, Mumbai-400018. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abapm4491J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Mitali Gopani Revenue By: Dr. P. Daniel सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21/09/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/12/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: The Assessee As Well As Revenue Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Different Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -52, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys. 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. Ita. No.6092/Mum/2018

For Appellant: Ms. Mitali GopaniFor Respondent: Dr. P. Daniel
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 234A

…g followed by them, (ix) the deduction of the said interest expenditure against the interest income from Term deposits is also to be allowed as per the principles of matching concept laid out by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. (260 ITR 102) and (x) this issue of interest expenditure has been adjudicated and allowed by the Tribunal in the case of the assessee as well as other notified entities. Further, the assessee has explained that as and when there are surplus funds available in the accounts of the assessee, the Hon'ble Special Court directs the Custodian to invest the same in t…

Growmore Leasing & Investment Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 4(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 6092/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.6092, 6093 & 6091/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Growmore Leasing & बिधम/ Dcit Cen Cir 4(3) Investment Ltd. Room No. 1921, Air India Vs. 32 Madhuli Apartment, 3Rd Bldg, 19Th Floor, Nariman Floor, Dr. A. B. Rd, Worli, Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400018. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.6213, 6214 & 6215/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Dcit Cen Cir 4(3) बिधम/ Growmore Leasing & Room No. 1921, Air India Investment Ltd. Vs. Bldg, 19Th Floor, Nariman 32 Madhuli Apartment, 3Rd Point, Mumbai-400021. Floor, Dr. A. B. Rd, Worli, Mumbai-400018. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abapm4491J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Mitali Gopani Revenue By: Dr. P. Daniel सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21/09/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/12/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: The Assessee As Well As Revenue Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Different Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -52, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys. 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. Ita. No.6092/Mum/2018

For Appellant: Ms. Mitali GopaniFor Respondent: Dr. P. Daniel
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 234A

…g followed by them, (ix) the deduction of the said interest expenditure against the interest income from Term deposits is also to be allowed as per the principles of matching concept laid out by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. (260 ITR 102) and (x) this issue of interest expenditure has been adjudicated and allowed by the Tribunal in the case of the assessee as well as other notified entities. Further, the assessee has explained that as and when there are surplus funds available in the accounts of the assessee, the Hon'ble Special Court directs the Custodian to invest the same in t…

M/S. Unitech Realty Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 3970/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2011-12
Section 2(22)(e)Section 250

…subsequent to its completion could not be allowed. The Ld. CIT (A), while upholding the disallowance placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, reported in [2003] 260 ITR 102 (Bombay) and held that the impugned expenditure could not be allowed as the receipts from the concerned project had already been offered to tax in the earlier assessment year. However, we find that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Gopal Das Estates & Housing Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in [2019] 103 Taxmann.com 334 M/s Unitech Realit…

DCIT 8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Housing Development Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 838/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh
Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…ing income and when there is no reorganization of income then there can be no allowability of the corresponding expenditure - otherwise it would result in distortion of the matching principle - as held by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Taparia Tools 260 ITR 102 (Bom) - therefore, since it cannot be linked with the recognization of revenue - in a project completion method - it cannot be allowed till the project is complete and revenue recognized - thus this ground of appeal is dismissed. Reliance placed by Ld. Counsel on the following decisions: (i) Tata Chemicals Ltd. 256 ITR 395 (ii) CIT Vs. Lokhandwal…

DCIT 8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Housing Development Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 837/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh
Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…ing income and when there is no reorganization of income then there can be no allowability of the corresponding expenditure - otherwise it would result in distortion of the matching principle - as held by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Taparia Tools 260 ITR 102 (Bom) - therefore, since it cannot be linked with the recognization of revenue - in a project completion method - it cannot be allowed till the project is complete and revenue recognized - thus this ground of appeal is dismissed. Reliance placed by Ld. Counsel on the following decisions: (i) Tata Chemicals Ltd. 256 ITR 395 (ii) CIT Vs. Lokhandwal…

Cascade Holdings P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 4(3), Cen RG 4, Pr. CIT(C)-2, Mumbai

ITA 6965/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6965, 6966 & 6968/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2015-16) Dcit Cc – 4(3), Cascade Holdings Pvt. R. No. 1921, Air India Ltd. बिधम/ Bldg, Nariman Point, 32, Madhuli Apartment, Vs. Mumbai 400 021. Dr. A. B. Road, Worli, Mumbai-400 018 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan No. Aaacc5768N (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6768, 6769 & 6771/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2015-16) Dcit Cc – 4(3), Cascade Holdings Pvt. R. No. 1921, Air India Ltd. बिधम/ Bldg, Nariman Point, 32, Madhuli Apartment, Vs. Mumbai 400 021. Dr. A. B. Road, Worli, Mumbai-400 018 (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Dharmesh Shah, Shri Nilesh Mehta & Ms. Mitali Gopani, Ars प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Dr. P. Daniel, Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 19.12.2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 16.03.2020 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh ShahFor Respondent: Dr. P. Daniel, DR
Section 4Section 57

…st the interest income from Term deposits is also to be allowed as per the principles of matching concept laid out by the 6 I.T.A. No. 6965, 6966 & 6968/Mum/2018& ITA No. 6768, 6769 & 6771/Mum/2018 jurisdictional High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. (260 ITR 102) and (x) this issue of interest expenditure has been adjudicated and allowed by the Tribunal in the case of the assessee as well as other notified entities. Further, the assessee has explained that as and when there are surplus funds available in the accounts of the assessee, the Hon'ble Special Court directs the Custodian to invest the same in t…