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

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, as indicated above

ITA 3644/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri G Manjunatha, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 3644/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2008-09) State Bank Of India The Dy. Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Corporate Centre Income Tax, Circle -2(2)(1) बनाम/ Madam Cama Road Mumbai Vs. Nariman Point Mumbai-400021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaacs8577K

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwalla &For Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma, CIT-DR&
Section 143(3)Section 147

…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 108 | P a g e State Bank of India ITA Nos.3644&4563/Mum/2016 Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2015] 372 ITR 605 (SC). 114. We…

The Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ADIT (It) RG-3(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3996/MUM/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Adit (It) 3(1) Vs. The Hongkong & Scindia House, Shanghai Banking R.No.132, 1St Floor Corporation Ltd N.M.Road, 52/60, Mahatma Gandhi Mumbai – 38 Road Mumbai – 400 001 Pan/Gir No. Aaact2786P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & The Hongkong & Vs. Adit (It) 3(1) Shanghai Banking Scindia House, R.No.132, 1St Floor Corporation Ltd 52/60, Mahatma Gandhi N.M.Road, Road Mumbai – 38 Mumbai – 400 001 Pan/Gir No. Aaact2786P (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 37Section 44C

…e bank V/s DCIT (Bang ITAT) -(2013) 38 taxmann.com 25); c) Bharat Earth Movers V/s CIT -245 ITR 428 (SC); d) Calcutta Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 1 (SC); e) Rotork India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 314 ITR 63 (SC); f) Taparia Tools Ltd v Joint CIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (Bom),; g) Vinitee Corporation (P) Ltd. (2005) 146 Taxman 313 (Delhi); and h) CIT v. Beema Manufacturers P. Ltd. (2003) 130 Taxman 400 (Mad) ITA No.2519/Mum/2004 and other six appeals 87. We find that the ld.CIT(A) has considered this issue with detailed discussions, we also find that an identical issue had come up before the various forums/ Judi…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ircon International Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 3805/DEL/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…ollowing decisions also- (i) Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 486 - “A provision can only be recognized when the obligation has already fructified.” (ii) Grace Shelter Vs. ACIT [2019] 104taxmann.com 133 (iii) Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (iv) DCIT Vs. Fag Bearing India Ltd. [2008] 115 ITD 53 (v) CIT Vs. Aman Khera [2016] 387 ITR 33 6.5 The decisions relied upon by the assessee, as submitted in case law compilation, are mainly in respect of provision for warranty. In those cases, the Courts have observed that there has to be scientific method/historical trend to substantiate th…

Ircon International Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 705/DEL/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2002-2003

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…ollowing decisions also- (i) Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 486 - “A provision can only be recognized when the obligation has already fructified.” (ii) Grace Shelter Vs. ACIT [2019] 104taxmann.com 133 (iii) Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (iv) DCIT Vs. Fag Bearing India Ltd. [2008] 115 ITD 53 (v) CIT Vs. Aman Khera [2016] 387 ITR 33 6.5 The decisions relied upon by the assessee, as submitted in case law compilation, are mainly in respect of provision for warranty. In those cases, the Courts have observed that there has to be scientific method/historical trend to substantiate th…

DCIT, Circle-11(1) vs. Ircon International Ltd

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 2234/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2001-2002

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…ollowing decisions also- (i) Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 486 - “A provision can only be recognized when the obligation has already fructified.” (ii) Grace Shelter Vs. ACIT [2019] 104taxmann.com 133 (iii) Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (iv) DCIT Vs. Fag Bearing India Ltd. [2008] 115 ITD 53 (v) CIT Vs. Aman Khera [2016] 387 ITR 33 6.5 The decisions relied upon by the assessee, as submitted in case law compilation, are mainly in respect of provision for warranty. In those cases, the Courts have observed that there has to be scientific method/historical trend to substantiate th…

Ircon International Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 3804/DEL/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…ollowing decisions also- (i) Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 486 - “A provision can only be recognized when the obligation has already fructified.” (ii) Grace Shelter Vs. ACIT [2019] 104taxmann.com 133 (iii) Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (iv) DCIT Vs. Fag Bearing India Ltd. [2008] 115 ITD 53 (v) CIT Vs. Aman Khera [2016] 387 ITR 33 6.5 The decisions relied upon by the assessee, as submitted in case law compilation, are mainly in respect of provision for warranty. In those cases, the Courts have observed that there has to be scientific method/historical trend to substantiate th…

Ircon International Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, Range-11

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 1825/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2001-2002

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…ollowing decisions also- (i) Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 486 - “A provision can only be recognized when the obligation has already fructified.” (ii) Grace Shelter Vs. ACIT [2019] 104taxmann.com 133 (iii) Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2003] 260 ITR 102 (iv) DCIT Vs. Fag Bearing India Ltd. [2008] 115 ITD 53 (v) CIT Vs. Aman Khera [2016] 387 ITR 33 6.5 The decisions relied upon by the assessee, as submitted in case law compilation, are mainly in respect of provision for warranty. In those cases, the Courts have observed that there has to be scientific method/historical trend to substantiate th…

Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait B.S.C, Mumbai vs. Addl DIT (It) 3, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2323/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Ravish Soodita No. 2323/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year: 2008-09) Bank Of Bahrain & Kuwait Asst. Director Of Income Tax B.S.C. Jolly Maker Chambers Ii, (International Taxation) -3(2) 225, Nariman Point, Vs Mumbai. Mumbai – 400 021

For Appellant: Shri Farrokh V. Irani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 44C

…in the case of Vijaya Bank (Supra). Before the Tribunal the department had placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of American Express International Banking Corporation v CIT (258 ITR 602) and Taparia Tools Ltd. v. ]CIT ( 260 ITR 102). These two judgments have been considered by the Tribunal in paragraphs 14 to 17 of the order cited above and it was held that these judgments are not applicable to the facts of Union Bank's case. In paragraphs 20 & 21 to the Tribunal has also considered the objection of the department that the assessee cannot credit the interest on Govt. securi…

A.C.I.T Cir - 2(2), Kolkata vs. M/S West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1952/KOL/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Apr 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1952/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2004-05) Acit, Circle-2(2), Kolkata Vs. M/S West Bengal State Electricity Board (Now Renamed West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. )

For Appellant: Shri RadheyShyam, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Poddar, Sr. Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 4

…late to transactions pertaining to an earlier accounting year ... " 12.In CIT V. Bilahari Investment P. Ltd., [2008] 299 ITR 1 (SC), while dealing with accounting standards, their Lordships referred to the decisions in Taporia Tools Ltd. v. Joint CIT, [2003] 260 ITR 102 (Bombay) and J.K. Industries Ltd. v. Union of India, [2007] 13 Scale 204 and thereafter adverted to the recognition and identification of income under the 1961 Act as is attainable by several methods of accounting. Their Lordships referred to the completed contractmethod and the percentage of completion method which were the issues in the said ca…

M/S Ashoka Hi-Tech Builders P. Ltd., Indore vs. The DCIT (Central)-1, Indore

In the result Ground No.1 and 2 of the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 686/IND/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

…heir Lordship’s have considered these methods as methods of accounting and has placed its seal of approval upon completed contract method also. Their Lordship’s approving the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. V/s JCIT reported in 260 ITR 102 have held that in every case of substitution of one method to another the burden is upon 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 accrual of income , the method of 24 Ashoka Hi-Tech Builders Pvt.Ltd ITA No.121/Ind/2016 &686/Ind…

DCIT, CC-I, Chandigarh vs. M/S D.D. Global Capital Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1610/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri. Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri. Kultej Singh Bains
Section 14A

…invested Rs. 29,96,34,120/- as per the balance sheet. On perusal of the record, we find that the assessee has not earned any exempt income. The Assessing Officer has resorted to the matching principles as enunciated in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd. Vs. JCIT 260 ITR 102 wherein it was held as under: “Under this matching concept, revenue and income earned during an accounting period irrespective of actual cash in-flow, is required to be compared with expenses incurred during the same period, irrespective of actual out-flow of cash. In this case, the assessee is following the mercantile system of accounting. This…

Nielsen (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed, as above

ITA 4168/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Gosain: (A.Y : 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri Girish Dave &For Respondent: Shri T.A. Khan
Section 143(3)

…a period of time. Considering the aforesaid, we find no reason to deny the claim of assessee for deduction of the impugned expenditure. 8. Before parting, we may also refer to the judgments of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd., 260 ITR 102 (Bom) and Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd., 225 ITR 802 (Bom), which have been referred to by the CIT(A). In our considered opinion, the ratio of the aforesaid decisions have no relevance so far as the instant controversy is concerned which is required to be adjudicated on the principles of consistency as well as on the basis of the…

Soutchco India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) RG 3, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed is allowed

ITA 34/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Southco India Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of 8, Candy House, Mandik Income Tax, Range 1(3), Vs. Road, Colaba, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400001. Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaics9770N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Chandra Shekar, Ar Revenue By : Mr. V. Justin, Dr Date Of Hearing : 22/02/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 11/04/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Chandra Shekar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. V. Justin, DR
Section 143Section 43B

…e was following mercantile system of accounting during the impugned assessment year. As per the chart depicted hereinbefore the liability was created by the assessee on 31.03.2011. 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 as follows: "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 actual…

Mehta Jaising Builders, Mumbai vs. DCIT 19(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 125/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2007-08 Mehta Jaising Builders Dcit- Circle -19(1) 398, Kirti Kunj, 14Th Road, Vs. Piramal Chambers, Khar (W) Lalbaug, Mumbai-400052. Mumbai-400012. Pan No. Aabtm7681C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Sameer G. Dalal, Ar Revenue By : Mr. M.C. Omi Ningshen, Dr Date Of Hearing : 02/02/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Sameer G. Dalal, ARFor Respondent: Mr. M.C. Omi Ningshen, DR
Section 143(3)Section 194Section 203

…have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. The reasons for our decisions are given below. The appellant follows mercantile method 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 as follows: "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 actual…

DCIT - 3(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Kuoni Travels (I) Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, Ground no.5 & 6 of the appeal are dismissed

ITA 1924/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2018AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran,Accountant Mamber & Shri Pawan Singhdcit 3(3)(1), M/S Sotc Travel Services Pvt. Room No. 609, 6Th Floor, Ltd. (Previously Known As Kuoni Aayakar Bhavan, Travels (India) Pvt. Ltd.),Now Mumbai-400020. Vs. Merged With Travel Corporation (India) Ltd. Kuoni House, N.F. Road, Behind Taj Mahal Hotel, Colaba, Mumbai-400001 Pan: Aaacs0170L (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S Sotc Travel Services Pvt. Dcit 3(3)(1), Room No. 609, 6Th Floor, Ltd. (Previously Known As Kuoni Travels (India) Pvt. Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd.),Now Merged With Travel Mumbai-400020. Corporation (India) Ltd. Kuoni Vs. House, N.F. Road, Behind Taj Mahal Hotel, Colaba, Mumbai-400001 Pan: Aaacs0170L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri S. Padmaja CIT –DR with & with Ms Pooja Swaroop ( Sr
Section 253Section 254(1)Section 80HSection 8O

…avels (India) Pvt. Ltd. Tribunal in Hidelberg Cement India Ltd. v/s ACIT [2015] 55 taxmann.com 336(Mumbai Trib). It was further argued that learned Commissioner (Appeals) relied upon the decision of Bombay High Court in Taparia Tools Ltd Versus JCIT[2003] 260 ITR 102/126 Taxman 544 (Bombay) which has been reversed by Hon’ble Supreme Court vide [2015] 372 ITR 605(SC). On the other hand the ld. DR supported the order of Assessing Officer. It was argued that agreement entered by assessee with Anita Shirodkar provides benefits to the assessee, which is enduring in nature. However, for agreement with Arjun Sharm…

Ask Property Investment Advisors P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst Cir 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1810/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am

Section 143(3)

…53,023/-. The disputed portion is 6/7th portion of expenditure before us i.e Rs 8,67,18,139/-. The ld AO in support of his contention had placed reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd vs JCIT reported in 260 ITR 102 (Bom) among others. We find that this decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court had been subsequently reversed by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd vs JCIT reported in 372 ITR 605 (SC) . The brief facts of this case and decision rendered thereon are as below:- 5. In the assessment orders passed by the LD AO, the assessee's c…

Acnielsen Research Services P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as pronounced in the open court in the presence of both the parties at the conclusion of hearing on 29th May, 2017

ITA 2388/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh: (A.Y : 2008-09) Acnielsen Research Services Vs. Addl. Cit, Range 5(1), Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai (Respondent) 6Th Floor, Godrej It Park, 02 Godraj Business District, Phirojshanagar, Lbs Marg, Vikroli (W), Mumbai 400 079 Pan : Aadca0218N (Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Girish DaveFor Respondent: Shri Ajai Pratap Singh
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : (A.Y : 2008-09) ACNielsen Research Services Vs. Addl. CIT, Range 5(1), Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai (Respondent) 6th floor, Godrej IT Park, 02 Godraj Business District, Phirojshanagar, LBS Marg, Vikroli (W), Mumbai 400 079 PAN : AADCA0218N (Appellant) Appellant by : Shri Girish Dave Respondent by : Shri Ajai Pratap Singh Date of Hearing : 29/05/2017 Date of Pronouncement : 29/05/2017 O R D E R PER G.S. PANNU, AM : The captioned appeal by the assessee is directed against the o…

A.C.I.T. Circle 6(1), Mumbai vs. Inx Media Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 7216/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sandeep Gosainacit, Circle 6(1), फनाभ/ M/S. Inx Media Pvt Ltd., R.No.506, 5 Th Floor, 3Rd Floor, Inx House, Apsara Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Complex, Dr. Dadasaheb C Mumbai – 20. Bhadmarkar Marg, Grand Road (E), Mumbai – 400 007. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aabc15594D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. M/S. Inx Media Pvt Ltd., फनाभ/ Acit, Circle 6(1), 3Rd Floor, Inx House, Apsara R.No.506, 5 Th Floor, Vs. Complex, Dr. Dadasaheb C Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Bhadmarkar Marg, Grand Road Mumbai – 20. (E), Mumbai – 400 007. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aabc15594D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Shishir Dhamija, CIT-DR
Section 32Section 68

…, Rs. 11,73,02,688/- is allowed and the balance of Rs. 58,65,13,438/- is added to the income of the assessee. AO relied upon the Apex Court judgment in the case of M.I.I.C Ltd (225 ITR 802) (SC) and Bombay High Court judgment in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd (260 ITR 102) (Bom). AO is guided by the nature of expenditure ie sponsoring of Indo-Pak series 2007 (Rs. 4.8 Crs), launch expenditure (Rs. 0.60 crore) etc. AO is of the view that these expenditure helps in brand building of „INX Media‟ or „9X Channel‟. 15. However, FAA analysed each of these expenditure (para 5-8 to 5-9) and held that these are revenue in na…

F Harley & Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. The CIT, 1, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 864/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Avinash Mishra, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 36(1)(va)

…ot make it any less vulnerable to correction u/s 263 of the Act. 9 F.Harley & Co. Pvt. Ltd.., AY 2011-12 7.3. We also find that the decision relied upon by the ld AR on the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd vs JCIT reported in (2003) 260 ITR 102 (Bom) on the principles of matching concept is squarely applicable to the facts of the instant case. It was held that :- A. Matching concept 22. 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 t…

Religare Technova Global Solutions Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Cir 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 245/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri N. K. Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna & Shri RaviFor Respondent: Shri Prakash R. Mane,DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…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 mercantile system of accounting, profits arising or accruing at the date of the transaction are liable to be taxed notwithstanding the fact that they…