Toyo Engg. India Ltd. v. JCIT

5 SOT 616Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2006#4315 most cited

What is Toyo Engg. India Ltd. v. JCIT authority for?

Tax deducted at source (TDS) is a method of collection, not a levy of tax. Credit for TDS can be granted even if the corresponding income is not yet assessable, as long as the assessee follows a consistent method of accounting.

28

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Toyo Engg. India Ltd · JCIT · 5 SOT 616 · 100 TTJ 373 · ITAT · credit for tds · section 199 · tax deducted at source · section 145 · consistency in accounting

Also reported as

100 TTJ 373

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 194Section 263Section 8D

Issues it is cited on

section 199credit for tdspercentage completion methodtax deducted at sourcerule of consistencysection 19section 145revenue expenditurecapital expendituresection 115jbsection 154section 263

Judgments citing Toyo Engg. India Ltd. v. JCIT

IMPERIAL HOUSING VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. PR, CIT CENTRAL DELHI-2, DELHI

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

ITA 2345/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaimperial Housing Ventures Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Pr.Cit (Central), Room No.205, Welcome Plaza, Delhi-2. Sector 54, Golf Course Road, Shakarpur, East Delhi, Delhi – 110 092. (Pan : Aacci2023E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate Shri Shailesh Gupta, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.04.2025 Date Of Order : 30.06.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman:

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 194Section 199

…implied that the nexus between TDS and the corresponding income element would remain rather notional/conceptual. In this connection, reference is made to the Mumbai Tribunal decision in the case of Toyo Engineering India Ltd. vs. JCIT SR 27 reported in (2006) 5 SOT 616 (Mum), copy enclosed The provisions of section relating to deduction of tax at source are not charging sections or computation section unless and until it is followed by an assessment order 4 making a charge of tax. The deduction of tax is not a levy of tax. Deduction of taxis tax at source is merely one of the mode of collection of tax. The amoun…

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-1(3), NAGPUR vs. M/S SPACEWOOD FURNISHERS PVT. LTD , NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 163/NAG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur11 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 154

…the appellant was chargeable to tax at maximum rates for both the relevant financial years. The appellant placed reliance on following decisions:  CIT v. Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd (74 Taxmann.com 163) (Gujarat HC);  Toyo Engg. India Ltd v. JCIT (100 TTJ 373) (Mumbai ITAT). 5.4 The appellant alternatively submitted that, issue regarding the allowability or otherwise of prior period expenses can only be decided by making full investigation and examination of the nature of expenses and only then it could be decided after such due process of reasoning given by any authority. Thus, in any case the issue…

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

…ar, adjustments were made, that such method of accounting was regularly followed by the assessee since inception and was allowed by the AO in the earlier AYs. He relied upon the orders of Jagatjit Industries Ltd., (194 Taxman 158) and Toyo Engg. India Ltd., [(5 SOT 616 (Mumbai Tribunal)]. DR submitted that treatment give by the assessee for prior period expenses was not as per the matching number. 11. We have heard the rival submissions. There is no doubt that assessees, following the Mercantile system of accounting should take care of all expenses of that particular AY while preparing the Books of Accounts of t…

DY CIT-1(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

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

ITA 3916/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Mr. Sushil LakhaniFor Respondent: Mrs. Riddhi Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s The Maharashtra State Co op. ITO-1(3)(3), Bank Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 9, Sir Vithaldas Thackersey Memorial Vs. M.K. Road, Bldg. Maharashtra Chamber of Mumbai-400020. Commerce Lane, Fort, Mumbai-400001. PAN No. AAAAT 4066 A Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dy. CIT-1(3)(2), M/s The Maharashtra State Co op. Room No. 540, 5th floor, Bank Ltd., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 9, Sir Vithaldas Thackersey Mumbai-400020. Mem…

M/S THE MAHARASHTRA STATE CO. OP BANK LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO-1(3)(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 3878/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Mr. Sushil LakhaniFor Respondent: Mrs. Riddhi Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s The Maharashtra State Co op. ITO-1(3)(3), Bank Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 9, Sir Vithaldas Thackersey Memorial Vs. M.K. Road, Bldg. Maharashtra Chamber of Mumbai-400020. Commerce Lane, Fort, Mumbai-400001. PAN No. AAAAT 4066 A Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dy. CIT-1(3)(2), M/s The Maharashtra State Co op. Room No. 540, 5th floor, Bank Ltd., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 9, Sir Vithaldas Thackersey Mumbai-400020. Mem…

DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI vs. HCL COMNET SYSTEMS & SERVICES LTD., GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR

In the result, Appeal filed by the Assess in ITA No

ITA 6360/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Sh. Aditya Vohra, Adv & ShFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Ld. DR
Section 115J

…nancial year(s). Further, it was submitted that this is purely a case of timing difference only and there has been no loss to Revenue. The assessee relied on the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Toyo Engg. India Ltd vs. JCIT: [2006] 5 SOT 616 (Mum). 10. The AO disallowed TDS on deferred revenue by holding that if corresponding income is not taxable in a particular year, then corresponding credit for tax deducted may not be granted in view of section 199 of the Act, in that year. Further, the AO held that merely because credit was claimed for tax deducted at source, it does not mean tha…

HCL COMNET LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-11(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Assess in ITA No

ITA 5968/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Sh. Aditya Vohra, Adv & ShFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Ld. DR
Section 115J

…nancial year(s). Further, it was submitted that this is purely a case of timing difference only and there has been no loss to Revenue. The assessee relied on the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Toyo Engg. India Ltd vs. JCIT: [2006] 5 SOT 616 (Mum). 10. The AO disallowed TDS on deferred revenue by holding that if corresponding income is not taxable in a particular year, then corresponding credit for tax deducted may not be granted in view of section 199 of the Act, in that year. Further, the AO held that merely because credit was claimed for tax deducted at source, it does not mean tha…

HCL COMNET SYSTEMS & SERVICES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Assess in ITA No

ITA 5967/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Sh. Aditya Vohra, Adv & ShFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Ld. DR
Section 115J

…nancial year(s). Further, it was submitted that this is purely a case of timing difference only and there has been no loss to Revenue. The assessee relied on the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Toyo Engg. India Ltd vs. JCIT: [2006] 5 SOT 616 (Mum). 10. The AO disallowed TDS on deferred revenue by holding that if corresponding income is not taxable in a particular year, then corresponding credit for tax deducted may not be granted in view of section 199 of the Act, in that year. Further, the AO held that merely because credit was claimed for tax deducted at source, it does not mean tha…

BRIJ GOPAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY P LTD. ,DELHI vs. ACIT SPECIAL RANGE-2, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 813/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2015-16 Brij Gopal Construction Company P. Ltd., Vs Acit, A-7/2, Shivaji Apartment, Sector-14, Special Range-2, Rohini, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 085. Pan: Aadcb7702J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms Monika Aggarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Princy Singhla, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 10.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.05.2023 Order Per M. Balaganesh, Am: This Appeal In Ita No.813/Del/2022 For Ay 2015-16 Arises Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, New [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit(A)’, In Short] In Appeal No.Cit(A), Delhi-2/10198/2019-20 Dated 07.03.2022 Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 09.12.2017 By The Ld. Assessing Officer, Spl. Range-2, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Ao’). 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: Ms Monika Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Princy Singhla, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 154

…by M/s. Gammon India Limited. Therefore, the credit of the same is to be allowed to the assessee. The contentions of the assesses were examined by the CIT(A) and following the order of the Tribunal, Mumbai Bench in the case of Toyo Engineering India Limited, 5 SOT 616 directed the A.O. to allow the credit of TDS in the year under consideration. 6. ……Undisputedly, the tax was deducted at the source on payment of the mobilization amount though this mobilization amount is merely an advance given to the assessee and not chargeable to tax. But once the tax is deducted on any payment made to the assessee, though it is…

HCL COMNET LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1113/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmahcl Comnet Limited Vs. Dcit, 806, Sidharth, Circle-11(1), 96, Nehru Place, Room No. 416, New Delhi C.R.Building, Pan : Aach9667H New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 254(2)

…evenue of Rs. 60,73,52,860/- the assessee company has claimed TDS of Rs. 2,48,71,145/- and being dissatisfied observed as follows; “I have considered the plea of the assessee company and also the decision referred in the case of M/s Toyo engineering India Ltd[5 SOT 616] and of the view that the case of M/s Toyo engineering India Ltdis totally different. In this case, the company was recognizing revenue on percentage completion method but in the instant case the company is recognizing revenue as per actual transaction made. In the case of revenue recognition there is no specific revenue that has to be credited to…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION OF INDIA, NEW DELHI

ITA 4108/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ishtiyaque Ahmed, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 139(5)Section 14ASection 194HSection 40Section 41(1)Section 43Section 43(5)(d)Section 43BSection 72

…ion in the tax audit report does not necessarily lead to disallowance . Reliance in this regard is placed upon following case laws: Saurashtra Cement and Chemical Industries Ltd . 213 ITR¬ 523 (Guj) Egmore Benefit Societyl48 CTR 158 (Mad .)¬ Toyo Engg . Ltd . 5 SOT 616 (Mum)¬ Issue regarding allowability o f prior period expenses came up for consideration for the ITAT in the case of appellant itself for A.Y . 1984-85 in ITA No. 2296/D/88. The tribunal vide its order dated 12-08-91 upheld the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on this count and for A.Y . 2004-05 came up for…

KANTILAL JAIN,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 579/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri B.R. Sudheendra, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 143(1)Section 194DSection 234BSection 234CSection 250

…ant has placed his reliance on the decision of the Delhi Tribunal in DCIT vs. Lloyd Insulation (India) Ltd. in ITA No. 2400/De1/11 decision dated 9.8.2012 in this connection, similar principle have been upheld in the case of Toyo Engg India Ltd v. JCIT [2006] 5 SOT 616 (MUM.) wherein the Tribunal observed as follows-"Tax deduction at source is basically a machinery provision for collecting tax on the potential income of the assessee. There is no such conclusive presumption that tax is invariably deducted always out of income; that is why the expression 'tax deducted at source' has been used in the Act, rather tha…

DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI vs. HCL COMNET SYSTEMS & SERVICES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 447/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Aditya Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. R. J. Pradip Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 35Section 37

…nancial year(s). Further, it was submitted that this is purely a case of timing difference only and there has been no loss to Revenue. The assessee relied on the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Toyo Engg. India Ltd vs. JCIT: [2006] 5 SOT 616 (Mum). 10. The AO disallowed TDS on deferred revenue by holding that if corresponding income is not taxable in a particular year, then HCL Comnet Systems & Services Ltd. corresponding credit for tax deducted may not be granted in view of section 199 of the Act, in that year. Further, the AO held that merely because credit was claimed for tax deduc…

HCL COMNET SYSTEMS & SERVICES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8168/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Aditya Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. R. J. Pradip Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 35Section 37

…nancial year(s). Further, it was submitted that this is purely a case of timing difference only and there has been no loss to Revenue. The assessee relied on the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Toyo Engg. India Ltd vs. JCIT: [2006] 5 SOT 616 (Mum). 10. The AO disallowed TDS on deferred revenue by holding that if corresponding income is not taxable in a particular year, then HCL Comnet Systems & Services Ltd. corresponding credit for tax deducted may not be granted in view of section 199 of the Act, in that year. Further, the AO held that merely because credit was claimed for tax deduc…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION OF INDIA, NEW DELHI

ITA 4107/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4107/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Acit, Vs National Agricultural Cooperative Circle-54(1), Marketing Federation Of India, New Delhi Nafed House, Ashram Chowk, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaan4629F Assessee By : Sh. Hiren Mehta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Satpal Gulati, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.03.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Hiren Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT DR
Section 40

…on in the tax audit report does not necessarily lead to disallowance. Reliance in this regard is placed upon following case laws:  Saurashtra Cement and Chemical Industries Ltd. 213 ITR 523 (Guj)  Egmore Benefit Societyl48 CTR 158 (Mad.)  Toyo Engg. Ltd. 5 SOT 616 (Mum) Issue regarding allowability of prior period expenses came up for consideration for the ITAT in the case of appellant itself for A.Y. 1984-85 in ITA No. 2296/D/88. The tribunal vide its order dated 12-08-91 upheld the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on this count and for A.Y. 2004-05 came up for co…

DCIT vs. SASKEN NETWORK ENGG. LTD.,,

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is allowed

ITA 547/BANG/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jul 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2007-08 The Deputy Commissioner Vs. M/S. Sasken Network Engineering Limited, Of Income Tax, No.139/25, Amarjyothi Layout, Circle - 12(3), 14/3, 4Th Floor, Rastrothana Ring Road, Domlur, Bhavan (Opp. Rbi), Nrupathunga Road, Bengaluru-560071. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaics 4405 Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Smt. R. Premi, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Respondent By : Shri. C. Narayan, Ca Date Of Hearing : 07.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.07.2021 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevanthis Is An Appeal By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 30.01.2013 Of Cit(Appeals)-Iii, Bengaluru, Relating To Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. The Facts & Circumstances Under Which The Said Appeal By The Revenue Arises For Consideration Are The Assessee Is A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act, 1956 & Engaged Inter Alia In The Business Of Installation & Commissioning Services. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income ('Rol') Under Section 139(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Act') On October 31, 2007 Declaring Taxable Income Of Rs 3,05,04,940 On Which Taxes Of Rs 1,02,67,963 Were Payable. On Account Of Credit For Taxes Deducted At Source (Tds') Amounting To Rs 1,21,26,857 & Self Assessment Tax Amounting To Rs 1,60,0000 A Page 2 Of 9 Refund Of Rs 34,58,894 Was Claimed. The Rol Was Selected For Scrutiny & The Assessment Was Concluded Vide Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Act Dated December 17, 2009 Wherein Income Returned By The Assessee In The Rol Was Accepted By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 12(3) (A0).

For Appellant: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), BengaluruFor Respondent: Shri. C. Narayan, CA
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 154

…axable in his hands. In the present case, the assessee has not explained as to the status of the income as reflected in the TDS certificate. The other decision cited by the learned Counsel for the assessee in the case of Toyo Engg. India Ltd., Vs. DCIT (2006) 5 SOT 616 (Bombay) is contrary to the law laid down in 3rd Member decision in the case of Pradeep Kumar Dhir (supra). The decision of Page 9 of 9 the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of M/s. Bhooratnam and Co. 357 ITR 396 was a case where TDS certificates of an assessee were in the name of joint venture partners and credit was not given by the D…

M/S ABB AB,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee appeals for A

ITA 464/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(I.T)A Nos.464/Bang/2018 & 2878/Bang/2019 (Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S. Abb Ab C/O Abb India Limited, 21St Floor, World Trade Centre, Dr. Rajkumar Road, Malleshwaram (West), Bangalore-560 055 ….Appellant Pan Aafca9560R Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, (International Taxation) Circle 1(1), Bangalore. ……Respondent. Assessee By: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Advocate. Revenue By: Shri S. Sundar Rajan, Addl. Cit (D.R) & Shri K.V. Arvind, Standing Counsel For Department.

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Sundar Rajan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 199Section 2Section 250Section 90

…gement of this Hyderabad Tribunal in the case of Progressive Constructions Limited Vs. JCIT ITA 482 and 557/Hyd/2001 and the order of the Tribunal of Chennai Bench in the case of Supreme Renewable Energy Limited Vs. ITO 32 DTR 140 and Toyo Engineering Limited 5 SOT 616 in which the Tribunal has taken a consistent view that the credit of TDS should be given in the year of receipt. The facts of the case of M/s. Progressive Constructions Ltd. (supra) and Toyo Engineering India Limited (supra) are almost similar to that of the present case. In the case of Supreme Renewable Energy Limited (supra), the Tribunal has hel…

DY.C.I.T. 1, BHILAI(CG) vs. SHRI SANDEEP SURENDRAN NAIR, BHILAI(CG)

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

ITA 318/BIL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury,Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.222& 318/Rpr/2014 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11& 2011-12

For Appellant: ShriMakarand Joshi and ShriAniruddhaKavimandanFor Respondent: Smt. AnubhaTahGoel
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 43B

…in s. 199 does not provide for any such casualty.” The CIT(A) further after relying on the following decisions; deleted the addition made by Assessing Officer. a) Toyo Engg. India Ltd. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (2006) 100 TTJ (Mumbai) 373 : (2006) 5 SOT 616 (Mumbai) A.Y. 2010-11 & 2011-12 b) Transmission Corporation of AP Ltd. &Anr. Vs. CIT (1999) 239 ITR 587 (SC) c) ITO Vs. T.G. Veeraraghavan (2007) 110 TTJ (Coch) 708. 6. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), Revenue is now in appeal before us. 7. Before us, Ld. DRtook us through the order of Assessing Officer and supported the order of Assessing Office…

DY.C.I.T. 1 vs. SHRI SANDEEP SURENDRAN NAIR, BHILAI(CG)

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

ITA 222/BIL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury,Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.222& 318/Rpr/2014 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11& 2011-12

For Appellant: ShriMakarand Joshi and ShriAniruddhaKavimandanFor Respondent: Smt. AnubhaTahGoel
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 43B

…in s. 199 does not provide for any such casualty.” The CIT(A) further after relying on the following decisions; deleted the addition made by Assessing Officer. a) Toyo Engg. India Ltd. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (2006) 100 TTJ (Mumbai) 373 : (2006) 5 SOT 616 (Mumbai) A.Y. 2010-11 & 2011-12 b) Transmission Corporation of AP Ltd. &Anr. Vs. CIT (1999) 239 ITR 587 (SC) c) ITO Vs. T.G. Veeraraghavan (2007) 110 TTJ (Coch) 708. 6. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), Revenue is now in appeal before us. 7. Before us, Ld. DRtook us through the order of Assessing Officer and supported the order of Assessing Office…

MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 6(3), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal and cross objection are partly allowed and Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5202/MUM/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ravish Sood (Jm)

Section 14ASection 37(1)

…013/ Mum/2001 and 3863/Mum/2006) (Bombay Trib.) d. Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Co. Ltd. v/s. ACIT in ITA. No. 2212/Mum/2011 (BombayTrib.) e. Sterlite Industries India Ltd. (2006) 6 SOT 497 (Bombay Trib.) f. Toyo Engineering India Ltd. (2006) 5 SOT 616 (Bombay Trib.) g. Bank of India v DCIT (2012) 139 ITD 493 (Bombay Trib.) 4. In the current year, the prior period expenses constitute only 0.43% of total revenue. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in the case of Escorts Ltd. v/s. ACIT reported in (2004) 89 TTJ page 221 wherein it has been h…

Showing 1–20 of 28 · Page 1 of 2