UCO Bank v. CIT

200 ITR 68High Court#8850 most cited

What is UCO Bank v. CIT authority for?

An assessee can prepare a computation of income for tax purposes using a method different from how it maintains its accounts, as long as the adopted method is consistent and regular. The real taxable income is what is subject to income tax.

12

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also referred to as

UCO Bank v CIT · 200 ITR 68 · Calcutta HC · accounting method · computation of income · tax purposes · real taxable income · statutory provisions · banking regulation act · consistent accounting

Judgments citing UCO Bank v. CIT

Standard Chartered Grindlays Bank Ltd vs. Dy. Director of Income Tax & Ors

ITA/496/2018HC Delhi16 Jan 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

Section 36Section 44C

…ch of the ITAT in the case of Inspecting Assistant Commissioner vs. Goodricke Group Ltd. reported in 12 ITD 1 (Calcutta). It was further submitted that the learned AO had relied upon the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in the case of UCO Bank Vs. CIT (200 ITR 68) for making this disallowance. That judgement had subsequently been reversed by the Supreme Court in 240 ITR 355(SC), Reliance was placed on Article 7 of the Indo- Australian Double Taxation Avoidance Treaty under which the Business Profits of Permanent Establishment (PE) in India were to be computed. Under Article 7 of the aforesaid Treaty…

Director of Income Tax vs. Standard Chartered Grindalys Bank Ltd

ITA/615/2009HC Delhi19 Sept 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

…igh Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/10/2024 at 11:32:50 ITA 563/2007 & connected matters Page 10 of 12 upon the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in the case of UCO Bank Vs. CIT (200 ITR 68) for making this disallowance. That judgement had subsequently been reversed by the Supreme Court in 240 ITR 355(SC), Reliance was placed on Article 7 of the Indo- Australian Double Taxation Avoidance Treaty under which the Business Profits of Permanent Establishment (PE) in India were to be computed. Under Article 7 of the aforesaid Treaty th…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Anz Grindlays Bank Ltd

ITA/1300/2007HC Delhi19 Sept 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

…igh Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/10/2024 at 11:32:50 ITA 563/2007 & connected matters Page 10 of 12 upon the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in the case of UCO Bank Vs. CIT (200 ITR 68) for making this disallowance. That judgement had subsequently been reversed by the Supreme Court in 240 ITR 355(SC), Reliance was placed on Article 7 of the Indo- Australian Double Taxation Avoidance Treaty under which the Business Profits of Permanent Establishment (PE) in India were to be computed. Under Article 7 of the aforesaid Treaty th…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Standard Chartered Grindlays Ltd

ITA/387/2019HC Delhi19 Sept 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

…igh Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/10/2024 at 11:32:52 ITA 563/2007 & connected matters Page 10 of 12 upon the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in the case of UCO Bank Vs. CIT (200 ITR 68) for making this disallowance. That judgement had subsequently been reversed by the Supreme Court in 240 ITR 355(SC), Reliance was placed on Article 7 of the Indo- Australian Double Taxation Avoidance Treaty under which the Business Profits of Permanent Establishment (PE) in India were to be computed. Under Article 7 of the aforesaid Treaty th…

Director of Income Tax vs. Standard Chartered Grindlays Bank Ltd

ITA/629/2009HC Delhi19 Sept 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

…igh Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/10/2024 at 11:32:50 ITA 563/2007 & connected matters Page 10 of 12 upon the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in the case of UCO Bank Vs. CIT (200 ITR 68) for making this disallowance. That judgement had subsequently been reversed by the Supreme Court in 240 ITR 355(SC), Reliance was placed on Article 7 of the Indo- Australian Double Taxation Avoidance Treaty under which the Business Profits of Permanent Establishment (PE) in India were to be computed. Under Article 7 of the aforesaid Treaty th…

Asst CIT Cir 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

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

ITA 4564/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: S/Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/w Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Ms. Surabhi Sharma
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…ch is altogether different from the manner in which entries are made in its accounts, we may notice the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of United Commercial Bank in 240 ITR 355(SC). While reversing the judgment of the Calcutta High Court reported in 200 ITR 68 (Cal), wherein it was held that the assessee cannot prepare the computation of its income fro income tax purposes in a manner different form the method under which it keeps accounts. It was held by the Supreme court that preparation of the balance sheet in accordance with the statutory provisions of the banking Regulation Act would not disentitle…

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

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

ITA 3645/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: S/Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/w Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Ms. Surabhi Sharma
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…ch is altogether different from the manner in which entries are made in its accounts, we may notice the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of United Commercial Bank in 240 ITR 355(SC). While reversing the judgment of the Calcutta High Court reported in 200 ITR 68 (Cal), wherein it was held that the assessee cannot prepare the computation of its income fro income tax purposes in a manner different form the method under which it keeps accounts. It was held by the Supreme court that preparation of the balance sheet in accordance with the statutory provisions of the banking Regulation Act would not disentitle…

Indian Overseas Bank, Chennai vs. JCIT, Chennai

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

ITA 781/CHNY/2001[1991-92]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2022AY 1991-92

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 780 & 781/Chny/2001 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 1990-91 & 1991-92

For Appellant: Shri C. Naresh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Clement Kumar Ramesh, CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147

…whereas it has been valued on the basis of market value or cost price whichever s less for the purpose of Incometax. The method adopted by the assessee is distorting the profit shown for the Incometax. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in CIT v/s UCO Bank Ltd (200 ITR 68) stated that the assessee cannot follow one method in accounts and another for tax purposes. In this way, the claim of depreciation amounting to Rs.14,89,42,190/- cannot be sustained in the eye of law. In this way, I have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped in respect of the aforesaid line.” Similar are the reasons recorde…

Indian Overseas Bank, Chennai vs. JCIT, Chennai

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

ITA 780/CHNY/2001[1990-91]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2022AY 1990-91

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 780 & 781/Chny/2001 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 1990-91 & 1991-92

For Appellant: Shri C. Naresh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Clement Kumar Ramesh, CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147

…whereas it has been valued on the basis of market value or cost price whichever s less for the purpose of Incometax. The method adopted by the assessee is distorting the profit shown for the Incometax. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in CIT v/s UCO Bank Ltd (200 ITR 68) stated that the assessee cannot follow one method in accounts and another for tax purposes. In this way, the claim of depreciation amounting to Rs.14,89,42,190/- cannot be sustained in the eye of law. In this way, I have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped in respect of the aforesaid line.” Similar are the reasons recorde…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Leasemen Fin-Vest India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4860/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Vs. Leasemen Fin-Vest India Circle-15(1), Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi 301, Vardhman Plaza, Plot No. 14, Road No. 44, Pitampur Community Centre, New Delhi Pan: Aaacl0389A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 14A

…ent method as it does not recognize the revenue which has not been earned by the assessee. Further it was not shown by the revenue that how the change in the method of the valuation of the closing stock is not bona fides. The decision of Calcuta High Court in 200 ITR 68 relied upon by the ld AO supports the case of the assessee as assessee was following valuation method of „At cost‟ which is changed to „At cost or market value whichever is less‟ is more prudent. In view of this, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned Commissioner of income tax ACIT Vs. Leasemen Fin-Vest India Pvt. Ltd appeals. A…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 2(2)

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4736/MUM/2010[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2018AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhstate Bank Of India Acit Circle (2)(2), Financial Reporting, Compliance & Mumbai. Taxation Department, 19Th Floor, Vs. Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit Circle (2)(2), State Bank Of India Mumbai. Financial Reporting, Compliance & Taxation Department, 19Th Floor, Vs. Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena (CIT-DR)
Section 14ASection 195Section 253Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40Section 43D

…ch is altogether different from the manner in which entries are made in its accounts, we may notice the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of United Commercial Bank in 240 ITR 355(SC). While reversing the judgment of the Calcutta High Court reported in 200 ITR 68 (Cal), wherein it was held that the assessee cannot prepare the computation of its income from income tax purposes in a manner different form the method under which it keeps accounts. It was held by the Supreme Court that preparation of the balance sheet in accordance with the statutory provisions of the banking Regulation Act would not disentitle…

ACIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4598/MUM/2010[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2018AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhstate Bank Of India Acit Circle (2)(2), Financial Reporting, Compliance & Mumbai. Taxation Department, 19Th Floor, Vs. Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit Circle (2)(2), State Bank Of India Mumbai. Financial Reporting, Compliance & Taxation Department, 19Th Floor, Vs. Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena (CIT-DR)
Section 14ASection 195Section 253Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40Section 43D

…ch is altogether different from the manner in which entries are made in its accounts, we may notice the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of United Commercial Bank in 240 ITR 355(SC). While reversing the judgment of the Calcutta High Court reported in 200 ITR 68 (Cal), wherein it was held that the assessee cannot prepare the computation of its income from income tax purposes in a manner different form the method under which it keeps accounts. It was held by the Supreme Court that preparation of the balance sheet in accordance with the statutory provisions of the banking Regulation Act would not disentitle…

UCO Bank v. CIT (200 ITR 68) — Cited in 12 Judgments | BharatTax