Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. v. CIT

314 ITR 188Supreme Court of India2009#17702 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 30Section 31Section 35Section 35ASection 35ESection 37Section 37(1)

Judgments citing Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. v. CIT

THE KERALA MINERALS AND METALS LIMITED,KOLLAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 918/COCH/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 May 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2007-08 The Kerala Minerals & Metals Ltd. .......... Appellant Sankaramangalam, Chavara, Kollam 691583 [Pan: Aaact8118R] Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax .......... Respondent Circle - 1, Kollam Appellant By: Shri Rajeev R., Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 13.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.05.2025

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev R., CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)

…d. of laid down in the case of Sarvana Spinning Mills Ltd. (supra). Reliance can be placed on the following decisions:- (i) CIT vs. McDowell and Co. Ltd., 314 ITR 177; (ii) CIT vs. McDowell and Co. Ltd., 314 ITR 180; (iii) CIT vs. Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd., 314 ITR 188; and, (iv) Shreyans Industries Ltd. vs. CIT, 314 ITR 302. 9. Therefore, it is clear that the ratio of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarvana Spinning Mills Ltd. (supra) cannot be applicable to the facts of the present case and undisputedly the claim for deduction is not u/s 31 but u/s 37 of the Act. .....................…

DCIT 1(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. FORBES & COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4493/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shir Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr.Ketan Ved & Mr.AbdulkadirFor Respondent: Mr, Ankush Kapoor, CIT &
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 250Section 35A

…bes and Company Ltd, Mumbai. ITA no 1002&4493/Mum/2017 ITA .no 1816/Mum/2019 & ITA no.1682/Mum/2021. agreement is allowable under section 37. In this regard the appellant placed reliance on decision of Apex court in case of Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. v. CIT (314 ITR 188) (SC).The appellant further submitted that compensation paid for premature termination of services is an allowable expense u/s.37(1) of the Act and placed reliance on Apex court decision in case of Ashok Leyland Ltd. (86 ITR 549) (SC).The appellant also placed reliance on Apex court decision in case of Taparia Tools Ltd. v. JCIT (55 taxmann.com 3…

DCIT - 1 (1) (2), MUMBAI vs. FORBES & COMPANY LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1002/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shir Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr.Ketan Ved & Mr.AbdulkadirFor Respondent: Mr, Ankush Kapoor, CIT &
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 250Section 35A

…bes and Company Ltd, Mumbai. ITA no 1002&4493/Mum/2017 ITA .no 1816/Mum/2019 & ITA no.1682/Mum/2021. agreement is allowable under section 37. In this regard the appellant placed reliance on decision of Apex court in case of Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. v. CIT (314 ITR 188) (SC).The appellant further submitted that compensation paid for premature termination of services is an allowable expense u/s.37(1) of the Act and placed reliance on Apex court decision in case of Ashok Leyland Ltd. (86 ITR 549) (SC).The appellant also placed reliance on Apex court decision in case of Taparia Tools Ltd. v. JCIT (55 taxmann.com 3…

JAYA HIND INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 9,, PUNE

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

ITA 2149/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Jan 2021AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Mukesh PatelFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 31

…o of laid down in the case of Sarvana Spinning Mills Ltd. (supra). Reliance can be placed on the following decisions :- (i) CIT vs. McDowell and Co. Ltd., 314 ITR 177; (ii) CIT vs. McDowell and Co. Ltd., 314 ITR 180; (iii) CIT vs. Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd., 314 ITR 188; and, (iv) Shreyans Industries Ltd. vs. CIT, 314 ITR 302. 9. Therefore, it is clear that the ratio of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarvana Spinning Mills Ltd. (supra) cannot be applicable to the facts of the present case and undisputedly the claim for deduction is not u/s 31 but u/s 37 of the Act. Therefore, the findin…

RELIANCE LIFESTYLE HOLDINGS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 6797/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Dec 2016AY 2010-11
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 43B

…case of CIT v. Vinay Cement Ltd. (2007) 213 CTR 268 (SC); CfT v. Alom Extrusion Ltd. (2010) 1 SCC 489(SC); CIT v. Maruti Udyog Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 729 (SC), Berger Paints India Ltd. v. CIT (2004) ~66 ITR 99 (SC) and CIT v. Udaipur Distilleries Co. Ltd. (2009) 314 ITR 188 (SC). In view of the above, the disallowance of Rs. 36,40,709/ - made by the AO” 10. The ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently argued before us that the ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the order of AO on the issue of 13 taxation of provision written back qua the leave encashment as both the authorities below have failed to appreciate…

Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. v. CIT (314 ITR 188) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax