United Commercial Bank v. CIT

240 ITR 355Supreme Court of India1999#245 most cited

What is United Commercial Bank v. CIT authority for?

Liabilities accrued on a notional basis are allowable as deductions under the mercantile system of accounting even if their exact quantification or discharge is deferred to a future date or if the demand itself is disputed.

314

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

United Commercial Bank v. CIT · Section 145 · Section 37(1) · mercantile system of accounting · accrual basis deduction · unascertained liability · provision for expenses · deferred quantification · disputed liability · business deductions

Also reported as

156 CTR 380

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 14A Section 36(1)(vii)Section 145 Section 36(1)(viii)Section 10(34)

Issues it is cited on

section 36(2)(v)section 145(1)section 36(1)(viia)section 36(2)section 36(1)(vii)interest on securities mercantile system of accounting section 10(34)profits and gains of business or profession section 145 section 36(1)disallowance u/s 14a

Judgments citing United Commercial Bank v. CIT

Bharuch District Central Co.-Op. Bank Ltd., Bharuch vs. The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhaurch Range, Bharuch

ITA 1543/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

…the assessee in its Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2009. 1.1 The Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the claim of deduction on account of diminution of value of securities on the basis of Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of United Commercial Bank vs CIT (SC) 240 ITR 355 without appreciating that the assessee's case is on distinct fact inasmuch as the assessee was not consistently following such method of claiming deduction on account of diminution of value of securities which renders the case of the assessee obiter dictum. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) err…

Bharuch District Central Co.-Op. Bank Ltd., Bharuch vs. The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhaurch Range, Bharuch

ITA 1542/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

…the assessee in its Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2009. 1.1 The Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the claim of deduction on account of diminution of value of securities on the basis of Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of United Commercial Bank vs CIT (SC) 240 ITR 355 without appreciating that the assessee's case is on distinct fact inasmuch as the assessee was not consistently following such method of claiming deduction on account of diminution of value of securities which renders the case of the assessee obiter dictum. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) err…

The ACIT, Circle-1, Bharuch vs. Bharuch District Central Co. Op. Bank Ltd., Bharuch

ITA 1531/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

…the assessee in its Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2009. 1.1 The Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the claim of deduction on account of diminution of value of securities on the basis of Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of United Commercial Bank vs CIT (SC) 240 ITR 355 without appreciating that the assessee's case is on distinct fact inasmuch as the assessee was not consistently following such method of claiming deduction on account of diminution of value of securities which renders the case of the assessee obiter dictum. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) err…

The ACIT, Circle-1, Bharuch vs. Bharuch District Central Co. Op. Bank Ltd., Bharuch

ITA 1530/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

…the assessee in its Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2009. 1.1 The Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the claim of deduction on account of diminution of value of securities on the basis of Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of United Commercial Bank vs CIT (SC) 240 ITR 355 without appreciating that the assessee's case is on distinct fact inasmuch as the assessee was not consistently following such method of claiming deduction on account of diminution of value of securities which renders the case of the assessee obiter dictum. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) err…

The ACIT, Circle-1, Bharuch vs. Bharuch District Central Co. Op. Bank Ltd., Bharuch

ITA 1529/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

…the assessee in its Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2009. 1.1 The Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the claim of deduction on account of diminution of value of securities on the basis of Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of United Commercial Bank vs CIT (SC) 240 ITR 355 without appreciating that the assessee's case is on distinct fact inasmuch as the assessee was not consistently following such method of claiming deduction on account of diminution of value of securities which renders the case of the assessee obiter dictum. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) err…

DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Adani Petronet (Dahej) Port Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for AY 2014-15 and CO of the assessee for AY 2013-14 are treated as partly allowed

ITA 2045/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2012-13 Adani Petronet (Dahej) Port The Dy. Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income-Tax, 9Th Floor, Shikhar Building, Circle 1(1)(1), Nr. Mithakali Circle, Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan: Aaeca 5046 R Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Dy. Commissioner Of Adani Petronet (Dahej) Port Income-Tax, Vs Pvt. Ltd., Circle 1(1)(1), Ahmedabad-380009 Ahmedabad Pan: Aaeca 5046 R

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi, AR &For Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, CIT-DR

…nder the mercantile system of accounting, what is due is bought into credit before it is actually received: it brings into debit an expenditure for which a legal liability has been incurred before it is actually disbursed. UNITED COMMERCIAL BANK v. CIT [1999] 240 ITR 355 (SC) followed. The accounting method followed by an assessee continuously for a given period of time has to be presumed to be correct till the Assessing Officer comes to the conclusion for reasons to be given that the system does not reflect true and correct profits." It is observed that in above decision, Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that ap…

The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Adani Petronet( Dahej) Port Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for AY 2014-15 and CO of the assessee for AY 2013-14 are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1792/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2012-13 Adani Petronet (Dahej) Port The Dy. Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income-Tax, 9Th Floor, Shikhar Building, Circle 1(1)(1), Nr. Mithakali Circle, Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan: Aaeca 5046 R Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Dy. Commissioner Of Adani Petronet (Dahej) Port Income-Tax, Vs Pvt. Ltd., Circle 1(1)(1), Ahmedabad-380009 Ahmedabad Pan: Aaeca 5046 R

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi, AR &For Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, CIT-DR

…nder the mercantile system of accounting, what is due is bought into credit before it is actually received: it brings into debit an expenditure for which a legal liability has been incurred before it is actually disbursed. UNITED COMMERCIAL BANK v. CIT [1999] 240 ITR 355 (SC) followed. The accounting method followed by an assessee continuously for a given period of time has to be presumed to be correct till the Assessing Officer comes to the conclusion for reasons to be given that the system does not reflect true and correct profits." It is observed that in above decision, Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that ap…

The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Adani Petronet( Dahej) Port Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for AY 2014-15 and CO of the assessee for AY 2013-14 are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1470/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2012-13 Adani Petronet (Dahej) Port The Dy. Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income-Tax, 9Th Floor, Shikhar Building, Circle 1(1)(1), Nr. Mithakali Circle, Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan: Aaeca 5046 R Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Dy. Commissioner Of Adani Petronet (Dahej) Port Income-Tax, Vs Pvt. Ltd., Circle 1(1)(1), Ahmedabad-380009 Ahmedabad Pan: Aaeca 5046 R

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi, AR &For Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, CIT-DR

…nder the mercantile system of accounting, what is due is bought into credit before it is actually received: it brings into debit an expenditure for which a legal liability has been incurred before it is actually disbursed. UNITED COMMERCIAL BANK v. CIT [1999] 240 ITR 355 (SC) followed. The accounting method followed by an assessee continuously for a given period of time has to be presumed to be correct till the Assessing Officer comes to the conclusion for reasons to be given that the system does not reflect true and correct profits." It is observed that in above decision, Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that ap…

Adani Petronet( Dahej) Port Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for AY 2014-15 and CO of the assessee for AY 2013-14 are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1398/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2012-13 Adani Petronet (Dahej) Port The Dy. Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income-Tax, 9Th Floor, Shikhar Building, Circle 1(1)(1), Nr. Mithakali Circle, Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan: Aaeca 5046 R Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Dy. Commissioner Of Adani Petronet (Dahej) Port Income-Tax, Vs Pvt. Ltd., Circle 1(1)(1), Ahmedabad-380009 Ahmedabad Pan: Aaeca 5046 R

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi, AR &For Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, CIT-DR

…nder the mercantile system of accounting, what is due is bought into credit before it is actually received: it brings into debit an expenditure for which a legal liability has been incurred before it is actually disbursed. UNITED COMMERCIAL BANK v. CIT [1999] 240 ITR 355 (SC) followed. The accounting method followed by an assessee continuously for a given period of time has to be presumed to be correct till the Assessing Officer comes to the conclusion for reasons to be given that the system does not reflect true and correct profits." It is observed that in above decision, Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that ap…

The Karnataka Bank Ltd, Mangaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Mangaluru

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

ITA 1907/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranthe Karnataka Bank Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 2(1) Head Office, Mahaveera Circle Mangalore Vs. Kankanady Mangalore 575002 Pan – Aabct5589K Appellant Respondent Dcit, Circle – 2(1) The Karnataka Bank Ltd. Mangalore Head Office, Mahaveera Circle Vs. Kankanady Mangalore 575002 Pan – Aabct5589K Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri S. Ananthan, Ca & Smt. Lalitha Rameswaran, Ca Revenue By: Shri Mudavathu Harish Chandra Naik, Ca Date Of Hearing: 22.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.05.2022 O R D E R Per: B.R. Baskaran, A.M. These Cross Appeals Are Directed Against The Order Dated 27-03-2018 Passed By Ld Cit(A), Mangaluru & They Relate To The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Is A Banking Company Carrying On Banking Business. The Karnataka Bank Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, CA &For Respondent: Shri Mudavathu Harish

…nch, in AY 2006-07, has noticed that the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court has rendered its decision The Karnataka Bank Ltd. in the case of ING Vysya Bank Ltd (supra) without considering the decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UCO Bank (240 ITR 355)(SC). It was further noticed that the Hon'ble jurisdictional Karnataka High Court, in two subsequent decisions rendered in the cases of Vijaya Bank (supra) and Karnataka Bank (supra), has held that the depreciation claimed on investments ‘held on maturity’ by a bank has to be treated as ‘stock in trade’ in accordance with RBI guidelines and CBDT…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle - 1, Bellary vs. M/S Auro Minerals, Hospet

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and that of the Assessee allowed

ITA 1543/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Srinivas T. Bidari, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. S. PADMAVATHY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. and Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 1543/Bang/2018 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, M/s. Auro Minerals, 2012-13 Circle - 1, 1. D.No.19, W. No.15, Anegundi House, Bellary. AC Office Road, N. C. Colony, Hospet – 583 203. 2. Salgaocar Bhavan, Altinho, Panaji, Goa – 403 001. PAN: AAEFA 4157 A 1329/Bang/2018 M/s. Auro Minerals, Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, 2012-13 1. D.No.19, W. No.15, Anegundi Bellary Range, House, AC Office Road, N. C. Colony, Bellary. H…

M/S Auro Minerals, Hospet vs. Joint Commissionerof Income Tax Bellary Range, Bellary

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and that of the Assessee allowed

ITA 1329/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Srinivas T. Bidari, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. S. PADMAVATHY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. and Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 1543/Bang/2018 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, M/s. Auro Minerals, 2012-13 Circle - 1, 1. D.No.19, W. No.15, Anegundi House, Bellary. AC Office Road, N. C. Colony, Hospet – 583 203. 2. Salgaocar Bhavan, Altinho, Panaji, Goa – 403 001. PAN: AAEFA 4157 A 1329/Bang/2018 M/s. Auro Minerals, Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, 2012-13 1. D.No.19, W. No.15, Anegundi Bellary Range, House, AC Office Road, N. C. Colony, Bellary. H…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 6, Pune vs. M/S. Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2428/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker

…a revenue loss.” 24. We find that the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of Bengaluru Tribunal in the case of Canara Bank (supra) is based on the CBDT Circular as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of United Commercial Bank vs. CIT, 240 ITR 355 (SC). Therefore, the decision of the ld. CIT(A) is inconsonance with the law followed by the Co-ordinate Bench of Bengaluru Tribunal in the case of Canara Bank (supra). Thus, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the ground of appeal no.1 filed by the Revenue stands dismissed. 25. Ground of appeal n…

Janata Sahakari Bank Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 6, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2400/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker

…a revenue loss.” 24. We find that the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of Bengaluru Tribunal in the case of Canara Bank (supra) is based on the CBDT Circular as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of United Commercial Bank vs. CIT, 240 ITR 355 (SC). Therefore, the decision of the ld. CIT(A) is inconsonance with the law followed by the Co-ordinate Bench of Bengaluru Tribunal in the case of Canara Bank (supra). Thus, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the ground of appeal no.1 filed by the Revenue stands dismissed. 25. Ground of appeal n…

Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 6, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2641/PUN/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker

…a revenue loss.” 24. We find that the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of Bengaluru Tribunal in the case of Canara Bank (supra) is based on the CBDT Circular as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of United Commercial Bank vs. CIT, 240 ITR 355 (SC). Therefore, the decision of the ld. CIT(A) is inconsonance with the law followed by the Co-ordinate Bench of Bengaluru Tribunal in the case of Canara Bank (supra). Thus, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the ground of appeal no.1 filed by the Revenue stands dismissed. 25. Ground of appeal n…

M/S. Kallakurichi Co-Operative Sugar Mills Ltd., Kallakurichi vs. ACIT, Villupuram

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 410/CHNY/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.369/Chny/2019 & Ita Nos.409 & 410/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 V. M/S.Kallakurichi Co-Operative- The Asst. Commissioner- Sugar Mills Unit-Ii, Of Income Tax, Cs11, Kachirapalayam, Villupuram Circle, Kallakurichi, Villupuram. Villupuram. [Pan: Aaaak 0655 Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Mr.Sanat Kumar Raha

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(19)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…cannot be considered as component of cost of production for determining the value of closing stock. The ld. AR relied on the following judgments for the proposition that consistency to be followed in income-tax proceedings: 1. United Commercial Bank v. CIT (240 ITR 355)(SC) 2. CIT v. Woodward Governor India P. Ltd. (312 ITR 254)(SC) 3. Merck Ltd. v. DCIT (2 ITR (Trib)-OL 629 (Mumbai) 4. CIT v. Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. (360 ITR 82) (Allahabad) In our opinion, each assessment year is an independent assessment of unit and the wrong method of accounting followed by the assessee cannot be appropriated. In our opi…

M/S. Kallakurichi Co-Operative Sugar Mills Ltd., Kallakurichi vs. ACIT, Villupuram

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 409/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.369/Chny/2019 & Ita Nos.409 & 410/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 V. M/S.Kallakurichi Co-Operative- The Asst. Commissioner- Sugar Mills Unit-Ii, Of Income Tax, Cs11, Kachirapalayam, Villupuram Circle, Kallakurichi, Villupuram. Villupuram. [Pan: Aaaak 0655 Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Mr.Sanat Kumar Raha

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(19)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…cannot be considered as component of cost of production for determining the value of closing stock. The ld. AR relied on the following judgments for the proposition that consistency to be followed in income-tax proceedings: 1. United Commercial Bank v. CIT (240 ITR 355)(SC) 2. CIT v. Woodward Governor India P. Ltd. (312 ITR 254)(SC) 3. Merck Ltd. v. DCIT (2 ITR (Trib)-OL 629 (Mumbai) 4. CIT v. Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. (360 ITR 82) (Allahabad) In our opinion, each assessment year is an independent assessment of unit and the wrong method of accounting followed by the assessee cannot be appropriated. In our opi…

M/S. Kallakurichi Co-Operative Sugar Mills Ltd., Kallakurichi vs. ACIT, Villupuram

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 369/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.369/Chny/2019 & Ita Nos.409 & 410/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 V. M/S.Kallakurichi Co-Operative- The Asst. Commissioner- Sugar Mills Unit-Ii, Of Income Tax, Cs11, Kachirapalayam, Villupuram Circle, Kallakurichi, Villupuram. Villupuram. [Pan: Aaaak 0655 Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Mr.Sanat Kumar Raha

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(19)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…cannot be considered as component of cost of production for determining the value of closing stock. The ld. AR relied on the following judgments for the proposition that consistency to be followed in income-tax proceedings: 1. United Commercial Bank v. CIT (240 ITR 355)(SC) 2. CIT v. Woodward Governor India P. Ltd. (312 ITR 254)(SC) 3. Merck Ltd. v. DCIT (2 ITR (Trib)-OL 629 (Mumbai) 4. CIT v. Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. (360 ITR 82) (Allahabad) In our opinion, each assessment year is an independent assessment of unit and the wrong method of accounting followed by the assessee cannot be appropriated. In our opi…

Income Tax Officer Ward- Seoni, Seoni vs. Jila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Maryadit, Seoni

In the result, all the Appeals and CO (# 7/2018) are allowed for statistical purposes, and CO (# 5/2018) is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 99/JAB/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur20 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri B.Ganguly, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shravan Ku. Gotru, CIT-DR

Section 36(1)(viia)Section 37(1)Section 43D

…ext may be made to AS9 by ICAI, the regulatory accounting body in India. The law in the matter is well-settled, and for which one may refer to the decisions by the Apex Court, as in UCO Bank v. CIT [1999] 237 ITR 889 (SC); United Commercial Bank v. CIT [1999] 240 ITR 355; Godra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 746 (SC), to cite some, also relied upon by the assessee, wherein it stands clarified that accrual of income is to be judged in the light of the reality of the situation. There is thus no question of accrual of such interest income. (AYs. 2009-10, 2013-14 & 2014-15) C.O.Nos. 05 & 07/JAB/2018 Jila…

Income Tax Officer Ward- Seoni, Seoni vs. Jila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Maryadit, Seoni

In the result, all the Appeals and CO (# 7/2018) are allowed for statistical purposes, and CO (# 5/2018) is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 97/JAB/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur20 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri B.Ganguly, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shravan Ku. Gotru, CIT-DR

Section 36(1)(viia)Section 37(1)Section 43D

…ext may be made to AS9 by ICAI, the regulatory accounting body in India. The law in the matter is well-settled, and for which one may refer to the decisions by the Apex Court, as in UCO Bank v. CIT [1999] 237 ITR 889 (SC); United Commercial Bank v. CIT [1999] 240 ITR 355; Godra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 746 (SC), to cite some, also relied upon by the assessee, wherein it stands clarified that accrual of income is to be judged in the light of the reality of the situation. There is thus no question of accrual of such interest income. (AYs. 2009-10, 2013-14 & 2014-15) C.O.Nos. 05 & 07/JAB/2018 Jila…