← All Phrases

“Section 41(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 41Section 41(1)883 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 41(1) is Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT (227 ITR 172), cited in 621 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 41(1)

Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT
227 ITR 172 · 1997 · Supreme Court
621
citing judgments

Interest income earned on deposits, particularly before the commencement of business operations or as a requirement for business licensing, is taxable as "income from other sources" under Section 56, and cannot be treated as business income or set off against interest on borrowed funds.

CIT v. T.V. Sundaram Iyengar & Sons Ltd.
222 ITR 344 · 1996 · Supreme Court
223
citing judgments

Unclaimed deposits received in the course of trading transactions and sundry credit balances written back are taxable as business income under Section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as they constitute a cessation of trading liability.

CIT v. Indo Nippon Chemicals Co. Ltd.
261 ITR 275 · 2003 · Supreme Court
204
citing judgments

A liability recognized in accordance with the Accounting Standards prescribed by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) is an allowable expense for income tax purposes.

CIT v. Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd.
236 ITR 518 · 1999 · Supreme Court
203
citing judgments

For the purpose of Section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act, a liability is considered to have ceased only when the creditor actively releases or writes off the amount, or when the liability ceases to exist in the assessee's books; mere expiry of the limitation period for recovery does not constitute cessation of liability.

CIT v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd.
404 ITR 1 · 2018 · Supreme Court
164
citing judgments

The waiver of a loan taken for acquiring capital assets is considered a capital receipt and is not taxable as income under Section 28(iv) of the Income Tax Act. The ruling distinguishes between the waiver of trading liabilities and capital liabilities for tax purposes.

Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. v. CIT
261 ITR 501 · 2003 · High Court
147
citing judgments

Section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act cannot be invoked if the assessee has not been granted a deduction for the relevant liability in earlier years.

Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
201 ITR 684 · 1993 · Supreme Court
133
citing judgments

Compensatory interest or damages paid for a breach of contract, arising in the normal course of business, are allowable as a deduction under section 37(1) as wholly and exclusively incurred for business purposes. This principle extends to indirect taxes paid in the course of business, which are admissible as business expenditure.

CIT v. Oswal Agro Mills Ltd.
341 ITR 467 · 2012 · High Court
108
citing judgments

The Legislature abolished terminal depreciation under section 32(1)(iii) and the taxing of balancing charge under section 41(2), replacing these provisions with the requirement to reduce sale proceeds of depreciable assets from the block of assets.

Judgments citing Section 41(1)

Jayanta Khaund, Guwahati vs. ACIT Cir-1, Guwahati

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

ITA 219/GTY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 148Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 68

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण गुवाहाटी पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH AT KOLKATA [वर्ुअल कोटु] [Virtual

Jayanta Khaund, Guwahati vs. ACIT Cir-1, Guwahati

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

ITA 218/GTY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 148Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 68

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण गुवाहाटी पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH AT KOLKATA [वर्ुअल कोटु] [Virtual

Jayanta Khaund, Guwahati vs. ACIT Cir-1, Guwahati

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

ITA 217/GTY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 148Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 68

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण गुवाहाटी पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH AT KOLKATA [वर्ुअल कोटु] [Virtual

M/S Ashwinkumar Kailashchand Bajoriya, Akola vs. ITO Ward-1, Akola

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 374/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri R.K. GaneriwalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 41Section 41(1)

justified in confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer at ` 29,06,000, on account of cessation of liability under section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). 4. Brief facts of the case:– During the assessment year 2016–17, the assessee was involved in carrying ... filed all confirmation and also not denied the liabilities. He submitted that the advances received by the assessee are also not covered under section 41(1) of the Act for disallowance. Hence, he submitted that the addition of ` 29,06,000 by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the learned

Mr. Mahendra Mohiniraj Gandhe, Ahmednagar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle, Ahmednagar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 413/PUN/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.413/Pun/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Mr.Mahendra Mohiniraj V The Assistant Gandhe, S Commissioner Of Income 270/31, Manisha Banglow, Tax, Ahmednagar Circle, Professor Colony, Ahmednagar. Savedi Road, Ahmednagar – 414003. Pan: Aaypg 2983J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Hari Krishan – Ar Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde - Dr Date Of Hearing 17/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21/03/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Pune Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 21.01.2020 For Assessment Year 2016-17. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 68

holding that the Assessing Officer was justified in treating the amount of Rs.18,05,280/- as cessation of liability within the provisions of section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act and adding the same to the total income of the assessee. 3. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals ... from the balance sheet of his proprietary concern to his personal balance sheet, amounted to cessation or remission of liability as contemplated in section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act. 4. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in holding that the Assessing Officer has correctly treated

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Pgf Ltd., Chandigarh

ITA 4591/DEL/2009[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2025AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year: 1998-99 Acit, Central Circle-4, Vs. Pgf Ltd., New Delhi Sco 1042-43, Sector 22-B, Chandigarh Pan No. Aabcp2805N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 57

Joint Venture Development Account as the same has become bad. 13 Assessment Year: 1988-99 10.2 As regards invoking the provisions of section 41 (1) of the Act by the AO, the CIT (A) observed that this section specifies that the profit arising on account of cessation/remission of any liability ... same should be credited to the Joint Venture Development Account. Thus, in our view, there is no scope for invoking the provisions of section 41(1) of the Act. Thus, ground no. 9 and 10 are rejected. 11. Lastly the department objected to the decision

Dharrit Shah, Pune vs. ACIT Cir-6 Pune, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2260/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2260/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Vishal A. Makawane
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 41(1)Section 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL

Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank, Mumbai vs. The Dy-CIT (Int. Taxation)-2(1)(1), Mumbai

Accordingly these grounds are dismissed as not pressed

ITA 749/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am I.T. (Tp) A. No. 1479/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Credit Agricole Corporate & Dcit (International Taxation)- Investment Bank (Formerly 2(1)(1), 1St Floor, Room No. 136, Known As ‘Calyon Bank’) Vs. 11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Pan: Aaccc3872B Appellant) : Respondent)

Section 143(3)

provisions of Sec 41(1). Assessee vide letter dated 22/02/2016 has reproduced the section and submitted: For any expenditure to fall under section 41(1) of the Act,  A deduction should have been claimed in any previous year and  The assessee should have obtained any amount in respect of such

Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank, Mumbai vs. The Dy.CIT of Income Tax (Internationsl Taxation) -2(1) (1), Mumbai

Accordingly these grounds are dismissed as not pressed

ITA 1234/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am I.T. (Tp) A. No. 1479/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Credit Agricole Corporate & Dcit (International Taxation)- Investment Bank (Formerly 2(1)(1), 1St Floor, Room No. 136, Known As ‘Calyon Bank’) Vs. 11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Pan: Aaccc3872B Appellant) : Respondent)

Section 143(3)

provisions of Sec 41(1). Assessee vide letter dated 22/02/2016 has reproduced the section and submitted: For any expenditure to fall under section 41(1) of the Act,  A deduction should have been claimed in any previous year and  The assessee should have obtained any amount in respect of such

Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank, Mumbai vs. The Jt CIT (International Taxationa), Mumbai

Accordingly these grounds are dismissed as not pressed

ITA 1027/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am I.T. (Tp) A. No. 1479/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank (Formerly Known As 'Calyon Bank') 11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B Vs. Dcit (International Taxation)- 2(1)(1), 1St Floor, Room No. 136, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Appellant) : Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No. 1839/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Adit (International Taxation)- 1(2), Room No. 119, 1St Floor, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Appellant) Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank, Vs.11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B : Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No. 1273/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank (Formerly Known As 'Calyon Bank') 11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B Vs. Dcit (International Taxation)- 2(1)(1), 1St Floor, Room No. 136, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Appellant) : Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No. 1165/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit (International Taxation)- 1(1)(1), Room No. 114, 1St Floor, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400038. Appellant) Vs. Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank, 11Th & 12Th & 14Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B : Respondent)

Section 143(3)

provisions of Sec 41(1). Assessee vide letter dated_22/02/2016 has reproduced the section and submitted: For any expenditure to fall under section 41(1) of the Act, • A deduction should have been claimed in any previous year and • The assessee should have obtained any amount in respect of such

Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank, Mumbai vs. ACIT (It) 2 (1)(1), Mumbai

Accordingly these grounds are dismissed as not pressed

ITA 458/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am I.T. (Tp) A. No. 1479/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank (Formerly Known As 'Calyon Bank') 11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B Vs. Dcit (International Taxation)- 2(1)(1), 1St Floor, Room No. 136, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Appellant) Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No. 1839/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Adit (International Taxation)- 1(2), Room No. 119, 1St Floor, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Appellant) Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank, Vs.11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No. 1273/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank (Formerly Known As 'Calyon Bank') 11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B Vs. Dcit (International Taxation)- 2(1)(1), 1St Floor, Room No. 136, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Appellant) Respondent) 2

Section 143(3)

provisions of Sec 41(1). Assessee vide letter dated_22/02/2016 has reproduced the section and submitted: For any expenditure to fall under section 41(1) of the Act, • A deduction should have been claimed in any previous year and • The assessee should have obtained any amount in respect of such

Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 2(1)(1), Mumbai

Accordingly these grounds are dismissed as not pressed

ITA 4652/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am I.T. (Tp) A. No. 1479/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank (Formerly Known As ‘Calyon Bank') 11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B Vs. Dcit (International Taxation)- 2(1)(1), 1St Floor, Room No. 136, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Appellant) : Respondent)

Section 143(3)

provisions of Sec 41(1). Assessee vide letter dated_22/02/2016 has reproduced the section and submitted: For any expenditure to fall under section 41(1) of the Act, • A deduction should have been claimed in any previous year and • The assessee should have obtained any amount in respect of such

Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 2(1)(1), Mumbai

Accordingly these grounds are dismissed as not pressed

ITA 2313/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am I.T. (Tp) A. No. 1479/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank (Formerly Known As ‘Calyon Bank’) 11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B Vs. Dcit (International Taxation)- 2(1)(1), 1St Floor, Room No. 136, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Appellant) : Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No. 1839/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Adit (International Taxation)- 1(2), Room No. 119, 1St Floor, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Appellant) Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank, Vs.11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B : Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No. 1273/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank (Formerly Known As 'Calyon Bank') 11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B Vs. Dcit (International Taxation)- 2(1)(1), 1St Floor, Room No. 136, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Appellant) : Respondent) 2

Section 143(3)

provisions of Sec 41(1). Assessee vide letter dated_22/02/2016 has reproduced the section and submitted: For any expenditure to fall under section 41(1) of the Act, • A deduction should have been claimed in any previous year and • The assessee should have obtained any amount in respect of such

Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 2(1)(1), Mumbai

Accordingly these grounds are dismissed as not pressed

ITA 1273/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am I.T. (Tp) A. No. 1479/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank (Formerly Known As 'Calyon Bank') 11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B Vs. Dcit (International Taxation)- 2(1)(1), 1St Floor, Room No. 136, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Appellant) Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No. 1839/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Adit (International Taxation)- 1(2), Room No. 119, 1St Floor, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank, Vs. 11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B Appellant) Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No. 1273/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank (Formerly Known As 'Calyon Bank') 11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B Vs. Dcit (International Taxation)- 2(1)(1), 1St Floor, Room No. 136, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Appellant) Respondent) 2

Section 143(3)

provisions of Sec 41(1). Assessee vide letter dated_22/02/2016 has reproduced the section and submitted: For any expenditure to fall under Section 41(1) of the Act, • A deduction should have been claimed in any previous year and • The assessee should have obtained any amount in respect of such

DCIT (It) 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank, Mumbai

Accordingly these grounds are dismissed as not pressed

ITA 1165/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am I.T. (Tp) A. No. 1479/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank (Formerly Known As 'Calyon Bank') 11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B Vs. Dcit (International Taxation)- 2(1)(1), 1St Floor, Room No. 136, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Appellant) : Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No. 1839/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Adit (International Taxation)- 1(2), Room No. 119, 1St Floor, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Appellant) Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank, Vs.11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B : Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No. 1273/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank (Formerly Known As 'Calyon Bank') 11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B Vs. Dcit (International Taxation)- 2(1)(1), 1St Floor, Room No. 136, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Appellant) : Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No. 1165/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit (International Taxation)- 1(1)(1), Room No. 114, 1St Floor, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400038. Appellant) Vs. Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank, 11Th & 12Th & 14Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B : Respondent)

Section 143(3)

provisions of Sec 41(1). Assessee vide letter dated_22/02/2016 has reproduced the section and submitted: For any expenditure to fall under section 41(1) of the Act, • A deduction should have been claimed in any previous year and • The assessee should have obtained any amount in respect of such

ADIT (It) 1(2), Mumbai vs. Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank, Mumbai

Accordingly these grounds are dismissed as not pressed

ITA 1839/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am I.T. (Tp) A. No. 1479/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Credit Agricole Corporate & Dcit (International Taxation)- Investment Bank (Formerly 2(1)(1), 1St Floor, Room No. 136, Known As ‘Calyon Bank’) Vs. 11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Pan: Aaccc3872B Appellant) : Respondent)

Section 143(3)

provisions of Sec 41(1). Assessee vide letter dated 22/02/2016 has reproduced the section and submitted: For any expenditure to fall under section 41(1) of the Act,  A deduction should have been claimed in any previous year and  The assessee should have obtained any amount in respect of such

Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) 2(1)(1), Mumbai

Accordingly these grounds are dismissed as not pressed

ITA 1479/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am I.T. (Tp) A. No. 1479/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank (Formerly Known As ‘Calyon Bank’) 11Th Floor, Hoechst House, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaccc3872B Vs. Dcit (International Taxation)- 2(1)(1), 1St Floor, Room No. 136, Scindia House, N.M. Marg, Ballard Pier, Mumbai-400038. Appellant) Respondent)

Section 143(3)

provisions of Sec 41(1). Assessee vide letter dated_22/02/2016 has reproduced the section and submitted: For any expenditure to fall under Section 41(1) of the Act, • A deduction should have been claimed in any previous year and • The assessee should have obtained any amount in respect of such

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad vs. Amsri Builders, Secunderabad

ITA 1898/HYD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. Hon'Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Chary Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 28

LD.CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and also taking note of provisions of Section 28(iv) of the Act and Section 41(1) of the Act, and also by following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Mahindra and Mahindra (supra ... creditor is taxable as a perquisite under Section 28 (iv) of the IT Act or taxable as a remission of liability under Section 41 (1) of the IT Act. 12) The first issue is the applicability of Section 28 (iv) of the IT Act in the present case. Before moving

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad vs. Amsri Builders, Secunderabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for A

ITA 1897/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. Hon’Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Chary Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 28

LD.CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and also taking note of provisions of Section 28(iv) of the Act and Section 41(1) of the Act, and also by following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Mahindra and Mahindra (supra ... creditor is taxable as a perquisite under Section 28 (iv) of the IT Act or taxable as a remission of liability under Section 41 (1) of the IT Act. 12) The first issue is the applicability of Section 28 (iv) of the IT Act in the present case. Before moving

Utpal Sarkar, Hooghly vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 23, Hooghly

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed subject to verification as above in para 5

ITA 1514/KOL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Mar 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250

wholly correct and only on this ground the liability claim could not be disallowed. The assessee contends non-application of provisions of section 41(1) of the Act, however, the disallowance has not been made specifically under section 41(1) the Act. The liability remaining unverifiable does not automatically lead ... application of section 41(1) of the Act. The assessee further contends by virtue of the certificate of the Chartered Accountant that all the liabilities have been paid off as on 31.03.2023. Hence, on appreciation of the submission made, the outstanding Page 5 of 7 I.T.A. No.: 1514/KOL/2024 Assessment Year