← 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)

The Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Company Limited, Raipur, Raipur (Cg) vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax 1(2), Raipur, Raipur (Cg)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 16/BIL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur15 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.16/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Company Ltd. O/O. Executive Director-Finance Ground Floor, Vidyut Seva Bhawan, Daganiya, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aadcc5772F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.24/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Company Ltd. Ground Floor, Vidyut Seva Bhawan, Daganiya, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aadcc5772F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI RAVISH

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Bhilai vs. Mesers Metex Engineers, Bhilai

In the result Ground No 8 of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 247/RPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.238/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) M/S Metex Engineers, Vs Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.247/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Vs M/S Metex Engineers, Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R.B.Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.K.Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24/04/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K.Singh, CIT-DR
Section 68

cessation and remission of the liability and are liable to be added to the income of the assessee under the provisions of section 41(1). It was therefore, the prayer that the addition deleted by ld. CIT(A) shall be restored in terms of observations ... remission or cessation of liability or to show that any benefit was derived by the assessee. It was the submission that conditions of section 41(1) were not satisfied in the present case and therefore, the addition made was bad in law, unjustified and has rightly deleted

Mesers Metex Engineers, Bhilai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Bhilai

In the result Ground No 8 of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 238/RPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.238/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) M/S Metex Engineers, Vs Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.247/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Vs M/S Metex Engineers, Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R.B.Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.K.Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24/04/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K.Singh, CIT-DR
Section 68

cessation and remission of the liability and are liable to be added to the income of the assessee under the provisions of section 41(1). It was therefore, the prayer that the addition deleted by ld. CIT(A) shall be restored in terms of observations ... remission or cessation of liability or to show that any benefit was derived by the assessee. It was the submission that conditions of section 41(1) were not satisfied in the present case and therefore, the addition made was bad in law, unjustified and has rightly deleted

Qualcomm Incorporated, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle- 3(1)(1), Intl. Taxation, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7559/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Sh. Percy J. Pardiwala, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’, NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY

Qualcomm Incorporated, Usa vs. DCIT, Circle- 3(1)(1), Intl. Taxation, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7894/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Sh. Percy J. Pardiwala, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’, NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY

Rashmi Jain, Imliwala Phatak, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 6(2) Jaipur, Ward 6 (2) Jaipur

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

ITA 134/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Then Cit(A)-2, Jaipur With In 2 Smt. Rashmi Jain Vs Ito,Ward 6(2), Jaipur Prescribed Limitation U/S 249(2) Of The I.T. Act I.E. 30 Days From The Service Of The Impugned Assessment Order (Ii) That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Reproducing The Reason For Delay By The Appellant Like ‘’Ipse Dixit’’ (Iii) That The Ld. Cit(A) Appears Erred In Applying Judicial Precedent For Dismissing The Appeal While The Precedents Are Supporting To The Appellant.

For Appellant: Shri C.M. Batwara, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 249(2)Section 41(1)

आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR JhlanhixkslkbZ]U;kf;dlnL; ,oaJhjkBksMdeys'kt

DCIT Circle-27(1), New Delhi vs. Wahid Sandhar Sugars Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6508/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Verma
Section 10(1)Section 2Section 41(1)

grounds of appeal of the Revenue it is directed against deletion of addition of Rs.6,72,537/- made under section 41(1) of the Act in respect of outstanding balances in sundry creditors accounts. While completing the assessment the Assessing Officer noticed that there are outstanding sundry credits for more ... been taken for recovery, any legal proceedings are pending he concluded that these balances are no longer payable and brought to tax under section 41(1) of the Act. 8. On appeal the ld. CIT (Appeals) following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case

M/S. Shaz Enterprise, Rajkot vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(1), Rajkot

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 394/RJT/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot26 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted Through Virtual Court) Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And

Fancy Diamonds India Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. N F Ass C / DCIT-5(1)(1) (Current Juridiction), Mumbai

In the result, impugned order is set-aside and appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 728/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Ms. Padmavathy Sfancy Diamonds India Nfassc/Dcit-5(1)(1), Pvt.Ltd., 52, Sidhpura Aayakar Bhavan, बनाम/ Industrial Estate, 2Nd M.K.Road, Vs. Floor, Gaik Wadi, Mumbai-400020. S V Road, Goregaon, Mumbai-400062. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacf3325J (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Himanshu Gandhi.Ar ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Smt.Vranda U Matkarni.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 23/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 25/05/2023 आदेश / Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale - Jm: The Assessee Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- 1. "On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & Law, The Ld.Cit Erred In Confirming Levy Of Penalty Of Rs.10,000/- Under Section 272A(1)(D) Of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2 Fancy Diamonds India Pvt.Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Gandhi.ARFor Respondent: Smt.Vranda U Matkarni.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271A(1)(d)Section 272A(1)(d)Section 41(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH MUMBAI. BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT

Raunika Fashion, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 21(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2311/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahemad, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

concerning AY 2015-16. 2. As per the grounds of appeal, the assessee has challenged the additions made by the Assessing Officer under Section 41(1) of the Act amounting to Rs.69,59,056/- on account of cessation of liability. 3. Briefly stated, the assessee e-filed its return ... account. The assessee thus contended before the Assessing Officer that the liability existed in the books of account and therefore provisions of Section 41(1) cannot be invoked. The Assessing Officer however based on non service of notice under Section 133(6) concluded that the liability has ceased to exist

Shri Mehul Prakash Mehta, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 599/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 41(1)

genuine and that the evidences produced in the form of vouchers could not be accepted. The Assessing Officer also made an addition under section 41(1) in respect of certain creditors since there was no 4 ITA 599/Mum/2023 Shri Mehul Prakash Mehta liability to pay and that the liability ceased ... tune of Rs.16,82,284/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) deleted the addition made under section 41(1) but sustained the addition made towards expenses by holding that – “9.3 The contentions made by the appellant have been carefully considered. The argument

DCIT - 19(3), Mumbai vs. M/S. Ramani Exports, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue are dismissed and cross objection filed by the assesses are allowed

ITA 609/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms. Padmavathy S, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.609 & 608/Mum/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year 2013-14 & 2014-15) Dcit-19 (3). M/S. Ramani Exports. Matru Mandir, 2Nd Floor, 6/B, Shreeji Darshan, Tata बिधम/ Room No. 206, Grant Road, No. 01 & 02, Opera Road. Mumbai-400 006 House. Mumbai-400 004 Vs.

For Appellant: Shri. Bhupendra Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. Ar. CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 21Section 41Section 41(1)(a)

should have been offered to tax and instead assessee has credited the same to the partners to the capital account. The Ld.AO invoked section 41(1)(a), holding it to be benefit out of cessation of trading liability, that is, the benefit would be deemed to be from “profits ... accrued, the same was credited to the profit and loss account till the loan was not NPA. The condition for invoking of section 41(1) (a) is that, where an allowance or deduction has been made in the assessment for any year in respect of loss, expenditure or trading liability

DCIT - 19(3), Mumbai vs. M/S. Ramani Exports, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue are dismissed and cross objection filed by the assesses are allowed

ITA 608/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms. Padmavathy S, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.609 & 608/Mum/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year 2013-14 & 2014-15) Dcit-19 (3). M/S. Ramani Exports. Matru Mandir, 2Nd Floor, 6/B, Shreeji Darshan, Tata बिधम/ Room No. 206, Grant Road, No. 01 & 02, Opera Road. Mumbai-400 006 House. Mumbai-400 004 Vs.

For Appellant: Shri. Bhupendra Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. Ar. CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 21Section 41Section 41(1)(a)

should have been offered to tax and instead assessee has credited the same to the partners to the capital account. The Ld.AO invoked section 41(1)(a), holding it to be benefit out of cessation of trading liability, that is, the benefit would be deemed to be from “profits ... accrued, the same was credited to the profit and loss account till the loan was not NPA. The condition for invoking of section 41(1) (a) is that, where an allowance or deduction has been made in the assessment for any year in respect of loss, expenditure or trading liability

Nitin Narnheram Patel, Mumbai vs. CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 375/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalnitin Narbheram Patel Flat No.1702/1802, Wing-F, Pirojshah Nagar, Eastern Express Highway, Vikhroli (E) Mumbai-400 079 Pan: Aajpp4339A ...... Appellant Vs. Cit(A)/Nfac Mumbai- ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R. SinghFor Respondent: Shri Chetan M. Kacha, Sr. AR
Section 133(6)Section 250Section 272ASection 41Section 41(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL

ACIT, CC - 2., Surat vs. M/S. Mangalmurty Developers, Surat

In the result, ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 217/SRT/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.217/Srt/2020 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Acit, Central Circle-2, Vs. M/S. Mangalmurti Developers, Surat. 17/18, Astvinayak Raw House, Near Parshuram Garden, Adajan, Surat-395001. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aavfm9510C

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

have conducted further enquiry. Besides, the assessing officer has not discredited the documents and evidences submitted by the assessee, as noted above. Moreover, section 41(1) of the Income- Tax Act is not a charging section. It is only a machinery section. In order to bring a case under section

Silvassa Asbestos Cement Products, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle- 18(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 672/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2023AY 2015-16
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ajay Singh
Section 133(6)Section 141(1)Section 143(2)Section 250(6)Section 41(1)

P a g e | 1 M/s Silvassa Asbestos Cement Products Vs. ACIT, Circle-18(3) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE

Sh. Pradeep Sawhney, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 393/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 May 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 133(6)

have ceased to exist as the parties are not acknowledging their dues from the Appellant and, therefore, in view of Explanation 1 to Section 41(1), there is cessation of liability by the concerned parties. 12. Two issues arise out of the facts of this case. 1. Whether revenue ... specific facts of the case, we have examined provisions of the Act and the judicial pronouncements on this issue. 6 Pradeep Sawhney 14. Section 41(1)(1) reads as under: “Section 41(1) (1) Where an allowance or deduction has been made in the assessment for any year in respect

ACIT Circle-2(1), Bhopal vs. M/S. Gilcon Sacpes Joint Venture, Bhopal

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 901/IND/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit Circle 2(1) M/S. Gilcon Sacpes Joint Bhopal Venture, Vs. Old Subhash Nagar, Bhopal Revenue) Respondent Pan: Aaaag 3559 M Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, Ars Date Of Hearing 13.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 12.05.2023

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 41(1)

income is reported by the joint venture partners in the subsequent years. Further the Ld. CIT(A) has held that provision of section 41(1) are not applicable as there is no remission or cessation of liability and assessee is finally paid the said amount to same ... entire amount is subjected to tax in the hands of the joint venture partners. Ld. AR has further submitted that the provision of section 41(1) or not applicable in the case of the assessee as the same can be applied only where there is a cessassion/remission of a trading

Bina Silk Mills, Mumbai vs. ITO 23(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 705/MUM/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Bina Silk Mills Ito 23(2)(1) 1St Floor, Behind Manisha Heights, Mumbai Vs. Balrajeshwar Road, Mulund (W), Mumbai-400 080 Pan/Gir No. Aabfb 8748 B (Appellant) : (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Satish R. ModyFor Respondent: Shri Chetan M Kacha
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 41(1)Section 50Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM

ITO Ward-4(1)(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Ashik Wollen Mills Limited, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal of revenue is allowed in terms indicated here

ITA 3021/MUM/2022[2011-2012]Status: FixedITAT Mumbai10 May 2023AY 2011-2012
Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 41(1)

present appeal is being decided accordingly. 7. Then, the Ld. CIT-DR straightaway carried us to the relevant portion of section 41(1) which reads as under: Section 41: “(1) Where an allowance or deduction has been made in the assessment for any year in respect of loss, expenditure ... been made is in existence in that year or not; or (b) XXXX” 8. Ld. CIT-DR submitted that the language of section 41(1) is very much clear and leaves no doubt for interpretation. She submitted that once it is found that there is a cessation of trading liability