← All Phrases

“book profits”

Special Rate ProvisionsSection 115JBSection 115JB1,713 judgments

The decision most relied on for book profits is Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. DCIT (328 ITR 81), cited in 1,183 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on book profits

Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. DCIT
328 ITR 81 · 2010 · High Court
1,183
citing judgments

Rule 8D, for computing disallowance under Section 14A for expenses related to exempt income, applies from Assessment Year 2008-09 onwards; for prior years, a reasonable disallowance must be made. The disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the actual exempt income earned.

ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.
165 ITD 27 · 2017 · ITAT
882
citing judgments

No disallowance under section 14A can be made while computing book profits under section 115JB unless the expenditure is debited to the profit and loss account and satisfies clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2).

Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
372 ITR 694 · 2015 · High Court
803
citing judgments

Disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act cannot exceed the actual amount of exempt income earned by the assessee. This principle also applies when computing book profits under section 115JB.

ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.
82 Taxmann.com 415 · 2017 · High Court
789
citing judgments

Disallowance computed under Section 14A, read with Rule 8D, cannot be added to book profits under Section 115JB for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) purposes. Additionally, for Section 14A disallowance, only investments that yielded exempt income during the year are considered for calculating their average value.

Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT
255 ITR 273 · 2002 · Supreme Court
657
citing judgments

For the purpose of computing book profits under Section 115J, arrears of depreciation, including those arising from assets working extra shifts, are a necessary charge on profits if debited to the profit and loss account and are allowable as such.

Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT
82 ITR 363 · 1971 · Supreme Court
654
citing judgments

Tax liability for an item of income or expenditure is determined solely by the provisions of the Income-tax Act. Entries in an assessee's books of account are not conclusive and do not govern the taxability or deductibility of an item, as the legal rights and obligations under the Act prevail.

CIT v. President Industries
258 ITR 654 · 2002 · High Court
471
citing judgments

When books of account are rejected and unaccounted sales or receipts are discovered, the income addition is restricted to the net profit element embedded in these undisclosed transactions, not the entire sale proceeds or receipts, especially if corresponding purchases are not proven to be outside the books.

CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.
341 ITR 385 · 2012 · High Court
270
citing judgments

A provision for doubtful debts cannot be added back while computing book profits under Section 115JB of the Income-tax Act for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) purposes.

Judgments citing book profits

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT - 3(2)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the

ITA 2594/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Farooq Irani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 37

return of income for AY 2014-15 on 29.11.2014 declaring total income of Rs. Nil under the normal provisions of the Act and Book Profit of Rs.937,72,74,424 under section 115JB of the Act. The return was selected for scrutiny and the statutory notices were duly served ... disallowances / additions to arrive at the assessed income of Rs.1211,85,34,530 under the normal provisions of the Act and also recomputed the book profits at Rs.954,81,45,852. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A) wherein the CIT(A) gave partial relief

Consolidated Infrastructure Compamy Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle 6(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 462/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Fenil Bhatt, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144(2)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

being the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules in the impugned order, to the Book Profits of the Assessee, by importing the provisions of sub-section 14A(2) and (3) of the Act into Clause (f) below Explanation to Section 115JB

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Vadodara vs. Gujarat State Electricity Corporation Limited, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1289/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

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

Section 115JSection 271Section 271(1)(c)

Income on 27-09-2011 declaring nil income, after setting off brought forward losses of Rs.177,69,81,562/- and as per the Book Profit under 115JB of Rs.179,31,09,000/-. The return was taken up for scrutiny assessment and several additions and disallowances made by the Assessing Officer ... assessee submitted that the addition on account of capital grant is a matter pending before ITAT, when assessment has been made on basis of book profit, penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) cannot be levied on the addition made under normal provisions of the Act and relied upon ITAT Mumbai Bench

M/S. Marico Industries Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT Cent. Cir. - 35, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal bearing ITA No

ITA 4823/MUM/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2025AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjee- A.Y. 2000-01 - A.Y. 2001-02 - A.Y. 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi & Shri MilinFor Respondent: Ms. Monica H Pande,SR AR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 801BSection 80H

Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.3,73,03,344/-, being provision for Advertisement and Sales promotion expenses while computing book profit u/s 115JA of the Income-tax Act by holding that the appellant had failed to prove the existence of any liability. Provision for Advertisement ... being an unascertained liability as per clause (c) to the Explanation to section 115JA(2), the same ought not to be added while computing book profit u/s 115JA of the Act. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and / or rescind any grounds of appeal during the course

ACIT C.C.- 35, Mumbai vs. M/S. Marico Indsutries Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal bearing ITA No

ITA 4680/MUM/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2025AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjee- A.Y. 2000-01 - A.Y. 2001-02 - A.Y. 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi & Shri MilinFor Respondent: Ms. Monica H Pande,SR AR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 801BSection 80H

Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.3,73,03,344/-, being provision for Advertisement and Sales promotion expenses while computing book profit u/s 115JA of the Income-tax Act by holding that the appellant had failed to prove the existence of any liability. Provision for Advertisement ... being an unascertained liability as per clause (c) to the Explanation to section 115JA(2), the same ought not to be added while computing book profit u/s 115JA of the Act. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and / or rescind any grounds of appeal during the course

M/S. Marico Industries Ltd vs. The ACIT CC-35

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal bearing ITA No

ITA 2564/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2025AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjee- A.Y. 2000-01 - A.Y. 2001-02 - A.Y. 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi & Shri MilinFor Respondent: Ms. Monica H Pande,SR AR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 801BSection 80H

Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.3,73,03,344/-, being provision for Advertisement and Sales promotion expenses while computing book profit u/s 115JA of the Income-tax Act by holding that the appellant had failed to prove the existence of any liability. Provision for Advertisement ... being an unascertained liability as per clause (c) to the Explanation to section 115JA(2), the same ought not to be added while computing book profit u/s 115JA of the Act. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and / or rescind any grounds of appeal during the course

The ACIT CC-35 vs. M/S. Marico Industries Ltd

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal bearing ITA No

ITA 1678/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2025AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjee- A.Y. 2000-01 - A.Y. 2001-02 - A.Y. 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi & Shri MilinFor Respondent: Ms. Monica H Pande,SR AR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 801BSection 80H

Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.3,73,03,344/-, being provision for Advertisement and Sales promotion expenses while computing book profit u/s 115JA of the Income-tax Act by holding that the appellant had failed to prove the existence of any liability. Provision for Advertisement ... being an unascertained liability as per clause (c) to the Explanation to section 115JA(2), the same ought not to be added while computing book profit u/s 115JA of the Act. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and / or rescind any grounds of appeal during the course

ACIT C.C. 35, Mumbai vs. M/S. Marico Foods Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal bearing ITA No

ITA 7397/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2025AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjee- A.Y. 2000-01 - A.Y. 2001-02 - A.Y. 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi & Shri MilinFor Respondent: Ms. Monica H Pande,SR AR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 801BSection 80H

Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.3,73,03,344/-, being provision for Advertisement and Sales promotion expenses while computing book profit u/s 115JA of the Income-tax Act by holding that the appellant had failed to prove the existence of any liability. Provision for Advertisement ... being an unascertained liability as per clause (c) to the Explanation to section 115JA(2), the same ought not to be added while computing book profit u/s 115JA of the Act. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and / or rescind any grounds of appeal during the course

M/S. Marico Industries Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen. Cir. - 35, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue's appeal bearing ITA No

ITA 7124/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2025AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi & Shri MilinFor Respondent: Ms. Monica H Pande,SR AR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 80HSection 80I

Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.3,73,03,344/-, being provision for Advertisement and Sales promotion expenses while computing book profit u/s 115JA of the Income-tax Act by holding that the appellant had failed to prove the existence of any liability. Provision for Advertisement ... being an unascertained liability as per clause (c) to the Explanation to Section 115JA(2), the same ought not to be added while computing book profit u/s 115JA of the Act. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and / or rescind any grounds of appeal during the course

Manoj Tantia, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 25, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 5944/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5944/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Baani Landbase Pvt Ltd., Dcit, Corporate One, Ground Floor, Vs. Circle-4(2), Plot No.5, District Center, Jasola, Central Revenue Building, Delhi. I.P. Estate, Delhi. Pan No.Aadcb0237E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 156Section 292B

completed on 28.12.2017 determining the loss of the assessee at Rs.2,04,16,710/- under normal provisions of the Act and book profits u/s 115JB at Rs.1,75,39,634/-. Subsequently notice u/s 148 was issued on 30.06.2021 along with the following reasons for reopening of assessment

DCIT 3(3) (1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Shapoorji Pallonji and Co. Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and cross objections are dismissed

ITA 2234/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora a/w Shri Nikhil Tiwari & Ms. Palak MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT/DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 92C

Special Bench in the case of Vireet Investments by holding that the disallowance made u/r. BD cannot be adopted while computing book profit u/s 115JB and held that the assessee has incurred expenses for earning of exempt income, hence, directed the AO to restrict the disallowance to the amount ... disallowance made by the Respondent in the return of income towards administration expenses of Rs. 10,00,000 was appropriate B. Adjustment of book profit under section 115JB in relation to expenditure relatable to earning exempt income u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D: Rs. 5,60,77,316 2 erred

DCIT 3(3) (1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Shapoorji Pallonji and Co.Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and cross objections are dismissed

ITA 2232/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora a/w Shri Nikhil Tiwari & Ms. Palak MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT/DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 92C

Special Bench in the case of Vireet Investments by holding that the disallowance made u/r. BD cannot be adopted while computing book profit u/s 115JB and held that the assessee has incurred expenses for earning of exempt income, hence, directed the AO to restrict the disallowance to the amount ... disallowance made by the Respondent in the return of income towards administration expenses of Rs. 10,00,000 was appropriate B. Adjustment of book profit under section 115JB in relation to expenditure relatable to earning exempt income u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D: Rs. 5,60,77,316 2 erred

Shapoorji Pallonji & Company Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(3) (1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and cross objections are dismissed

ITA 2027/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora a/w Shri Nikhil Tiwari & Ms. Palak MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT/DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 92C

Special Bench in the case of Vireet Investments by holding that the disallowance made u/r. BD cannot be adopted while computing book profit u/s 115JB and held that the assessee has incurred expenses for earning of exempt income, hence, directed the AO to restrict the disallowance to the amount ... disallowance made by the Respondent in the return of income towards administration expenses of Rs. 10,00,000 was appropriate B. Adjustment of book profit under section 115JB in relation to expenditure relatable to earning exempt income u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D: Rs. 5,60,77,316 2 erred

Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(3) (1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and cross objections are dismissed

ITA 2026/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora a/w Shri Nikhil Tiwari & Ms. Palak MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT/DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 92C

Special Bench in the case of Vireet Investments by holding that the disallowance made u/r. BD cannot be adopted while computing book profit u/s 115JB and held that the assessee has incurred expenses for earning of exempt income, hence, directed the AO to restrict the disallowance to the amount ... disallowance made by the Respondent in the return of income towards administration expenses of Rs. 10,00,000 was appropriate B. Adjustment of book profit under section 115JB in relation to expenditure relatable to earning exempt income u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D: Rs. 5,60,77,316 2 erred

Bombay Oxygen Investments Limited, Mumbai vs. Commisioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4406/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Monika H. Pande, Sr. AR
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

made by the Appellant. 2. On the facts and in law, the CIT(A) erred in upholding disallowance made by AO u/s.14A while computing book profit u/s.115JB of the Act. The Appellant prays that it be held that while computing book profits u/s.115JB, only actual expenditure, if any for earning ... section 14A are towards disallowance made while computing assessed income under the normal provisions of the Act as well as adjustment made while computing book profit under section 115JB of the Act. 5. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is engaged in manufacturing and trading of industrial gases

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Madurai

Appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2884/CHNY/2024[2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.2883 & 2884/Chny/2024. (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2020-2021) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Income Tax, 47, Psk Nagar, Corporate Circle, Rajapalayam 626 108. Madurai [Pan Aaacr 5284J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. S. Muralidhar & Shri J. Prabhakar, F.C.As. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. R. Bhoopathi, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri. S. Muralidhar and Shri JFor Respondent: Shri. R. Bhoopathi, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

part of total income". (4) The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that disallowance u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D should not be made while computing Book Profit u/s 115JB. (5) The Ld.CIT(A) failed to consider that the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT. Mumbai Bench in the case of DCIT ... been held that the addition on account of disallowance u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D being expenditure in relation to earning of exempt income to Book Profit u/s 115JB is justified. (6) For these and such other grounds that may be adduced at the time of hearing and it is prayed that

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Rajapalayam

Appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2883/CHNY/2024[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.2883 & 2884/Chny/2024. (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2020-2021) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Income Tax, 47, Psk Nagar, Corporate Circle, Rajapalayam 626 108. Madurai [Pan Aaacr 5284J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. S. Muralidhar & Shri J. Prabhakar, F.C.As. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. R. Bhoopathi, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri. S. Muralidhar and Shri JFor Respondent: Shri. R. Bhoopathi, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

part of total income". (4) The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that disallowance u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D should not be made while computing Book Profit u/s 115JB. (5) The Ld.CIT(A) failed to consider that the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT. Mumbai Bench in the case of DCIT ... been held that the addition on account of disallowance u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D being expenditure in relation to earning of exempt income to Book Profit u/s 115JB is justified. (6) For these and such other grounds that may be adduced at the time of hearing and it is prayed that

Muthu Thevar Nagarajan, Dindigul vs. ITO, Ward-1., Dindigul

Appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2083/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.2883 & 2884/Chny/2024. (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2020-2021) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Income Tax, 47, Psk Nagar, Corporate Circle, Rajapalayam 626 108. Madurai [Pan Aaacr 5284J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. S. Muralidhar & Shri J. Prabhakar, F.C.As. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. R. Bhoopathi, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri. S. Muralidhar and Shri JFor Respondent: Shri. R. Bhoopathi, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

part of total income". (4) The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that disallowance u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D should not be made while computing Book Profit u/s 115JB. (5) The Ld.CIT(A) failed to consider that the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT. Mumbai Bench in the case of DCIT ... been held that the addition on account of disallowance u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D being expenditure in relation to earning of exempt income to Book Profit u/s 115JB is justified. (6) For these and such other grounds that may be adduced at the time of hearing and it is prayed that

Gateway Office Parks Priovate Limitedi, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corporate Cicle-6(1), Chennai

ITA 617/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.617/Chny/2023 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2015-16 Gateway Office Parks Private Limited, Block No.A6, Ground Floor, No.16, Gst Road, Perungalathur, Chennai-600 063. [Pan: Aajcs8198P] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-6(1), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Shri S.Ananthan, Advocate (Virtual). Shri Nilay Baran Som, Cit 22.01.2025 19.02.2025 आदेश / Order Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M : This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Bearing Din & Order No.Itba/Apl/M/250/2022-23/1050825008(1) Dated 16.03.2023 For The Assessment Years 2015-16. Through The Aforesaid Appeal The Assesse Has Challenged Order U/S 250 Dated 16.03.2023 Passed By Cit(A), Chennai. 2.0 Ground Of Appeal No.1 Has Been Found To Be General In Nature & Hence Not Worthy Of Any Meritorious Adjudication.

Section 250Section 56(2)(viib)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, "ए' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH: CHENNAI श्री एबी टी. वर्की, न्यायिक

United India Insurance Company Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai

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

ITA 1108/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1108/Chny/2022 यिर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2018-19

For Appellant: Ms. Pavithra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.V.Pushpa, Sr.Standing Counsel
Section 115Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)

adjustments proposed in the intimation u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act. b) the addition of Rs. 470,51,72,227/- made to the Book Profits u/s 11538 of the Act relating to Reserve for Unexpired Risk by the AO eventhough no amount had been debited to the Profit & Loss