← 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

Indian Overseas Bank, Chennai vs. ACIT Ltu-2, Chennai

ITA 661/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Dec 2024AY 2015-16
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

additions while passing assessment order. Since tax payable under Normal Method is Rs.6485,40,31,723/- which is more that the tax payable under Book Profit u/s 115JB of Rs.3437,30,42,396/- hence, tax payable under Normal Method is adopted by the AO. 3. At the outset

Ecl Finance Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-Central Circle-1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5283/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjeeand Miss Padmavathy S.- A.Y. 2017-18 - A.Y. 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: Shri Lieder Panicker, SR DR
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

Additionally, an adjustment of Rs. 4,59,39,132/- was made under Section 115JB of the Act while computing the book profits. Both these issues were challenged by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) considered the submissions of the assessee, which raised both legal ... Whether on the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld. CITIA), was justified in deleting the addition made to Book Profit computed u/s 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, disregarding the clear provisions under Explanation (1)) to section 115JB of the Act, which does

Trent Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 4074/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Respondent: Shri Rajan Vora and Nikhil Tiwari, CA
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234Section 234CSection 250

Rules for the purpose of section 115JB of the Act: 5. erred in not appreciating that no adjustment can be made to the book profit under section 115J8 of the Act by applying provisions of section 14A of the Act (read with Rule 8D of the Rules). Levy of Interest ... moto disallowance made by the assessee as ld. Assessing Officer invoked Rule 8D without recording satisfaction. Assessee has also contested adjustments made to the book profit u/s.115JB towards disallowance resorted to by ld. Assessing Officer by applying provisions of section 14A r.w.r. 8D. 4. Brief facts of the case

Asst.Commissioner of Income-Tax (TDS)2(1), Mumbai vs. Patel Engineering Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3068/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2017-18
Section 194ASection 201

facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the adjustments on account of addition made in computing the Book Profit u/s 115JB of the Act by ignoring the explanation 1 to section 115JB of Income Tax Act." 21. Whereas assessee has raised following two grounds ... Assessee had filed its return of income on 30/11/2017 which was revised on 02/02/2018 declaring total income of Rs.122,12,77,610/-. The book profit u/s.115JB was returned at Rs.205,39,00,312/-. The ld. AO has completed the assessment on an income of Rs.192

Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS 2 1, Mumbai vs. Patel Engineering Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3065/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2018-19
Section 194ASection 201

facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the adjustments on account of addition made in computing the Book Profit u/s 115JB of the Act by ignoring the explanation 1 to section 115JB of Income Tax Act." 21. Whereas assessee has raised following two grounds ... Assessee had filed its return of income on 30/11/2017 which was revised on 02/02/2018 declaring total income of Rs.122,12,77,610/-. The book profit u/s.115JB was returned at Rs.205,39,00,312/-. The ld. AO has completed the assessment on an income of Rs.192

DCIT CC - 3(4), Mumbai vs. Patel Engineering Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3063/MUM/2024[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024
Section 194ASection 201

facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the adjustments on account of addition made in computing the Book Profit u/s 115JB of the Act by ignoring the explanation 1 to section 115JB of Income Tax Act." 21. Whereas assessee has raised following two grounds ... Assessee had filed its return of income on 30/11/2017 which was revised on 02/02/2018 declaring total income of Rs.122,12,77,610/-. The book profit u/s.115JB was returned at Rs.205,39,00,312/-. The ld. AO has completed the assessment on an income of Rs.192

DCIT CC- 3(4), Mumbai vs. Patel Engineering Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3061/MUM/2024[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024
Section 194ASection 201

facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the adjustments on account of addition made in computing the Book Profit u/s 115JB of the Act by ignoring the explanation 1 to section 115JB of Income Tax Act." 21. Whereas assessee has raised following two grounds ... Assessee had filed its return of income on 30/11/2017 which was revised on 02/02/2018 declaring total income of Rs.122,12,77,610/-. The book profit u/s.115JB was returned at Rs.205,39,00,312/-. The ld. AO has completed the assessment on an income of Rs.192

Patel Engineering Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-CC-3(4), Mumbai

ITA 2802/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2018-19
Section 194ASection 201

facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the adjustments on account of addition made in computing the Book Profit u/s 115JB of the Act by ignoring the explanation 1 to section 115JB of Income Tax Act." 21. Whereas assessee has raised following two grounds ... Assessee had filed its return of income on 30/11/2017 which was revised on 02/02/2018 declaring total income of Rs.122,12,77,610/-. The book profit u/s.115JB was returned at Rs.205,39,00,312/-. The ld. AO has completed the assessment on an income of Rs.192

Patel Engineering Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, except for one ground no

ITA 2801/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 194ASection 201

facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the adjustments on account of addition made in computing the Book Profit u/s 115JB of the Act by ignoring the explanation 1 to section 115JB of Income Tax Act." 21. Whereas assessee has raised following two grounds ... Assessee had filed its return of income on 30/11/2017 which was revised on 02/02/2018 declaring total income of Rs.122,12,77,610/-. The book profit u/s.115JB was returned at Rs.205,39,00,312/-. The ld. AO has completed the assessment on an income of Rs.192

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Welspun Steel Limited, Gujarat

Accordingly, Ground No.1 raised by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3862/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay NagpalFor Respondent: Dr.Kishor Dhule
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 250

case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing to delete the disallowance made u/s.14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the book profit of the assessee without appreciating the provisions of clause (f) of explanation 1 to section 115JB(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the decision ... filed under Section 153A of the Act]. The Assessee was assessed under normal provisions of the Act. However, the Assessing Officer also computed the Book Profits under Section 115JB of the Act by increasing the profits as per Profit and Loss Account by the aforesaid amount of INR.7

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- V (I), Kolkata vs. Birla Corporation Limited, Birla Building

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue is dismissed, as also the cross objection filed by the assessee for both the years

ITA 1024/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 80I

with rule 8D of the Rules, the Ld. AO added the enhanced amount of Rs. 6,82,71,486/- for the purposes of computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act. (v) The Ld. CIT(A) allowed claiming of TCS to the assessee even when the same was not claimed ... granted relief to the assessee with respect to disallowance u/s 14A of the Act and the consequence of such disallowance on the computation of “book profit” u/s 115JB of the Act. Since the matter pertaining to disallowance u/s 14A of the Act is subject matter of the Department’s appeal

M/S. United Phosphors Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen. Cir. - 38, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the revenue are partly

ITA 2990/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2024AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Respondent: Shri Heera Ram Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

during the year amounting to Rs. 26,54,302/- 16. Additional Ground No. 1: Computation of deduction under section 80HHC for the purpose of book profit under section 115JA. 16.1 The assessee has submitted that profits eligible for deduction under section 8OHHC for the purpose of reduction as per clause ... viii) of Explanation under section 115JA ought to be computed as per the book profit and not as per the provisions of the Act for computing book profit under section 115JA. 16.2 Ld. AR has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case

The Dy CIT CC-38, Mumbai vs. M/S. United Phosphourous Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 4099/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2024AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt.Renu Jauhri, Accountan Member

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Heera Ram Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

during the year amounting to Rs. 26,54,302/- 16. Additional Ground No. 1: Computation of deduction under section 80HHC for the purpose of book profit under section 115ЈА. 16.1 The assessee has submitted that profits eligible for deduction under section 80HHC for the purpose of reduction as per clause ... viii) of Explanation under section 115JA ought to be computed as per the book profit and not as per the provisions of the Act for computing book profit under section 115JA. 16.2 Ld. AR has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case

M/S. United Phosphorus Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT Cen Cir-38, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the revenue are partly

ITA 3456/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2024AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Respondent: Shri Heera Ram Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

during the year amounting to Rs. 26,54,302/- 16. Additional Ground No. 1: Computation of deduction under section 80HHC for the purpose of book profit under section 115JA. 16.1 The assessee has submitted that profits eligible for deduction under section 8OHHC for the purpose of reduction as per clause ... viii) of Explanation under section 115JA ought to be computed as per the book profit and not as per the provisions of the Act for computing book profit under section 115JA. 16.2 Ld. AR has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case

Jindal Padding Private Limited, Village Mannpura, Tehsil Nalag vs. Income Tax Officer Parwano, Parwano

ITA 100/CHANDI/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 68

assessee under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Factual Matrix 1. The return of income declaring loss of Rs.6,62,737/- and book profit under Section 115JB of Rs.11,11,014/- was e-filed by the assessee company on 30.09.2010. The assessment under Section 143(3) r.w.s ... issue relating to levy of penalty under Section 271(l)(c) of the Act where tax was paid on the basis of book profits determined under Section 115JB of the Act was considered by the Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Nalwa Sons Investments Limited

Biocon Biologics Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1)(1), Bangalore

ITA 1590/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavit(Tp)A No.1590/Bang/2024

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 92Section 92C

total income pursuant to DRP Directions on Draft assessment order containing above adjustments as per order u/s 92 CA 93) of the Act and book profit as per ROI of Rs. 4,26,28,48,182 under the provisions of section 115JB of the Act is assessed ... biosimilar. Assessee filed its original Return of Income on 12/2/2021 which was revised on 31st of March 2021 and tax was payable on Book profit tax. 3. This return was picked up for scrutiny and as assessee has entered into international transactions, a reference was made to the DCIT

DCIT CC 7(4), Mumbai vs. Poddar Renaissance Reality Pvt Ltd (Now Known As Imperial Renaissaice Reniasance Reality Pvt. Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 2045/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhaildcit, Cc-7(4), Mumbai V/S. Poddar Renaissance Reality Room No. 659, Aaykar बनाम Pvt. Ltd. (Now Known As Bhavan, M.K. Road, Imperial Renaissance Mumbai-400020 Renaissance Reality Pvt. Ltd.) 501/601, Aqua Marine, Carter Road, Mumbai-400050030 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aagcp2657R Appellant/अपीलाथ" .. Respondent/"ितवादी

For Appellant: Mr. Rishabh MehtaFor Respondent: Mr. R. A. Dhyani
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69

that the cash will be shows for 1996-97 assessment year as additional 97 assessment year as additional income over and above the book profits of Dhanvarsha Builders and income over and above the book profits of Dhanvarsha Builders and income over and above the book profits of Dhanvarsha Builders

ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi vs. Uflex Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2196/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 1726/Del/2017: Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1566/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 1567/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 1568/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Uflex Ltd., Vs Acit, 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27, Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Ita No. 2194/Del/2018: Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 2195/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2196/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Acit, Vs Uflex Ltd., 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27 (Erstwhile Central Circle-18), Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Assessee By : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv., Sh. Shivam Malik, Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: The Instant Batch Of Seven Appeals Pertains To The Single Assessee Herein Namely, M/S Uflex Ltd. All Other Relevant Details Thereof Stand Tabulated As Under: Uflex Ltd. Sl.

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 143(3)Section 43B

being a capital receipt granted under Uttar Pradesh Industrial Policy 1994 read with Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act, 1948 while computing the Book profit u/s 115JB of the Income Tax Act ,1961. 9. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) is wrong on facts and bad in law in not allowing the deduction ... being a capital receipt granted under 1991 scheme of Madhya Pradesh Government read with Madhya Pradesh General sales tax act 1958 while computing the Book profit u/s 115JB of the Income Tax Act ,1961. 10. The lower authorities are wrong on facts and bad in law in not allowing

ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi vs. Uflex Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2195/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 1726/Del/2017: Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1566/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 1567/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 1568/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Uflex Ltd., Vs Acit, 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27, Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Ita No. 2194/Del/2018: Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 2195/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2196/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Acit, Vs Uflex Ltd., 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27 (Erstwhile Central Circle-18), Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Assessee By : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv., Sh. Shivam Malik, Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: The Instant Batch Of Seven Appeals Pertains To The Single Assessee Herein Namely, M/S Uflex Ltd. All Other Relevant Details Thereof Stand Tabulated As Under: Uflex Ltd. Sl.

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 143(3)Section 43B

being a capital receipt granted under Uttar Pradesh Industrial Policy 1994 read with Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act, 1948 while computing the Book profit u/s 115JB of the Income Tax Act ,1961. 9. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) is wrong on facts and bad in law in not allowing the deduction ... being a capital receipt granted under 1991 scheme of Madhya Pradesh Government read with Madhya Pradesh General sales tax act 1958 while computing the Book profit u/s 115JB of the Income Tax Act ,1961. 10. The lower authorities are wrong on facts and bad in law in not allowing

ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi vs. Uflex Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2194/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 1726/Del/2017: Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1566/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 1567/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 1568/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Uflex Ltd., Vs Acit, 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27, Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Ita No. 2194/Del/2018: Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 2195/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2196/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Acit, Vs Uflex Ltd., 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27 (Erstwhile Central Circle-18), Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Assessee By : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv., Sh. Shivam Malik, Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: The Instant Batch Of Seven Appeals Pertains To The Single Assessee Herein Namely, M/S Uflex Ltd. All Other Relevant Details Thereof Stand Tabulated As Under: Uflex Ltd. Sl.

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 143(3)Section 43B

being a capital receipt granted under Uttar Pradesh Industrial Policy 1994 read with Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act, 1948 while computing the Book profit u/s 115JB of the Income Tax Act ,1961. 9. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) is wrong on facts and bad in law in not allowing the deduction ... being a capital receipt granted under 1991 scheme of Madhya Pradesh Government read with Madhya Pradesh General sales tax act 1958 while computing the Book profit u/s 115JB of the Income Tax Act ,1961. 10. The lower authorities are wrong on facts and bad in law in not allowing