← 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

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

ITA 1568/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

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

ITA 1567/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

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

ITA 1566/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

Uflex Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1726/DEL/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2024AY 2003-04

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

Indian Chronicle Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal ofthe assessee is allowed

ITA 1275/AHD/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Dec 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1275/Ahd/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Indian Chronicle Ltd. बनाम/ Ito Gujarat Samacharbhavan, Ward4(3), Ahmedabad Vs. Khanpur,Ahmedabad - 380001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaci0793H (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & अपीलाथ" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.R. Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondentby: Date Of Hearing 28/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18/12/2024

For Appellant: Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 10(38)Section 115JSection 254(2)Section 271(1)(c)

1275/Ahd/2012 [Indian Chronicle Ltd. Vs. ITO] A.Y. 2007-08- 2 – This exempt income was, however, required to be considered for computation of book profit u/s.115JB of the Act. In the course of assessment, the AO noticed that the assessee had not furnished computation of book profit u/s.115JB ... income claimed exempt under that section was required to be offered for taxation u/s.115JB of the Act. The AO, therefore, computed the book profit by including the exempt LTCG of Rs.8,52,63,544/- in the book profit and accordingly determined the tax payable by the assessee. As the book

Indus Towers Limited (Formerly Known As Bharti Infratel Ltd and As Successor in Interest of Erstwhile Indus Tower Ltd), Gurugram, Haryana vs. DCIT, Circle 12(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2762/DEL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarindus Towers Ltd (Formerly Vs. Dcit, Known As Bharti Infratel Ltd), Circle-12(1), 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, New Delhi Building No. 10, Tower A, Dlf Qe, So Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Acit, Vs. Indus Towers Ltd, 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, Central Circle-10, New Delhi Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Indus Towers Ltd (Formerly Vs. Dcit, Known As Bharti Infratel Ltd), Circle-12(1), 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, New Delhi Building No. 10, Tower A, Dlf Qe, So Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv Shri Rohit Jain, Adv Shri Deepesh Jain, Adv Ms. Shaurya Jain, Ca Revenue By: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 12/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10/12/2024

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 139(5)Section 142Section 143(3)Section 148

after giving due effect to the aforesaid merger, reporting a loss of (Rs.793,20,41,502/-) under normal provisions of the Act and a book profit of Rs.4,69,90,41,333/- as per the provisions of section 115JB of the Act. The aforesaid revised return of income was treated ... raised by the assessee are challenging the upward adjustment of depreciation on aforesaid assets obtained pursuant to the scheme of arrangement, while computing book profits under section 115JB of the Act. 3.32 We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The Passive Infrastructure Assets (PIAs