← 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

Soma Enterprises Limited, Mumbai vs. The PCIT, (Central)-Mumbai-1, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1138/MUM/2022[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2022AY 2010-2011
Section 115JSection 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 154Section 263

r.w.s. 153A of the Act on 19/06/2019 accepting the returned income at Rs.137,73,57,710/- under normal provisions of the Act and book profit of Rs.187,25,98,009/- u/s.115JB of the Act. In the said assessment order, the ld. AO had specifically stated that the credit ... revised return of income for the A.Y.2010-11 on 29/03/2012 declaring total income of Rs.Nil after claiming deduction u/s.80IA of the Act and declared book profit of Rs.227,87,65,749/- u/s.115JB of the Act. The assessment was completed u/s.143(3) of the Act. In the said M/s. Soma Enterprise

Soma Enterprises Limited, Mumbai vs. The PCIT(Central), Mumbai-1, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1137/MUM/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2022AY 2009-10
Section 115JSection 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 154Section 263

r.w.s. 153A of the Act on 19/06/2019 accepting the returned income at Rs.137,73,57,710/- under normal provisions of the Act and book profit of Rs.187,25,98,009/- u/s.115JB of the Act. In the said assessment order, the ld. AO had specifically stated that the credit ... revised return of income for the A.Y.2010-11 on 29/03/2012 declaring total income of Rs.Nil after claiming deduction u/s.80IA of the Act and declared book profit of Rs.227,87,65,749/- u/s.115JB of the Act. The assessment was completed u/s.143(3) of the Act. In the said M/s. Soma Enterprise

DCIT Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Acsys Investments Private Limited, Chennai

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 2512/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjunraj (CA) for Shri S. SridharFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 154

sole grievance of the revenue in the aforesaid appeal for Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15 is adjustment of disallowance u/s 14A while computing Book Profits u/s 115JB. The assessee has been assessed u/s 143(3) on 25.11.2016 wherein Ld. AO computed disallowance u/s 14A for Rs.18.01 Lacs in terms ... added the same while computing income under normal provisions. However, in rectification order u/s 154, Ld. AO added the disallowance while computing Book Profits u/s 115JB also. The assessee assailed this adjustment wherein Ld. CIT(A), relying on the decision of Special bench of Tribunal in Vireet Investment

Gmr Hyderabad International Airport Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore

In the result ground II is allowed

ITA 524/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Sunil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sri.K.R.Narayana, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 154

Rs.70,34,76,930. Subsequently, the A.O. passed order dated 18.06.2021 u/s 154 of the I.T.Act, 2 M/s.GMR Hyderabad International Airport Limited. wherein the book profit of the assessee were recomputed, as follows:- Sl. Particulars Amount No. 1. Inclusion of surplus of PSF (SC) of 19,14,43,451 Rs.19 ... follows:- “Ground II: Disallowance U/s 14A at Rs.3.37.88.198/- by applying Rule 8D against the amount as per Return of Income at Rs.22.47.020/- in computing Book Profit u/s 115JB II. 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) has erred

M/S Sicagen India Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corp Circle 6(2), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 271/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Ms. C.P. Priya (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Darzakhum Songate (CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

since the disallowance u/s 14A for Rs.69.28 Lacs was added in the normal income. However, the same was not added back while computing the Book Profits u/s 115JB which resulted into excess MAT credit. 3. The assessee submitted that no expenditure was incurred to earn the exempt income but notional ... expenditure of 1% of average investments was disallowed. The same was not to be considered while computing Book Profits u/s 115JB as per the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Bengal Finance & Investment Pvt. Ltd. (ITA 337 of 2013 dated 10.02.2015) as well as the decision

Bhupati Investments & Finance P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 5(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1134/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhm/S Bhupati Investments Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of & Finance Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax-6 B-34/35, 3Rd Floor, 501, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Paragon Condominium, Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Pandurang Budhkar Road, Marg, Worli, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400013 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaacb0441P Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Aarti Vissanji Respondent By : Ajay Chandra Date Of Hearing 11.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 17.10.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Pr. Cit-6, Mumbai, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The A.O U/S 143(3) Of The Act For A.Y. 2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Pr. Cit) Erred In Passing An Order U/S 263 & Directing The Assessing Officer To Modify The Order Dated 16/12/2019 Passed U/S 143(3) Of Income Tax Act, 1961. Your Appellants Submit That The Order Of The Pr. Cit Is Illegal, Bad In Law & Void & The Same Ought To Be Quashed.

For Appellant: Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Ajay Chandra
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

assessing the total income at Rs.nil under the normal provision of the Act and Rs.14,57,824/- u/s 115JB of the Act. The book profit was determined at Rs.14,53,824/- after making disallowance of Rs.15,03,383/- and Rs.9,53,542/- on account of profit on sale of investment ... r.w.rule 8D of the I.T. Rule and made not further addition. The ld. Counsel had also submitted that the A.O has computed the book profit u/s 115JB to the amount of Rs.14,53,824/- after adding the amount disallowed u/s 14A of Rs.9,59,846/-. The ld. Counsel also submitted

M/S. Standard Chartered Bank, Mumbai vs. The DIT (I.T), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3345/MUM/2004[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2022AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blestandard Chartered Bank V. The Director Of Income-Tax (It) 3Rd Floor, Tax Department 1St Floor, Scindia House 23-25, M.G. Road, Fort N.M. Road Ballard Pier Mumbai - 400001 Mumbai - 400038 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri P.J. Pardiwala & Shri Fenil Bhatt Department Represented By : Shri. Soumendu Kumar Dash

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37

provisions for doubtful debts. The provisions for doubtful debts is an unascertained liability and therefore it is required to be added for computing the book profit. 16. In response, assessee submitted that provision for doubtful debts is not a provision for a liability ascertained or unascertained. It is a provision ... revenue and the decision of the ITAT and the interpretation was not accepted by the Department. Accordingly, he proceeded to make adjustment of book profit and accordingly, determined the liability u/s.115JAA of the Act. Hence, he directed the Assessing Officer to give effect as per the direction of his order

M/S. Kwality Biscuits Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 11(5), Bangalore

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

ITA 675/BANG/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Oct 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 55(2)

receipts towards sale of land carried out during the year has not been routed through the Profit & Loss account of the assessee thereby reduced book profits for the purpose of section 115JB of the Act. The AO held that there is an escapement of income to this extent and therefore ... determined the income of the assessee at Rs.4,88,22,789. The AO also added the gain on sale of land to the book profit of the company. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(Appeals). 3. Before the CIT(Appeals), the assessee contended the legality

Reliance Industries Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asstt. CIT-CC-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 579/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vice Preside & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh Vora a/wFor Respondent: Shri Chetan M. Kacha, Sr. AR
Section 115JSection 143Section 144C(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 250(6)Section 32Section 92CSection 92C(3)

section 115JB(2) i.e. expenditure relating to exempt income, when no such disallowance ought to have been made while computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act, relying on Tribunal decision in appellant's own case for AY 2009-10 vide corrigendum order dated 02.04.2008. Disallowance of Depreciation 4. erred ... depreciation u/s. 32 of the Act on such capitalised value of the goods is allowable. Addition of interest on Income Tax Refund while computing Book Profits u/s 115JB 5. erred in confirming the action of the AO of adding interest on income tax refund

ACIT -3(4), Mumbai vs. Reliance Industries Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1438/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vice Preside & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh Vora a/wFor Respondent: Shri Chetan M. Kacha, Sr. AR
Section 115JSection 143Section 144C(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 250(6)Section 32Section 92CSection 92C(3)

section 115JB(2) i.e. expenditure relating to exempt income, when no such disallowance ought to have been made while computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act, relying on Tribunal decision in appellant's own case for AY 2009-10 vide corrigendum order dated 02.04.2008. Disallowance of Depreciation 4. erred ... depreciation u/s. 32 of the Act on such capitalised value of the goods is allowable. Addition of interest on Income Tax Refund while computing Book Profits u/s 115JB 5. erred in confirming the action of the AO of adding interest on income tax refund

DCIT Cent. Cir -4(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Inorbit Malls (India ) Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2220/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.2220/Mum/2021 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Central Cir-4(2) M/S. Inorbit Malls P.Ltd Room No.1918, 19Th Floor, बिधम/ Plot No.C-30,Bnlock-G, Air India Bldg, Nariman Opp Sidbi Bank, Bkc, Point Mumbai 400021 Vs. Bandra (East), Mumbai 400050 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaack9106G (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Mr. Madhur Agarwal, Adv. प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. Ganesh Bare, Cit Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 14.07.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 11.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla:

For Appellant: Mr. Madhur Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. Ganesh Bare, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 153A

case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 14A of the IT Act while computing the book profits u/s 115JB of the IT Act without 3 I.T.A. No. 2220/Mum/2021 M/s. Inorbit Malls Pvt. Ltd. realizing the fact, that clause (f) of explanation

Asst CIT Cir 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1739/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal () Mahindra & Mahindra Limited Vs Asst.Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Corporation Taxation, P.K. Kurne Circle-2(2)(1), Mumbai Chowk, Worli, Mumbai-400 018 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Pan : Aaacm3025E Mumbai-400 020 Appellant Respondent Asst.Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Vs 020Mahindra & Mahindra Limited Circle-2(2)(1), Mumbai Corporation Taxation, P.K. Kurne Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Chowk, Worli, Mumbai-400 018 Mumbai-400 Pan : Aaacm3025E Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 35Section 40Section 80I

which is not liable for taxation at all both under normal provisions of the Act as well as in the computation of book profits u/s.115JB of the Act. Merely because, the assessee had erroneously offered the same in the return of income, the same cannot be brought ... towards interest income on tax free bonds both under normal provisions of the Act as well as in the computation of book profits u/s.115JB of the Act. We also place reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Pruthvi Brokers and Shareholders

Mahindra & Mahindra Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Cir -2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1676/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal () Mahindra & Mahindra Limited Vs Asst.Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Corporation Taxation, P.K. Kurne Circle-2(2)(1), Mumbai Chowk, Worli, Mumbai-400 018 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Pan : Aaacm3025E Mumbai-400 020 Appellant Respondent Asst.Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Vs 020Mahindra & Mahindra Limited Circle-2(2)(1), Mumbai Corporation Taxation, P.K. Kurne Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Chowk, Worli, Mumbai-400 018 Mumbai-400 Pan : Aaacm3025E Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 35Section 40Section 80I

which is not liable for taxation at all both under normal provisions of the Act as well as in the computation of book profits u/s.115JB of the Act. Merely because, the assessee had erroneously offered the same in the return of income, the same cannot be brought ... towards interest income on tax free bonds both under normal provisions of the Act as well as in the computation of book profits u/s.115JB of the Act. We also place reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Pruthvi Brokers and Shareholders

Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), -4, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1149/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2012-13
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 263Section 92C

filed its original return of income on 29/112012, declaring total loss of Rs 130,64,21,515/- under normal provisions of the Act and book profit of Rs. 54,30,88,947/- u/s 115JB of the Act. Thereafter, the assessee e-filed a revised return of income on 11/03/2014 declaring ... total loss of Rs. 130,64,21,515/- under normal provisions of the Act and book profit of Rs. 54,35,88,947/- u/s 115JB of the Act for rectifying the following:-  Disclosing the foreign bank details;  14A Disallowance of Rs. 5,00,000 while computing book profits under Section

M/S. Mahindra Homes Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/ACIT/ITO/NFAC, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Asst Year 2016-17 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2179/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Us That The Issues In Asst Year 2016-17 May Be Taken As The Lead Case & The Decision Rendered Thereon Would Apply With Equal Force For The Asst Year 2017-18 Also In View Of Identical Facts Except With Variance In Figures.

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

read with Rule 8D of Rs. 1.63.63.538 under MAT provisions 32. erred in making an addition of Rs. 1,63,63,538 to Book Profits for the purpose of section 115JB on account of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. Double disallowance of interest paid on CCD's under ... partly allowed. 9. The Ground No. 32 raised by the assessee is challenging the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act while computing book profits u/s 115JB of the Act. 9.1. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that

Mahindra Homes P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO, Range-7(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Asst Year 2016-17 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1008/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Us That The Issues In Asst Year 2016-17 May Be Taken As The Lead Case & The Decision Rendered Thereon Would Apply With Equal Force For The Asst Year 2017-18 Also In View Of Identical Facts Except With Variance In Figures.

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

read with Rule 8D of Rs. 1.63.63.538 under MAT provisions 32. erred in making an addition of Rs. 1,63,63,538 to Book Profits for the purpose of section 115JB on account of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. Double disallowance of interest paid on CCD's under ... partly allowed. 9. The Ground No. 32 raised by the assessee is challenging the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act while computing book profits u/s 115JB of the Act. 9.1. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax.CC-7(3)., Mumbai vs. M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd(Successsor to Palava Dwellers Pvt Ltd), Mumbai

ITA 1348/MUM/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2016-2017
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

electronically declaring total income at Rs 5,08,97,690/- under normal provisions of the 4 M/s. Macrotech Developers Ltd., Act and book profits of Rs 330,91,37,656/- u/s 115JB of the Act. The final assessment was completed u/s 143(3) read with section 144C ... determining total income at Rs 401,72,21,219/- under normal provisions of the Act and book profits of Rs 330,97,63,757/- u/s 115JB of the Act after making various disallowances / additions. In the said assessment order, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee company had carried

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd (Successor to Shreenivas Cotton Mills Ltd), Mumbai

ITA 1347/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2014-15
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

electronically declaring total income at Rs 5,08,97,690/- under normal provisions of the 4 M/s. Macrotech Developers Ltd., Act and book profits of Rs 330,91,37,656/- u/s 115JB of the Act. The final assessment was completed u/s 143(3) read with section 144C ... determining total income at Rs 401,72,21,219/- under normal provisions of the Act and book profits of Rs 330,97,63,757/- u/s 115JB of the Act after making various disallowances / additions. In the said assessment order, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee company had carried

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd.(Successor to M/S Lodha Developer Pvt Ltd), Mumbai

ITA 1291/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2015-16
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

electronically declaring total income at Rs 5,08,97,690/- under normal provisions of the 4 M/s. Macrotech Developers Ltd., Act and book profits of Rs 330,91,37,656/- u/s 115JB of the Act. The final assessment was completed u/s 143(3) read with section 144C ... determining total income at Rs 401,72,21,219/- under normal provisions of the Act and book profits of Rs 330,97,63,757/- u/s 115JB of the Act after making various disallowances / additions. In the said assessment order, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee company had carried

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd(Earlier Known As M/S Lodha Developers Pvt Ltd), Mumbai

ITA 1290/MUM/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2015-2016
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

electronically declaring total income at Rs 5,08,97,690/- under normal provisions of the 4 M/s. Macrotech Developers Ltd., Act and book profits of Rs 330,91,37,656/- u/s 115JB of the Act. The final assessment was completed u/s 143(3) read with section 144C ... determining total income at Rs 401,72,21,219/- under normal provisions of the Act and book profits of Rs 330,97,63,757/- u/s 115JB of the Act after making various disallowances / additions. In the said assessment order, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee company had carried