book profits — 1,713 case laws

Kirloskar Toyota Textile Machinery Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is treated as partly allowed

ITA 197/BANG/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.197/Bang/2015 Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Toyota Industries Engine India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, (Formerly Known As Kirloskar Toyota Textile Circle – 11(5), Machinery Pvt. Ltd.,) Bengaluru. Plot No.09, 2Nd Phase, Jigani Industrial Area, Bengaluru – 560 105. Pan : Aaack 7425 Q Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Ajit Tolani, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 24.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2022 O R D E R Per N V Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. Ajit Tolani, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Learned AO in adding back the provision for bonus of Rs 3,474,345 by treating the same as unascertained liability, while computing the 'book profits' under section 115JB of the Act. 8. The Learned CIT(A) erred in disregarding the submissions made by the appellant and not adjudicating ... adding back the provision for long service award of Rs. 335,464 by treating the same as unascertained liability, while computing the 'book profits' under section 115JB of the Act. IT(TP)A No.197/Bang/2015 Page 12 of 15 8. Section 115JB of the Act provides that notwithstanding anything contained

Skil Infrastructure Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Range Central Circle 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee and revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5347/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 5347/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) बिधम/ Skill Infrastructure Ltd. Dcit, Range Central Circle- 209, Skill House, Bank 6(3) Vs. Room No. 1905, 19Th Floor, Street Cross Lane, Fort, Mumbai-400023. Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 5656/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Dcit, Range Central Circle- बिधम/ Skill Infrastructure Ltd. 6(3) 209, Skill House, Bank Street Vs. Room No.1905, 19Th Floor, Cross Lane, Fort, Mumbai- Air India Building, Nariman 400023. Point, Mumbai-400021. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahca5892 (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Jayant Jhaveri (Dr) Assessee By: None सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/12/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/02/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee As Well As Revenue Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Order Dated 14.06.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -54, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2016-17. Ita. No.5347/Mum/2019

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Jhaveri (DR)

Section 10(38)Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

that it being a corporate assessee, Long Term Capital Gain u/s. 10(38) though exempt in normal computation is includable for the purposes of book profits under section 115JB of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer therefore be directed to restrict the 14A disallowance at Rs.1.92 lakhs, which

M/S. Syndicate Bank, Manipal vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Udupi

In the result, grounds 6 and 9 are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1885/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sri. S.Ananthan, CA & Smt.Lalitha Rameshwaran, CAFor Respondent: Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40

Assessing Officer also assessed tax payable u/s 115JB of the I.T.Act at Rs.757,13,40,716 after making several additions to the book profits. 4. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the first appellate authority. The CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee ... applicable to the assessee. The first appellate authority allowed the appeal of the assessee-bank in respect of additions made to the book profit on the following issues:- Sl. Particulars Amount in Rs. No. 1. Disallowance u/s 14A 64,59,79,000 2. Cenvat credit reversal

M/S. Jeans Knit Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 706/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 80J

purpose of this appeal are with respect to disallowance of deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act (Ground No.2) and additions made to book profits u/s 115JB of the Act (Ground No.3). Ground No.1 is general ground and Ground 4 and 5 are consequential nature. 3. Brief facts of the case ... account of gratuity, Rs. 75,43,271/- on account of leave encashment and Rs, 5,13,20,045/- on account of bonus to the book profits of the assessee by classifying the same as unascertained and contingent liability. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the AO the assessee preferred

Asstt. CIT, Circle-3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Reliance Corporatio It Park Ltd., Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1893/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita Nos. 1893 & 1894/Mum/2020 (A.Ys: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Acit, Circle -3(3)(1) Vs. M/S Reliance Room No. 609, 6Th Corporate It Park Ltd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Bldg. No. 45, Ttc Indl. Mk Road, Mumbai – Area, Thane-Belapur 400 020. Road, Rabale, Navi Mumbai – 400701. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcd7169H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mrs.Mamta Bansal. Cit Dr Respondent By : Mr. Nimesh Vora.C A .Ar Date Of Hearing 24.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 17.02.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai, Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Income Tax Act.

For Appellant: Mrs.Mamta Bansal. CIT DRFor Respondent: Mr. Nimesh Vora.C A .AR

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92

return of income electronically on 29.11.2013 for the A.Y 2013-14 declaring a total loss of Rs. 120,57,37,408/- and the book profits calculated u/s 115JB of the Act of Rs. Nil. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s 143(2) and ITA No. 1893&1894/Mum/2020

Mr. Kishore Nandlal Chabria, Mumbai vs. The Pr. CIT-16, Mumbai

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

ITA 1554/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1554/Mum/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16) बनधम/ Mr. Kishore Nandlal Pcit-16 Room No.437, 4Th Floor Chabria Vs. 51, 5Th Floor, Radheya Aayakar Bhavan, Building, 14Th Road, Khar Maharishi Karve Road, West, Mumbai-400052. Mumbai-400020. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabpc5779R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Sanjay Singh Revenue By: Shri Vinay Sinha (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 16/11/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 10/02/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 07.07.2020 Passed By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-16, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Pcit”] Relevant To The A.Y.2015-16 In Which The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-16 Has Invoked The Provisions U/S 263 Of The I.T. Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - 2. 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-16, Mumbai Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act. 1961 Is Void Ab Initio Being Had In Law Based On Assumptions & Wrong Facts & Without Jurisdiction. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-16, Mumbai Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Assuming Jurisdiction Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 When

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay SinghFor Respondent: Shri Vinay Sinha (DR)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)

A.Ys. 2009-10 & 2010-11 dated 10.10.2017. The Hon’ble ITAT Pune Bench has held that :- “40. Now, coming to the aspect of book profits which was considered by the Commissioner and the order of the Assessing Officer was held to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue ... which it is picked up. Hence, the Assessing Officer has not formed any opinion 16 A.Y. 2015-16 in respect of computation of book profits in the hands of assessee. Once, no such opinion has been formed by the Assessing Officer, the Commissioner has erred in holding the order

M/S. Tejas Networks Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Circle-1, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 582/BANG/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs

Section 154

this appeal are as under: 1. The learned Assessing Officer erred in not allowing a sum of Rs.2,84,32,055/- reduction in book profit calculation under section 115JB of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Learned Assessing Officer is erred in not allowing ... Rs.2,84,32,055/- being reversal of provision for doubtful debts in computing the book profit under section 115JB of the Act when the same was allowed by the learned Assessing Officer in the normal computation on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The appellant craves leave

M/S Tejats Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 1674/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs

Section 154

this appeal are as under: 1. The learned Assessing Officer erred in not allowing a sum of Rs.2,84,32,055/- reduction in book profit calculation under section 115JB of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Learned Assessing Officer is erred in not allowing ... Rs.2,84,32,055/- being reversal of provision for doubtful debts in computing the book profit under section 115JB of the Act when the same was allowed by the learned Assessing Officer in the normal computation on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The appellant craves leave

Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 694/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs

Section 154

this appeal are as under: 1. The learned Assessing Officer erred in not allowing a sum of Rs.2,84,32,055/- reduction in book profit calculation under section 115JB of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Learned Assessing Officer is erred in not allowing ... Rs.2,84,32,055/- being reversal of provision for doubtful debts in computing the book profit under section 115JB of the Act when the same was allowed by the learned Assessing Officer in the normal computation on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The appellant craves leave

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 621/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs

Section 154

this appeal are as under: 1. The learned Assessing Officer erred in not allowing a sum of Rs.2,84,32,055/- reduction in book profit calculation under section 115JB of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Learned Assessing Officer is erred in not allowing ... Rs.2,84,32,055/- being reversal of provision for doubtful debts in computing the book profit under section 115JB of the Act when the same was allowed by the learned Assessing Officer in the normal computation on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The appellant craves leave

Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 468/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs

Section 154

this appeal are as under: 1. The learned Assessing Officer erred in not allowing a sum of Rs.2,84,32,055/- reduction in book profit calculation under section 115JB of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Learned Assessing Officer is erred in not allowing ... Rs.2,84,32,055/- being reversal of provision for doubtful debts in computing the book profit under section 115JB of the Act when the same was allowed by the learned Assessing Officer in the normal computation on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The appellant craves leave

Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. M/S Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 296/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs

Section 154

this appeal are as under: 1. The learned Assessing Officer erred in not allowing a sum of Rs.2,84,32,055/- reduction in book profit calculation under section 115JB of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Learned Assessing Officer is erred in not allowing ... Rs.2,84,32,055/- being reversal of provision for doubtful debts in computing the book profit under section 115JB of the Act when the same was allowed by the learned Assessing Officer in the normal computation on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The appellant craves leave

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 1119/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs

Section 154

this appeal are as under: 1. The learned Assessing Officer erred in not allowing a sum of Rs.2,84,32,055/- reduction in book profit calculation under section 115JB of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Learned Assessing Officer is erred in not allowing ... Rs.2,84,32,055/- being reversal of provision for doubtful debts in computing the book profit under section 115JB of the Act when the same was allowed by the learned Assessing Officer in the normal computation on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The appellant craves leave

Indo Nissin Foods Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 809/BANG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Krishnan Hariharan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 115JSection 154Section 263

adjusted against the authorized share capital. 5. For FY 2009-10, depreciation loss of Rs. 55,69,139 was set-off and book profit was Nil. This set-off was accepted by the learned DC Circle 12(3) in the scrutiny assessment. Subsequently, the assessment order was rectified under section ... year. Out of Rs. 1,42,26,745 brought forward to FY 2009-10, Rs. 55,69,139 was set-off against the book-profit based on the Sumi Motherson case. 9. In the Surat Mills case, the assessee was subject to a rehabilitation scheme

Srf Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 1, Ltu, New Delhi

Appeals are allowed

ITA 6693/DEL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: The Hearing Of The Appeal.

Section 28Section 37

account of Certified Emission Reduction (‘CER’s) / (‘Carbon Credits’) amounting to ` 93,85,40,499/- may held to be excluded from the computation of ‘book profits’ under section (‘u/s’) 115JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’).” “5. The Hon’ble ITAT may be pleased to grant the claim ... above, another issue raised by the assessee, by way of additional ground of appeal no.4, is the exclusion of carbon credits from the book profits computed under section 115JB of the Act. It was submitted that the above additional ground is legal ground, all the facts are available on record

M/S. Fortigo Network Logistics Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(1)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 2174/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Sri G.S. Prashanth, A.RFor Respondent: Sri M.K. Biju, D.R

Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

Bangalore Page 9 of 12 the Income-tax Act, to the extent of the excess over the tax payable with reference to the book profits in accordance with the law applicable thereto; (v) any amount representing provisions made for meeting liabilities, other than ascertained liabilities; (vi) any amount representing contingent

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jagson International Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.276/Del

ITA 276/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rahul PrabhakarFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Maurya, CIT

Section 115JSection 14A

storage. It filed its return of income declaring income of Rs.2,17,49,610/- under normal provisions of the I.T. Act, 1961 and at book profit at Rs.64,93,03,889/- under section 115JB of the I.T. Act, 1961. During the course of 3 ITA.Nos.1001 & 1002/Del./2016 And ITA.No ... appellant. Accordingly, ground nos.7 & 9 for A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 respectively are allowed”. 3.7. So far as the order challenging the computation of book profit by ignoring the provisions of Section 115VO is concerned, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the same by observing as under : “10.2. This ground

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jagson International Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.276/Del

ITA 1002/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rahul PrabhakarFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Maurya, CIT

Section 115JSection 14A

storage. It filed its return of income declaring income of Rs.2,17,49,610/- under normal provisions of the I.T. Act, 1961 and at book profit at Rs.64,93,03,889/- under section 115JB of the I.T. Act, 1961. During the course of 3 ITA.Nos.1001 & 1002/Del./2016 And ITA.No ... appellant. Accordingly, ground nos.7 & 9 for A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 respectively are allowed”. 3.7. So far as the order challenging the computation of book profit by ignoring the provisions of Section 115VO is concerned, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the same by observing as under : “10.2. This ground

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jagson International Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.276/Del

ITA 1001/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rahul PrabhakarFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Maurya, CIT

Section 115JSection 14A

storage. It filed its return of income declaring income of Rs.2,17,49,610/- under normal provisions of the I.T. Act, 1961 and at book profit at Rs.64,93,03,889/- under section 115JB of the I.T. Act, 1961. During the course of 3 ITA.Nos.1001 & 1002/Del./2016 And ITA.No ... appellant. Accordingly, ground nos.7 & 9 for A.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 respectively are allowed”. 3.7. So far as the order challenging the computation of book profit by ignoring the provisions of Section 115VO is concerned, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the same by observing as under : “10.2. This ground

Tata Realty and Infrastructure Ltd, Mumbai vs. Ast CIT 2(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 763/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Sanjeev Kashyap

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)

advance given to IAL had neither been included in the taxable business income computed under the normal provision nor it was included in the book profit computed u/s 115JB of the Act. It was submitted by the assessee that due to financial difficulty IAL was not able to repay such ... justified in nullifying the action of the AO in making the addition of such accrued interest while working out the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act without considering that the Ld. AO had held in the order that the assessee's profit & loss account was not prepared in accordance

“book profits”

Leading authorities on book profits

Judgments citing book profits

Kirloskar Toyota Textile Machinery Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

Skil Infrastructure Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Range Central Circle 6(3), Mumbai

M/S. Syndicate Bank, Manipal vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Udupi

M/S. Jeans Knit Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

Asstt. CIT, Circle-3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Reliance Corporatio It Park Ltd., Navi Mumbai

Mr. Kishore Nandlal Chabria, Mumbai vs. The Pr. CIT-16, Mumbai

M/S. Tejas Networks Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Circle-1, Bengaluru

M/S Tejats Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central, Bangalore

Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore

Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore

Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. M/S Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore

Indo Nissin Foods Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

Srf Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 1, Ltu, New Delhi

M/S. Fortigo Network Logistics Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(1)(1), Bengaluru

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jagson International Ltd., New Delhi

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jagson International Ltd., New Delhi

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jagson International Ltd., New Delhi

Tata Realty and Infrastructure Ltd, Mumbai vs. Ast CIT 2(3)(1), Mumbai