← All Phrases

“profits and gains of business or profession”

Income HeadsSection 28Section 281,710 judgments

The decision most relied on for profits and gains of business or profession is CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. (358 ITR 295), cited in 935 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on profits and gains of business or profession

CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd.
358 ITR 295 · 2013 · Supreme Court
935
citing judgments

When an income or expenditure is revenue neutral across different assessment years, where any benefit derived is offset by a corresponding liability or reversal, no additional tax liability arises, particularly concerning income recognition under the mercantile system of accounting.

Southern Technologies Ltd. v. JCIT
320 ITR 577 · 2010 · Supreme Court
353
citing judgments

The case concerns the allowability of deductions for provisions made under Section 36 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, especially those related to bad and doubtful debts. It distinguishes such deductions from the recognition of interest income on non-performing assets (NPAs).

Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh v. ITO
191 ITR 667 · 1991 · Supreme Court
254
citing judgments

Section 40A(3) is not absolute, and its application considers business expediency, practical difficulties, and other relevant factors, while keeping in mind its objective to curb the practice of ploughing unaccounted money into the system.

Karanpura Development Co. Ltd. v. CIT
44 ITR 362 · 1962 · Supreme Court
157
citing judgments

The income derived from letting out assets, such as coal mining leases, constitutes "profits and gains of business or profession" if the primary object and activity of the assessee company are to acquire, develop, and sub-lease such assets. This classification holds even if the income arises from letting, provided the letting itself constitutes the assessee's business.

(P.) Ltd. v. CIT
56 ITR 52 · 1965 · Supreme Court
146
citing judgments

Expenditure is revenue if incurred for operating a business to earn profit, even if an incidental enduring advantage results; it is capital if it creates an asset or an enduring advantage for the entire business structure.

Anupam Tele Services v. ITO
366 ITR 122 · 2014 · High Court
124
citing judgments

Section 40A(3) disallowances are not absolute; genuine and bonafide cash payments, where the payee's identity is established and business expediency is proven, fall outside its scope, as the section's purpose is to curb unaccounted money, not disallow genuine expenditure.

ACG Associated Capsule Private Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central IV, Mumbai
3 SCC 321 · 2022 · Reported
89
citing judgments

Profits of a business are computed under the head 'Profits and Gains of Business or Profession' and then reduced by specific receipts mentioned in Explanation (baa) to Section 80HHC. This means that for the purposes of Section 80HHC, only profits computed under the business head are considered, with subsequent adjustments for specified receipts.

Rayala Corporation Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT
386 ITR 500 · 2016 · Supreme Court
89
citing judgments

If an assessee company's main business object is to acquire and rent out properties, the rental income derived is taxable as 'Profits and gains of business or profession', rather than 'Income from house property', as the nature of the activity constitutes a business.

Judgments citing profits and gains of business or profession

M/S Tamilnadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle 3 [1], Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 353/CHNY/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.: 353/Chny/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Tamilnadu State The Acit, Marketing Corporation Ltd., Vs. Corporate Circle 3(1), Cmda Tower, Ii, Iv Floor, Chennai. Gandhi Irwin Bridge Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. Pan: Aaact 2964P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri R.Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Rajan, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 16.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Revision Order Passed U/S.263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-3 In Revision No.Pcit, Chennai-3/Revision-263/100000339483/2022 Dated 31.03.2022. The Assessment Was Framed By The Acit, Corporate Circle-3(1), Chennai For The Assessment Year 2014-15 U/S.143(3) Of The Act Vide Order Dated 30.12.2016. 2. The Only Issue In This Appeal Of Assessee Is As Regards To The Revision Order Passed By Pcit By Holding The Assessment Framed As Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue On Account Of Value Added Tax Paid By Assessee & Claimed As Deduction U/S.37 R.W.S. 43B Of The Act & Allowed.

For Appellant: Shri R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37Section 40

noted that this provision specified the amounts which shall not be deducted in computing the income chargeable under the head “profits and gains of business or profession”. According to PCIT, statutory duties like income-tax, wealth tax, etc., are non-deductible expenditure and disputes have arisen in respect of some ... State Government, shall not be allowed as deduction for the purpose of computation of income of such undertakings under the head “Profits and Gains of business or profession”. The change of VAT which is levied exclusively on the State Government undertaking by the State Government and therefore comes within

Batliboi Renewable Energy Soluations Private Limited, Chennai vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA 813/CHNY/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.789/Chny/2022 (िनधा0रण वष0 / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S.Electrical India Adit, Cpc बनाम/ New No.205, Old No.92/2, Lake View Road, Bengaluru. Vs. West Mambalam, Chennai-600 033. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafe-2087-M (अपीलाथ!/Appellant) : ($%थ! / Respondent) अपीलाथ!कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri I.Dinesh, Advocate $%थ!कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Arv Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.813/Chny/2022 (िनधा0रण वष0 / Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/S. Batliboi Renewable Energy Adit, Cpc बनाम/ Solutions Private Ltd. Bengaluru. No.28, Thiru-Vi-Ka Industrial Estate, Vs. Ekkaduthangal, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacb-6055-H (अपीलाथ!/Appellant) : ($%थ! / Respondent) अपीलाथ!कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Kumar (Advocate) – Ld. Ar $%थ!कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Arv Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Dr & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.788/Chny/2022 (िनधा0रण वष0 / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Mr. Abdul Hassan Risvi Adit, Cpc 27, 3Rd Floor, Chindhamani Building, बनाम/ Bengaluru. Meeran Sahib Street, Mount Road, Vs. Chennai-600 002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Audpr-2171-E (अपीलाथ!/Appellant) : ($%थ! / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri I.Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43Section 43B

with a non obstante clause overriding Sections 30-38), deals with what cannot be deducted in computing income under the head “Profits and Gains of Business and Profession”. Likewise, Section 40A(2) opens with a non-obstante clause and spells out what expenses and payments are not deductible in certain ... employee in the relevant fund by the due date. Where such income is not chargeable to tax under the head “profits and gains of business or profession” it will be assessed under the head “income from other sources.” 36. Significantly, the same Finance Act, 1987 also introduced provisos to Section

Electrical India, Chennai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA 789/CHNY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.789/Chny/2022 (िनधा0रण वष0 / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S.Electrical India Adit, Cpc बनाम/ New No.205, Old No.92/2, Lake View Road, Bengaluru. Vs. West Mambalam, Chennai-600 033. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafe-2087-M (अपीलाथ!/Appellant) : ($%थ! / Respondent) अपीलाथ!कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri I.Dinesh, Advocate $%थ!कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Arv Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.813/Chny/2022 (िनधा0रण वष0 / Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/S. Batliboi Renewable Energy Adit, Cpc बनाम/ Solutions Private Ltd. Bengaluru. No.28, Thiru-Vi-Ka Industrial Estate, Vs. Ekkaduthangal, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacb-6055-H (अपीलाथ!/Appellant) : ($%थ! / Respondent) अपीलाथ!कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Kumar (Advocate) – Ld. Ar $%थ!कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Arv Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Dr & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.788/Chny/2022 (िनधा0रण वष0 / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Mr. Abdul Hassan Risvi Adit, Cpc 27, 3Rd Floor, Chindhamani Building, बनाम/ Bengaluru. Meeran Sahib Street, Mount Road, Vs. Chennai-600 002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Audpr-2171-E (अपीलाथ!/Appellant) : ($%थ! / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri I.Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43Section 43B

with a non obstante clause overriding Sections 30-38), deals with what cannot be deducted in computing income under the head “Profits and Gains of Business and Profession”. Likewise, Section 40A(2) opens with a non-obstante clause and spells out what expenses and payments are not deductible in certain ... employee in the relevant fund by the due date. Where such income is not chargeable to tax under the head “profits and gains of business or profession” it will be assessed under the head “income from other sources.” 36. Significantly, the same Finance Act, 1987 also introduced provisos to Section

Mr. Abdul Hassn Rizvi, Chennai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA 788/CHNY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.789/Chny/2022 (िनधा0रण वष0 / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S.Electrical India Adit, Cpc बनाम/ New No.205, Old No.92/2, Lake View Road, Bengaluru. Vs. West Mambalam, Chennai-600 033. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafe-2087-M (अपीलाथ!/Appellant) : ($%थ! / Respondent) अपीलाथ!कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri I.Dinesh, Advocate $%थ!कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Arv Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.813/Chny/2022 (िनधा0रण वष0 / Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/S. Batliboi Renewable Energy Adit, Cpc बनाम/ Solutions Private Ltd. Bengaluru. No.28, Thiru-Vi-Ka Industrial Estate, Vs. Ekkaduthangal, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacb-6055-H (अपीलाथ!/Appellant) : ($%थ! / Respondent) अपीलाथ!कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Kumar (Advocate) – Ld. Ar $%थ!कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Arv Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Dr & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.788/Chny/2022 (िनधा0रण वष0 / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Mr. Abdul Hassan Risvi Adit, Cpc 27, 3Rd Floor, Chindhamani Building, बनाम/ Bengaluru. Meeran Sahib Street, Mount Road, Vs. Chennai-600 002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Audpr-2171-E (अपीलाथ!/Appellant) : ($%थ! / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri I.Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43Section 43B

with a non obstante clause overriding Sections 30-38), deals with what cannot be deducted in computing income under the head “Profits and Gains of Business and Profession”. Likewise, Section 40A(2) opens with a non-obstante clause and spells out what expenses and payments are not deductible in certain ... employee in the relevant fund by the due date. Where such income is not chargeable to tax under the head “profits and gains of business or profession” it will be assessed under the head “income from other sources.” 36. Significantly, the same Finance Act, 1987 also introduced provisos to Section

Dharmaraj Shankar Ganesh, Chennai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA 756/CHNY/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.789/Chny/2022 (िनधा0रण वष0 / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S.Electrical India Adit, Cpc बनाम/ New No.205, Old No.92/2, Lake View Road, Bengaluru. Vs. West Mambalam, Chennai-600 033. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafe-2087-M (अपीलाथ!/Appellant) : ($%थ! / Respondent) अपीलाथ!कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri I.Dinesh, Advocate $%थ!कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Arv Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.813/Chny/2022 (िनधा0रण वष0 / Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/S. Batliboi Renewable Energy Adit, Cpc बनाम/ Solutions Private Ltd. Bengaluru. No.28, Thiru-Vi-Ka Industrial Estate, Vs. Ekkaduthangal, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacb-6055-H (अपीलाथ!/Appellant) : ($%थ! / Respondent) अपीलाथ!कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Kumar (Advocate) – Ld. Ar $%थ!कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Arv Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Dr & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.788/Chny/2022 (िनधा0रण वष0 / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Mr. Abdul Hassan Risvi Adit, Cpc 27, 3Rd Floor, Chindhamani Building, बनाम/ Bengaluru. Meeran Sahib Street, Mount Road, Vs. Chennai-600 002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Audpr-2171-E (अपीलाथ!/Appellant) : ($%थ! / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri I.Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43Section 43B

with a non obstante clause overriding Sections 30-38), deals with what cannot be deducted in computing income under the head “Profits and Gains of Business and Profession”. Likewise, Section 40A(2) opens with a non-obstante clause and spells out what expenses and payments are not deductible in certain ... employee in the relevant fund by the due date. Where such income is not chargeable to tax under the head “profits and gains of business or profession” it will be assessed under the head “income from other sources.” 36. Significantly, the same Finance Act, 1987 also introduced provisos to Section

DCIT, Chennai vs. B.V.Reddy Enterprises Pvt Ltd., Chennai

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

ITA 1914/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1914/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. B.V. Reddy Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, New No. 21/Old No. 10A, First Floor, Corporate Circle 1(2), Umayal Road, Kilpauk, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 010. [Pan:Aaccn2252L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 04.11.2022 : आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Chennai, Dated 29.03.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Facts Are, In Brief, That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2010-11 On 13.10.2010 Admitting Total Income Of ₹.15,50,25,060/-. The Assessing Officer Has Completed The Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Dated

For Appellant: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 14Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

These returns were perused. They reveal the fact that the appellant has been regularly reporting income under the head 'Profits and gains of Business or Profession' as well as from other heads such as 'capital gains' and 'other sources'. The appellant's submissions are replete with material facts and judicial

DCIT, CC 1(1), Mumbai vs. Edelweiss Tokio Life Insurance Ltd., Mumbai

In the result appeal for AY 2014-15 filed by ld

ITA 2050/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, Edelweiss House Off Cst Vs. M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Edelweiss House Off Cst Bldg., (Annexe0, M.K.Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg., (Annexe0, Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) 3 Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacce2709H Assessee By : Shri. Ravikant Pathak Revenue By : Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing: 11.10.2022. Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2022. O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (CIT
Section 10Section 14Section 44

respect of expenditure incurred................". The chapter in question is chapter IV. This chapter also contains the provisions relating to computation of profits and gains of business or profession. Section 44 specifically excludes the provisions of the Act relating to computation of income, inter alia, those contained in "Section

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Edelweiss Tokio Life Insurance Limited, Mumbai

In the result appeal for AY 2014-15 filed by ld

ITA 2049/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, Edelweiss House Off Cst Vs. M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Edelweiss House Off Cst Bldg., (Annexe0, M.K.Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg., (Annexe0, Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) 3 Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacce2709H Assessee By : Shri. Ravikant Pathak Revenue By : Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing: 11.10.2022. Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2022. O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (CIT
Section 10Section 14Section 44

respect of expenditure incurred................". The chapter in question is chapter IV. This chapter also contains the provisions relating to computation of profits and gains of business or profession. Section 44 specifically excludes the provisions of the Act relating to computation of income, inter alia, those contained in "Section

DCIT, CC 1(1), Mumbai vs. Edelweiss Tokio Life Insurance Ltd., Mumbai

In the result appeal for AY 2014-15 filed by ld

ITA 2048/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, Edelweiss House Off Cst Vs. M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Edelweiss House Off Cst Bldg., (Annexe0, M.K.Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg., (Annexe0, Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) 3 Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacce2709H Assessee By : Shri. Ravikant Pathak Revenue By : Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing: 11.10.2022. Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2022. O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (CIT
Section 10Section 14Section 44

respect of expenditure incurred................". The chapter in question is chapter IV. This chapter also contains the provisions relating to computation of profits and gains of business or profession. Section 44 specifically excludes the provisions of the Act relating to computation of income, inter alia, those contained in "Section

DCIT, CC 1(1), Mumbai vs. Edelweiss Tokio Life Insurance Ltd., Mumbai

In the result appeal for AY 2014-15 filed by ld

ITA 2047/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, Edelweiss House Off Cst Vs. M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Edelweiss House Off Cst Bldg., (Annexe0, M.K.Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg., (Annexe0, Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) 3 Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacce2709H Assessee By : Shri. Ravikant Pathak Revenue By : Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing: 11.10.2022. Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2022. O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (CIT
Section 10Section 14Section 44

respect of expenditure incurred................". The chapter in question is chapter IV. This chapter also contains the provisions relating to computation of profits and gains of business or profession. Section 44 specifically excludes the provisions of the Act relating to computation of income, inter alia, those contained in "Section

DCIT, CC 1(1), Mumbai vs. Edelweiss Tokio Life Insurance Ltd., Mumbai

In the result appeal for AY 2014-15 filed by ld

ITA 2046/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, Edelweiss House Off Cst Vs. M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Edelweiss House Off Cst Bldg., (Annexe0, M.K.Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg., (Annexe0, Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) 3 Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Edelweiss Tokio Life Dcit-Cc1(1), 9Th Floor, 905, Insurance Ltd. Pratistha Bhavan, Old Vs. Edelweiss House Off Cst C.G.O. Bldg.,(Annexe0, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Rd, Kalina, Santacruz(E), Mumbai-400 098 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacce2709H Assessee By : Shri. Ravikant Pathak Revenue By : Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing: 11.10.2022. Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2022. O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: Shri. Suresh Periasamy, (CIT
Section 10Section 14Section 44

respect of expenditure incurred................". The chapter in question is chapter IV. This chapter also contains the provisions relating to computation of profits and gains of business or profession. Section 44 specifically excludes the provisions of the Act relating to computation of income, inter alia, those contained in "Section