← All Phrases

“ICDS”

ICDS & AccountingSection 145(2)Section 145(2)865 judgments

The decision most relied on for ICDS is ICDS Ltd. v. CIT (350 ITR 527), cited in 280 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on ICDS

ICDS Ltd. v. CIT
350 ITR 527 · 2013 · Supreme Court
280
citing judgments

An assessee engaged in the business of hire purchase or leasing, being the lessor, is entitled to claim depreciation on assets leased out, even if the assets are registered in the name of the lessee and used by the lessee.

SB) in Indusind Bank Ltd. v. ADIT
19 Taxmann.com 173 · 2012 · Reported
28
citing judgments

A Special Bench decision of the Tribunal rendered prior to a Supreme Court decision is subordinate to the Supreme Court ruling.

ICDS Ltd. v. CIT
10 SCC 529 · Reported
24
citing judgments

The Supreme Court remands a matter when an assessee is deprived of the opportunity to cross-examine individuals whose statements were relied upon by the Revenue under Section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act.

ICDS Limited v. CIT (
69 Taxmann.com 317 · 2016 · High Court
24
citing judgments

In lease transactions, only the lessor is entitled to claim depreciation, regardless of whether the lease is a finance lease or an operating lease. This is because the substantial risks and rewards of ownership are not transferred to the lessee.

Manipal Finance Corporation Limited v. ACTT Circle-1 Udupi
49 Taxmann.com 353 · 2014 · High Court
19
citing judgments

This case discusses the allowability of depreciation on leased assets in finance leases, a matter that has been addressed by the Supreme Court in ICDS Ltd vs CIT.

CIT v. G Narasimhan
236 ITR 327 · 1999 · Supreme Court
15
citing judgments

Accumulated profits for the purpose of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) are to be computed in accordance with the Income Computation and Disclosure Standards (ICDS) rather than opening balances as per Indian GAAP. This case also touches upon the definition of 'transfer' under section 2(47).

Chamber of Tax Consultants & Anr. v. UOI
87 Taxmann.com 92 · 2017 · High Court
10
citing judgments

The Delhi High Court held that Income Computation and Disclosure Standards (ICDS) notified under Section 145(2) were ultra vires the provisions of the Income Tax Act, as they exceeded delegated legislative power. Subsequently, Section 43CB was introduced to provide statutory backing for certain ICDS provisions, such as those related to construction contracts using the percentage of completion method.

Judgments citing ICDS

The DCIT, Central Circle-1, Rajkot vs. Vivan Commercial LLP, Rajkot

ITA 738/RJT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita Nos. 561 & 562/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years: 2021-22 & 2022-23 M/S. Vivan Commercial Llp The Dcit, Cc-1, R K World Tower, Sheetal Park, 150 Aayakar Bhavan, Amruta Estate, बनाम/ Ft Ring Road, Rajkot - 360001 M G Road, Rajkot - 360001 Vs. "थायीलेखासं ./ जीआइआरसं /. Pan/Gir No.: Aasfv2565P अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.Ita No. 738/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: 2021-22 The Dcit, Cc-1, Vivan Commercial Llp Aayakar Bhavan, Amruta Estate, 1 Pearl Plaza, 150 Ft Ring Road, Near G T बनाम/ School, Rajkot - 360001 M G Road, Rajkot - 360001 Vs. "थायीलेखासं ./ जीआइआरसं /. Pan/Gir No.: Aasfv2565P अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.It(Ss)A No. 18/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: 2022-23 The Dcit, Cc-1, Vivan Commercial Llp Aayakar Bhavan, Amruta Estate, 1 Pearl Plaza, 150 Ft Ring Road, Near G T बनाम/ School, Rajkot - 360001 M G Road, Rajkot - 360001 Vs. "थायीलेखासं ./ जीआइआरसं /. Pan/Gir No.: Aasfv2565P अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld.Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/01/2026 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/02/2026

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld.CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)

year in which the on-money has been received, ignoring that the same is not in accordance with Accounting principles as per ICDS-3 applicable to Real Estate Developers and also not appreciating that the income on account of undisclosed on-money receipt was required to be assessed