← All Phrases

“mercantile system of accounting”

ICDS & AccountingSection 145Section 1451,487 judgments

The decision most relied on for mercantile system of accounting is CIT v. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd. (312 ITR 254), cited in 968 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on mercantile system of accounting

CIT v. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd.
312 ITR 254 · 2009 · Supreme Court
968
citing judgments

Foreign exchange fluctuations, whether gains or losses, are inextricably linked to the underlying business transaction and must be accounted for under the mercantile system. The Supreme Court also affirmed the standard accounting principle of valuing stock at cost or net realisable value, whichever is lower.

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.

Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
314 ITR 62 · 2009 · Supreme Court
739
citing judgments

A provision for expenses, such as warranty, is a deductible liability for income tax purposes if it constitutes a present obligation arising from past events, and a reliable estimate of the amount of obligation is possible.

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.

Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT
37 ITR 288 · 1959 · Supreme Court
570
citing judgments

Where an assessee maintains regular books of account, and these books are not rejected or found defective by the Assessing Officer, any cash deposits or available cash shown in the cash book, if sufficient to cover the transaction, cannot be treated as unexplained income or an addition under sections 68 or 69A.

Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT
37 ITR 1 · 1959 · Supreme Court
341
citing judgments

When following the mercantile system of accounting, provisions for liabilities made on a scientific and rational basis are allowable as deductions, even if their actual quantification and discharge are deferred to a future date.

United Commercial Bank v. CIT
240 ITR 355 · 1999 · Supreme Court
314
citing judgments

Liabilities accrued on a notional basis are allowable as deductions under the mercantile system of accounting even if their exact quantification or discharge is deferred to a future date or if the demand itself is disputed.

M.M.Aqua Technologies Limited v. CIT
436 ITR 582 · 2021 · Supreme Court
308
citing judgments

Amendments to tax law that impose new obligations or change existing legal positions apply prospectively, even if stated to be "for the removal of doubts." The judgment also clarifies that deductions under Section 43B are allowed only on actual payment, overriding the mercantile system of accounting.

Judgments citing mercantile system of accounting

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 201/VIZ/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

towards upfront premium received on lease of lands, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is following the mercantile system of accounting and in accordance with the Accounting Standard on leases (AS-19) issued by the ICAI upfront premium received on leasing of lands which is amortized over the period ... risk & rewards incidental to the ownership were not transferred to the lessee. It was submitted by the Ld. AR that in the mercantile system of accounting being regularly followed by the assessee recognizing the rent 9 which was received on upfront for a period of 30 years over the lease

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 200/VIZ/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

towards upfront premium received on lease of lands, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is following the mercantile system of accounting and in accordance with the Accounting Standard on leases (AS-19) issued by the ICAI upfront premium received on leasing of lands which is amortized over the period ... risk & rewards incidental to the ownership were not transferred to the lessee. It was submitted by the Ld. AR that in the mercantile system of accounting being regularly followed by the assessee recognizing the rent 9 which was received on upfront for a period of 30 years over the lease

Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 193/VIZ/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

towards upfront premium received on lease of lands, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is following the mercantile system of accounting and in accordance with the Accounting Standard on leases (AS-19) issued by the ICAI upfront premium received on leasing of lands which is amortized over the period ... risk & rewards incidental to the ownership were not transferred to the lessee. It was submitted by the Ld. AR that in the mercantile system of accounting being regularly followed by the assessee recognizing the rent 9 which was received on upfront for a period of 30 years over the lease

Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 191/VIZ/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

towards upfront premium received on lease of lands, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is following the mercantile system of accounting and in accordance with the Accounting Standard on leases (AS-19) issued by the ICAI upfront premium received on leasing of lands which is amortized over the period ... risk & rewards incidental to the ownership were not transferred to the lessee. It was submitted by the Ld. AR that in the mercantile system of accounting being regularly followed by the assessee recognizing the rent 9 which was received on upfront for a period of 30 years over the lease

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam vs. M/S. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 125/VIZ/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

towards upfront premium received on lease of lands, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is following the mercantile system of accounting and in accordance with the Accounting Standard on leases (AS-19) issued by the ICAI upfront premium received on leasing of lands which is amortized over the period ... risk & rewards incidental to the ownership were not transferred to the lessee. It was submitted by the Ld. AR that in the mercantile system of accounting being regularly followed by the assessee recognizing the rent 9 which was received on upfront for a period of 30 years over the lease

Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 106/VIZ/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

towards upfront premium received on lease of lands, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is following the mercantile system of accounting and in accordance with the Accounting Standard on leases (AS-19) issued by the ICAI upfront premium received on leasing of lands which is amortized over the period ... risk & rewards incidental to the ownership were not transferred to the lessee. It was submitted by the Ld. AR that in the mercantile system of accounting being regularly followed by the assessee recognizing the rent 9 which was received on upfront for a period of 30 years over the lease

Lupin Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT, Circle-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 77/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, Shri PranayFor Respondent: Ms. Manju Thakur, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)

have held that the deductibility of discount during the vesting period, as prescribed under the SEBI Guidelines, matches with the treatment under the mercantile system of accounting. To that extent, we also hold that the SEBI guidelines are applicable in the matter of deduction of discount. Neither there

Asstt. CIT -Circle-3(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Lupin Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 1241/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, Shri PranayFor Respondent: Ms. Manju Thakur, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)

have held that the deductibility of discount during the vesting period, as prescribed under the SEBI Guidelines, matches with the treatment under the mercantile system of accounting. To that extent, we also hold that the SEBI guidelines are applicable in the matter of deduction of discount. Neither there

Gujarat Industries Power Co.Ltd., Baroda vs. The ACIT., Circle-1(1), Baroda

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 3049/AHD/2010[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Mar 2024AY 1998-99

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos. 3049 & 3050/Ahd/2010 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Years: (1998-1999 & 1999 & 2000) Gujarat Industries Power Company The Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Vs. Income Tax, P.O Petrochemicals, Circle-1(1), Baroda-391346. Baroda.

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 147Section 148

come forward with its letter dated 4-4-2002 at the instance of this office letter dated 14-02-2002. The assessee follows mercantile system of accounting and under the provisions of IT Act also it was required to disclose the above mentioned interest income in its return of income

Viswaat Chemicals Limited, Mumbai vs. CIT(A)-54, Earnest House

In the result, original grounds no

ITA 3494/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalviswaat Chemicals Limited, 909/910 Eco Star, Vishweshwar Nagar, Behind Udupi Vihae Hotel, Mumbai-400 063 Pan: Aaacv4184B ...... Appellant Vs. Dcit Cen. Cir. 6(3), 102, 1St Floor, Earnest House, Ncpa Marg, Nariman Point Mumbai- 400021 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Ld. DR
Section 234BSection 250Section 28Section 35Section 35(1)Section 35(1)(i)Section 37

duly approved by the customs authorities and actually received.Being 12 Viswaat Chemicals Limited a company, the assessee is duty-bound to follow the mercantile system of accounting, but as submitted by the assessee this particular income is being declared on an actual receipt basis and the amount involved is also

Jt. CIT (OSD) - 2 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Sons Private Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1349/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं. 1093/मुं/2019 (नि.व. 2012-13)

present case, the net provision for pension of Rs. 21.94 crore was claimed as deduction on the basis that assessee is following mercantile system of accounting. It is not in dispute that such an estimate has been made by the assessee from year to year to provide for the pension

Tata Sons Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)-58, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1093/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.1093/मुं/2019(िन.व. 2012-13) Tata Sons Private Limited, Bombay House, 24, Homi Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai 400 001. ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aaact-4060-A बनाम Vs. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-58, Jcit, Room No.552, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, ....."ितवादी/Respondent Mumbai – 400 020 आअसं.1349/मुं/2019 (िन.व. 2012-13) Jt.Cit (Osd)-2(3)(1), Mumbai Room No.552, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Mumbai – 400 020 बनाम Vs. Tata Sons Private Limited, Bombay House, 24, Homi Mody Stree, Fort, Mumbai 400 001. ....."ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaact-4060-A अपीलाथ""ारा/Appellant By : Ms. Arati Vissanji & Ms. Aastha Shah, Advocates. "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : S/Shri Manoj Kumar, Cit-Dr & Ujjwal Kumar Chavhan, Sr.Ar सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 22/12/2023 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 15/03/2024

For Appellant: Ms. Arati Vissanji and Ms. Aastha Shah, AdvocatesFor Respondent: S/Shri Manoj Kumar, CIT-DR and Ujjwal Kumar Chavhan, Sr.AR

present case, the net provision for pension of Rs. 21.94 crore was claimed as deduction on the basis that assessee is following mercantile system of accounting. It is not in dispute that such an estimate has been made by the assessee from year to 17 ITA NO.1349/MUM/2019(A.Y.2012-13) year

Clifford Chance Pte Ltd, Singapore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle Int. Tax

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the AYs 2020-21

ITA 3377/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Mar 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandrasa No. 437/Del/2023

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 9

making an addition of Rs. 10,23,649 on account of interest on income tax refund determined for AY 2019-20 based on mercantile system of accounting, without appreciating that no refund and/or interest on income tax refund was received by the appellant. 15.1 Without prejudice, the assessing officer erred

Clifford Chance Pte. Ltd., Singapore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Civic Centre

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the AYs 2020-21

ITA 2681/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Mar 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandrasa No. 437/Del/2023

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 9

making an addition of Rs. 10,23,649 on account of interest on income tax refund determined for AY 2019-20 based on mercantile system of accounting, without appreciating that no refund and/or interest on income tax refund was received by the appellant. 15.1 Without prejudice, the assessing officer erred

P. K. Parikh, HUF, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 556/AHD/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Mar 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Or During The Hearing Of This Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Kishore K. Parikh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. D.R
Section 139Section 43BSection 44A

have paid and not in the year in which the liability to pay such sum was incurred. However, if the taxpayer follows the mercantile system of accounting and if all the liability is paid on or before due date of filing the return of income, the same can be claimed

Srm Engineering Construction Cororation Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(3), Chennai

Appeal stand allowed

ITA 489/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.489/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S.Srm Engineering Construction Dcit बनाम/ Corporation Ltd. Central Circle-1(3) No.24, G.N. Chetty Road, T. Nagar, Chennai. Vs. Chennai-600 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcs-5856-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1084/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit M/S.Srm Engineering बनाम/ Central Circle-1(3) Construction Corporation Ltd. Chennai. No.24, G.N. Chetty Road, T. Nagar Vs. Chennai-600 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcs-5856-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri D. Anand (Advocate)- Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri N. Balakrishnan (Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12-03-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12-03-2024

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri N. Balakrishnan (CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 41(1)

noted that this deduction was denied on the ground that VAT payments pertained to earlier years and since the assessee was following mercantile system of accounting, the same could not be allowed to the assessee. The assessee contended that the expenditure was crystallized and ascertained only during the previous year

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Chennai vs. Srm Engineering Construction Corporation Limited, Chennai

Appeal stand allowed

ITA 1084/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.489/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S.Srm Engineering Construction Dcit बनाम/ Corporation Ltd. Central Circle-1(3) No.24, G.N. Chetty Road, T. Nagar, Chennai. Vs. Chennai-600 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcs-5856-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1084/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit M/S.Srm Engineering बनाम/ Central Circle-1(3) Construction Corporation Ltd. Chennai. No.24, G.N. Chetty Road, T. Nagar Vs. Chennai-600 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcs-5856-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri D. Anand (Advocate)- Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri N. Balakrishnan (Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12-03-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12-03-2024

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri N. Balakrishnan (CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 41(1)

noted that this deduction was denied on the ground that VAT payments pertained to earlier years and since the assessee was following mercantile system of accounting, the same could not be allowed to the assessee. The assessee contended that the expenditure was crystallized and ascertained only during the previous year

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4081/DEL/2010[2003-04]Status: PendingITAT Delhi12 Mar 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR

customs duty pertaining to the previous year relevant to AY 1987- 88 was Rs. 1,64,87,375. The Appellant therein, following the mercantile system of accounting, claimed deduction on account of the said additional customs duty, in as much as the same was included in the landed cost ... Rs.36,38,43,197/- was debited to consumption of raw material and components in the profit and loss account in accordance with mercantile system of accounting. The same was claimed as business deduction in the computation of income. Vendor-wise details of total provision of Rs.36,38,43,197/- made

DCIT (Ltu) 2, Mumbai vs. Asian Paints Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2959/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Fenil Bhatt a/wFor Respondent: Shri Vachashpati Tripathi
Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 37(1)

fact that such expenses were not crystallised or become payable in the year under consideration. 19. Undisputedly, the assessee is following the mercantile system of accounting, and therefore only such expenses which are crystallised during the Asian Paints Ltd. ITA no.1673/Mum./2019 ITA no.2959/Mum./2019 year can be allowed

Asian Paints Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1673/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Fenil Bhatt a/wFor Respondent: Shri Vachashpati Tripathi
Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 37(1)

fact that such expenses were not crystallised or become payable in the year under consideration. 19. Undisputedly, the assessee is following the mercantile system of accounting, and therefore only such expenses which are crystallised during the Asian Paints Ltd. ITA no.1673/Mum./2019 ITA no.2959/Mum./2019 year can be allowed