← 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

M/S. Macrotech Developers Ltd (Successor to Ajitnath Hi-Tech Builders Pvt. Ltd), Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 5021/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

option of half yearly periodical interest, debenture holders were given another option to accept one time upfront discounted interest payment - Assessee was following mercantile system of accounting - It filed its return claiming deduction of upfront interest charges paid during relevant year - However, said amount was shown as deferred

DCIT Circle- 6(3)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Kohinoor Planet Construction Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 292/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Jayesh DadiaFor Respondent: Smt. Neelam Shukla
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Department to prove that the method in vogue is not correct and it distorts the profits of a particular year. Under the mercantile system of accounting based on the concept of accrual, the method of accounting followed by the assessees is relevant. In the present case, there is no finding

Fouress Engineering (India)Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT-5(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1427/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Fouress Engineering (India) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Pvt. Ltd., Tax-5(1)(2), 4Th Floor, Mahalaxmi Chambers, 22, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Bhulabhai Desai Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400026. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacf 5897 K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Jeevraj P. Jain &For Respondent: Mr. S.N. Kabra, DR

employee of the company. The contention of the assessee was not accepted by Assessing Officer as the assessee is following the mercantile system of accounting. The Ld. CIT(A) concurred with the finding of Assessing Officer holding that the expenses do not pertain to the year. The assessee has clearly

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle - 1, Bellary vs. M/S Auro Minerals, Hospet

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and that of the Assessee allowed

ITA 1543/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Srinivas T. Bidari, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)

assessee. Hence, the assessee was required to reflect these sales as trading receipts in its books of account keeping in view the mercantile system of accounting followed by the assessee. ITA Nos.1543, 1329/Bang/2016 Page 11 of 38 19. With regard to the claim of the Assessee that if the sale ... reducing the amounts as claimed by the Assessee had to be accounted for by the Assessee as its sale. 34. The Assessee follows mercantile system of accounting and the moment sale is complete vis-à-vis the Assessee it had to account for sale in its books of accounts. Sale

M/S Auro Minerals, Hospet vs. Joint Commissionerof Income Tax Bellary Range, Bellary

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and that of the Assessee allowed

ITA 1329/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Srinivas T. Bidari, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)

assessee. Hence, the assessee was required to reflect these sales as trading receipts in its books of account keeping in view the mercantile system of accounting followed by the assessee. ITA Nos.1543, 1329/Bang/2016 Page 11 of 38 19. With regard to the claim of the Assessee that if the sale ... reducing the amounts as claimed by the Assessee had to be accounted for by the Assessee as its sale. 34. The Assessee follows mercantile system of accounting and the moment sale is complete vis-à-vis the Assessee it had to account for sale in its books of accounts. Sale

M/S. the Davangere Harihar Urban Sahakari Bank Niyamitha, Davangere vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Davangere

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2609/BANG/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George K. Georgeassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Muthukrishnan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 145Section 145(1)Section 234

short] which has been amended from 01.04.1997, the assessee has to follow either cash system of accounting or mercantile system of accounting. Hence a letter was issued to the assessee on 5.7.2010 to submit the interest receivable and received for the year ended 31.03.2008, as per M/s. The Davangere Harihar ... held that the interest accruing on sticky loans is taxable to Income Tax on accrual basis where the assessee follows mercantile system of accounting. The above circular was given by the Board to help the State Financial Corporation to change the method of accounting from mercantile to cash basis. Hence

M/S. Geotrix Building Envelope Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessees is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2561/BANG/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Ramasubramaniyan and Shri Sandeep, C.AsFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshini Basaganni, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 431Section 43B

Before the ITA No.2561 /Bang/2019 Page 4 of 9 CIT(A), the assessee submitted that the assessee is maintaining mercantile system of accounting. It had collected taxes during the previous year relevant to the asst. year. Out of the taxes so collected, the assessee had deposited part of the amount ... expenditure nor did the assessed claim any deduction in respect of the amount and considering that the assessed is following the mercantile system of accounting, the question of disallowing the deduction not claimed would not arise. 7. Learned Counsel for the revenue submits that the assessed has sought to evade

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S. Agv Infrastructure Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 198/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Agv Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy # 2013, 3Rd Block, Commissioner Of Janapriya Heavens, Income Tax, Allalasandra, Circle – 1(1)(1), Gkvk Post, Bangalore. Vs. Bangalore – 560065. Pan: Aafca3699F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, Ca : Smt. Priyadarshini Revenue By Basaganni, Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 18-04-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 13-05-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Revenue Against Order Dated 31.10.2019 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-1, Bangalore On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of The Learned Cit (Appeals), In So Far As It Is Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue, Is Opposed To Law & The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Adopting Gross Profit At 8.55% Based On The Trend Of The Gross Profit In The Preceding Three Years

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, CA
Section 143(2)Section 69

estimated in a reasonable manner. It is the contention of the revenue that such estimation is without any basis since the assessee followed mercantile system of accounting and is supposed to declare income on accrual basis and as per Form 26AS. It was submitted that the actual income that ... prayed for remand of both these issues for proper verification. 9. On the contrary, the Ld.AR submitted that, the assessee followed mercantile system of accounting and adopted Percentage Completion Method available in AS - 7. Based on the above, the assessee raised the invoices to the extent of Rs.6

DCIT 1(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra State Co Op Agricultural Rural Multipurpose Developement Bank Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is partly allowed for statistical purposes while for the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2962/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailmaharashtra State Co- Vs. Dcit-(Osd)-1 Op, Agricultural Rural Aayakar Bhavan, Multipurpose M.K. Road, Development Bank Ltd. Mumbai – 400 020 15-A, Morvi Lane, Chowpatty, Girgaum, Mumbai – 400 007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaam9669E Appellant .. Respondent Dcit-1(3)(2) Vs. M/S Maharashtra State R. No. 540, 5Th Floor Co-Op, Agricultural Rural Aayakar Bhavan, Multipurpose M.K. Road, Development Bank Ltd. Mumbai – 400 020 15-A, Morvi Lane, Chowpatty, Girgaum, Mumbai – 400 007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaam9669E Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Ruturaj GurjarFor Respondent: Salil Mishra
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(viia)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

erred in allowing the assessee's claim and thereby failing to appreciate that since assessee is following mercantile system of accounting and as there was no dispute' that the impugned interest amounting to Rs. 126,09,18,997/- accrued it during the previous year, the same was taxable on accrual ... Nos.2171 &2962/Mum/2017 A.Y. 2012-13 Maharashtra State Co-op Agricultural Rural Multipurpose Development Bank Ltd. Vs. DCIT (OSD)-1 assessee was following mercantile system of accounting and the interest accrued to the assessee for the year under consideration, therefore, the claim of deduction of overdue interest of Rs.1

Maharashtra State Co Op Agricultural Rural Multipurpose Developement Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD) 1, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is partly allowed for statistical purposes while for the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2171/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailmaharashtra State Co- Vs. Dcit-(Osd)-1 Op, Agricultural Rural Aayakar Bhavan, Multipurpose M.K. Road, Development Bank Ltd. Mumbai – 400 020 15-A, Morvi Lane, Chowpatty, Girgaum, Mumbai – 400 007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaam9669E Appellant .. Respondent Dcit-1(3)(2) Vs. M/S Maharashtra State R. No. 540, 5Th Floor Co-Op, Agricultural Rural Aayakar Bhavan, Multipurpose M.K. Road, Development Bank Ltd. Mumbai – 400 020 15-A, Morvi Lane, Chowpatty, Girgaum, Mumbai – 400 007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaam9669E Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Ruturaj GurjarFor Respondent: Salil Mishra
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(viia)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

erred in allowing the assessee's claim and thereby failing to appreciate that since assessee is following mercantile system of accounting and as there was no dispute' that the impugned interest amounting to Rs. 126,09,18,997/- accrued it during the previous year, the same was taxable on accrual ... Nos.2171 &2962/Mum/2017 A.Y. 2012-13 Maharashtra State Co-op Agricultural Rural Multipurpose Development Bank Ltd. Vs. DCIT (OSD)-1 assessee was following mercantile system of accounting and the interest accrued to the assessee for the year under consideration, therefore, the claim of deduction of overdue interest of Rs.1

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(4), Mumbai vs. Samruddhi Cement Limited (Since Amalgamated Into M/S.Ultratech Cement Limited), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5318/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2022AY 2011-12
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 43Section 43B

Keshav Mills Ltd.(supra) support the case of assessee as the assessee has incurred a definite legal liability and on following the mercantile system of accounting, the discount on ESOPs has rightly been debited as expenditure in the books of account. We are in respectful agreement with the view taken

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(4), Mumbai vs. Samruddhi Cement Limited (Since Amalgamated Into M/S.Ultratech Cement Limited), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4835/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2022AY 2010-11
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 43Section 43B

Keshav Mills Ltd.(supra) support the case of assessee as the assessee has incurred a definite legal liability and on following the mercantile system of accounting, the discount on ESOPs has rightly been debited as expenditure in the books of account. We are in respectful agreement with the view taken

DCIT Cir 2(1), Mumbai vs. Bayer Bioscience P. Ltd ( Formerly Known As Proagro Seed Co. Ltd), New Delhi

Accordingly, appeal of the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 6342/MUM/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm The Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bayer Bioscience Pvt. Ltd. Income-Tax, (Formerly Known As Proagro Seed Central Circle 10(3), Co. Ltd.,) 451, Aayakar Bhavan, 4Th Floor, Vs. Bayer House, Central Avenue M.K. Marg, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 076 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp3459M

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora &For Respondent: Shri Dr. Mahesh Akhade, CIT
Section 143(3)

shows that the assessee has claimed a sum of ₹ 50 lakhs as an expenditure incurred in license fees during the year based on mercantile system of accounting. As per the terms of agreement between the assessee and Mahyo Monsanto biotech India Ltd payment of ₹ 25 lakhs was made

Lemnisk Private Limited (Formerly Known As 'Vizury Interactive Solutions Private Limited'), Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee for assessment year

ITA 2129/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri K.R. Vasudevan

uncrystallised liability. This view was sustained by the Ld. CIT(A). 20.2 Before this Tribunal, the Ld.AR submitted that, the assessee regularly follows mercantile system of accounting and business income was computed accordingly. It was submitted that, there is no income attributable to the payee and the provisions are reversed

Lemnisk Private Limited (Formerly Known As 'Vizury Interactive Solutions Pvt Ltd'), Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee for assessment year

ITA 1851/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri K.R. Vasudevan

uncrystallised liability. This view was sustained by the Ld. CIT(A). 20.2 Before this Tribunal, the Ld.AR submitted that, the assessee regularly follows mercantile system of accounting and business income was computed accordingly. It was submitted that, there is no income attributable to the payee and the provisions are reversed

M/S Regency Property Investments Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 3 (3)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 7972/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Satish ModyFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Bare

loss. The appellant's income from foreign exchange fluctuation gain has been assessed accordingly. The appellant submits that it follows the mercantile system of accounting and foreign currency transaction are accounted at exchange rate prevailing on the date of transactions. Receivable and payable in foreign currency are restated at year

DCIT CC 7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Cowtown Land Development Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 4053/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2013-14
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 36(1)(iii)

project at Western Express Highway, Mumbai, The Assessing officer (A.O.) on perusal of the financial statements found that the assessee is following the mercantile system of accounting. Further for the purpose of determination of revenue from the project, the assessee M/s Cowtown Land Development Pvt Ltd., Mumbai. is following

Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 5(2), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed

ITA 3485/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Maharashtra State Road The Addl. Commissioner Of Development Corporation Ltd. Income Tax Priyadarshini Park, Central Circle 5(2) Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, 5Th Floor, Napeansea Road, Mumbai-400 036 Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm6833C

For Appellant: Shri Dalpat Shah &For Respondent: Shri Parag Vyas, Spl. Counsel
Section 143Section 143(3)

lakhs. The steps are taken with respective banks and reconcile the accounts. The learned assessing officer noted that since the company is following mercantile system of accounting any payment should be treated as an advance and only the interest allowable should be provided in the books of accounts of therefore

M/S Irunway India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 229/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Irunway India Private Limited, Dcit, Vs. Regus Business Center, Office Circle – 3(1)(1), No.1015, Bengaluru. 10Th Floor, Tower-B, Unitech Cyber Park, Sector 39, Gurugram, Gurgaon, Haryana – 122 003. Pan : Aabci 5613 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Susan D. George, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 37Section 40

during the financial year relevant to AY 2015-16, the assessee incurred certain expenses in the nature of professional charges. As per the mercantile system of accounting followed by it, the assessee had to accrue these expenses in its books of account as at 31 March 2015.In the absence ... assessee had not deducted tax at source on the provision made. 35. Before CIT(A), the assessee submitted that the assessee follows mercantile system of accounting as per which it would record for any expenses/ income on accrual basis in its books of account. Accordingly, the assessee has recorded

M/S. Nitesh Estates Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 5(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed on legal issue raised in ground no

ITA 1486/BANG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Nitesh Estates The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner Of Nitesh Time Square, Income Tax, 7Th Floor, #8, M.G. Road, Circle – 5 [1][2], Bangalore – 560 001. Vs. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcn9267C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate : Shri Sankar Ganesh K, Jcit Revenue By (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 04-02-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20-04-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Has Been Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 28/03/2019 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-5, Bangalore For Assessment Year 2009-10 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Orders Of The Authorities Below In So Far As They Are Against The Appellant Are Opposed To Law, Equity, Weight Of Evidence, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Order Of Re-Assessment Is Bad In Law & Void-Ab- Initio For Want Of Requisite Jurisdiction Especially, The Mandatory Requirements To Assume Jurisdiction U/S 148 Of The Act Did Not Exist & Have Not Been Complied With & Consequently, The Re-Assessment Requires To Be Cancelled. 3. The Learned Cit[A] Ought To Have Appreciated That There Was No Fresh Material To Show That Income Had Escaped Assessment Especially When There Was A Scrutiny

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234

Rs.16,49,3683/- was termed as unbilled revenue and the same could have been offered as income as the assessee was following mercantile system of accounting. Therefore, I have reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment as per provisions of Sec.147