Section 145 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.276

Section 145 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 276 (Method of accounting) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 276 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 145 is Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT (82 ITR 363), cited in 654 of the 1,584 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 145

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.

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.

CIT v. Bilahari Investment (P) Ltd.
299 ITR 1 · 2008 · Supreme Court
206
citing judgments

The project completion method and the percentage of completion method are both recognized methods for recognizing income from real estate contracts.

CIT v. N.C. Budharaja & Co.
204 ITR 412 · 1993 · Supreme Court
164
citing judgments

The word 'production' has a wider connotation than 'manufacture'; every manufacture is production, but not every production amounts to manufacture. 'Production' includes bringing into existence new goods, by-products, or inter-products through a process, which may or may not be manufacture.

CIT v. UTI Bank Ltd.
32 Taxmann.com 370 · 2013 · High Court
131
citing judgments

If an assessee possesses sufficient interest-free funds, it is presumed that investments yielding exempt income were made from these funds, therefore disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A is not justified.

Bausch & Lomb Eye Care (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Additional CIT
381 ITR 227 · 2016 · High Court
127
citing judgments

The existence of an international transaction must be established before its arm's length price can be determined. An alleged 'excessive' AMP expenditure cannot unilaterally expand the scope of an international transaction if its existence is contested.

CIT v. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd.
330 ITR 440 · 2011 · High Court
125
citing judgments

Interest income is taxable under the mercantile system of accounting even if it is not actually recovered, provided there is a right to receive it. The decision also touches upon the treatment of bad debts and provisions for doubtful debts under Section 36(1)(viia).

CIT v. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd.
294 ITR 451 · 2007 · High Court
120
citing judgments

The amendment to Section 43A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is prospective and applies only from April 1, 2003. This means it governs changes in the actual cost of assets due to exchange rate fluctuations from that date onwards.

CIT v. Vijaya Bank
187 ITR 541 · 1991 · Supreme Court
116
citing judgments

The 'broken period interest' paid on securities is considered part of the capital outlay for acquiring those securities and cannot be allowed as a revenue expenditure or business deduction. It must be capitalized.

CIT v. Rao Bahadur Calavala Cunnan Chetty Charities
135 ITR 485 · 1982 · High Court
98
citing judgments

The income of a charitable trust, particularly income from property held under trust, for the purpose of claiming exemption under Section 11, must be computed in a normal commercial manner, without strict reference to the computation provisions for different heads of income like Section 14 or Section 24(a). This approach ensures that the income available for application or accumulation is assessed on commercial principles.

Judgments on Section 145

Manavta Trade Link Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 10(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1222/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Sept 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Sonjoy Sarmamanavta Trade-Link Pvt Ltd Vs Ito, Ward-10 (2), Kolkata Room No.4, 24 Roy Steet, L.R.Sarani, Kolkata West Bengal-700020 Pan No.Aaicm 3500 C (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl.Cit-Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manjunatha G, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 29.06.2024 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-2018, On The Following Grounds :- 1. That The Order Passed U/S 250 Is Bad In Law As Well As On Facts Of The Case. That The Hon'Ble Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld. Assessing Officer In Rejecting The Books Of Accounts Under Section 145 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Without Establishing Any Cogent Or Specific Defect In The Regularly Maintained & Audited Books Of Accounts Of The Appellant 2. That The Hon'Ble Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Further Erred In Confirming The Assessment Framed Under Section 144 Of The Act By Estimating Net Profit @1.5% On Total Rs.64,50,64,196/- & Thereby Sustaining An Arbitrary Addition Of Rs. 96,75,963/-, Ignoring The Actual Audited Turnover & Net Profit Disclosed By The Appellant In Its Return 3. That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Not Admitting That Proper Opportunity Of Being Heard Was Not Granted By The Assessing Officer Before Proceeding To Reject The Books & Complete The 2

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl.CIT-Sr.DR
Section 144Section 145Section 250

Orbit Aviation Private Limited, Chandigarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Cir-1(1), Chandigarh

The appeal stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 341/CHANDI/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.341/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23) M/S Orbit Aviation Private Limited Dcit-Circle-1(1) बनाम/ 1St Floor Metro Plaza, Sco 54-55 Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Sector 9-D, Chandigarh Cr Building, Chandigarh. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaco-9386-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Aditya Kumar (Ca) A/W Shri Ashwani Kumar (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Anil Kumar Sharma (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27-08-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16-09-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2022-23 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Addl. / Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 10-01-2025 In The Matter Of An Intimation Issued By Cpc U/S 143(1) On 07-08-2023 Making Disallowance U/S 43B For Rs.1,07,54,593/- On Account Of Gst Payable At Year-End But Remaining Unpaid By Due Date Of Furnishing Of Return Of Income U/S 139(1). Having

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Kumar (CA) a/w Shri Ashwani KumarFor Respondent: Sh. Anil Kumar Sharma (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 145Section 43BSection 44A