Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.74 seconds)
Documents citing Mayur Electrical Industries Pvt. Ltd., ... vs Department Of Income Tax on 15 February, 2016

Dy.Cit, Circle-1,, Ahmedabad vs Arcoy Industries (India) Pvt. Ltd.,, ... on 7 November, 2016

13. We further observe that assessee is following exclusive method of accounting to recognize purchase and sale, net of excise duty. Further in respect of excise duty paid on purchases for which the assessee is eligible to claim Cenvat is debited under the head Cenvat credit and excise duty charged on sales is claimed as set off against Cenvat credit. Through this accounting treatment we observe that excise duty is never charged to profit and loss account and Cenvat credit account is in the form of current account in which excise duty paid on purchases is debited and that on sales is credited. At the end of the year if the Cenvat is receivable then it is carried forward and if it is payable then has to be paid in the following month. Therefore, there remains no reason for adding the Cenvat to the profit u/s 145 of the Act. We further observe that similar issue came up before the Co- ordinate Bench, Ahmedabad in the case of ACIT vs. Kiran Industries Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.1450/Ahd/2012 & CO No.135/Ahd/2012 wherein ITA No. 2546/Ahd/13 & CO 71/A/14 12 Asst. Year 2010-11 the issue has been decided in favour of assessee by observing as follows :-
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 39 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

D.C.I.T Cc - Xxiii,Kolkata., Kolkata vs Singhal Enterprises Pvt Ltd., Kolkata on 9 December, 2016

The appellant has explained the circumstances under which the returns for the assessment years under appeal were filed beyond the due date ITA No.342-343/Kol/2013 A.Y. 08-09 & 09-10 DCIT CC-XXIII, Kol. vs. M/s Singhal Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Page 5 prescribed u/s. 139(1). Although a family settlement had already been arrived at by the litigants vide Memoranda of Understanding dated 24.04.07 but from the petition dated 05.10.10 before the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court, it is clear that the non-co-operation by Sri Radha Krishan Agarwal prevented the appellant from getting the accounts audited and filing return of income within the due date. From the facts observed above, it is quite clear that the delay in filing of returns for the assessment year under appeal was for the reasons beyond app's control and for a reasonable cause. Therefore, respectfully following the decisions of the Hon'ble Hyderbad Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. S. Venkaataish (supra) and of the Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Dhir Global Industrial Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the allowance of deduction us/s 80IA & 80IB of the Act, in my opinion, cannot be denied on technical ground in view of the unavoidable circumstances enumerated by the appellant in these cases. Accordingly, the AO is directed to allow deduction u/s. 80IA and 80IB for both Assessment Years 2008-09 & 20091-10."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1