Commissioner Of Income Tax-V v. M/S Rites Ltd
High Court
08 Jan 2016 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax-V v. M/S Rites Ltd
Date of order
08 Jan 2016
Assessment year(s)
1988-89
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax-V v. M/S Rites Ltd, the High Court (2016) decided the matter.
Issue: The short question urged by the Revenue in the appeal is whether the ITAT was right in deleting the addition of prior period expenses claimed by the Assessee in its profit and loss account for the Assessment Year (AY) 2005-06.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
12.
+ ITA 884/2015
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-V ..... Appellant Through: Mr N. P. Sahni, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr Nitin Gulati, Junior Standing Counsel. Versus Through: Mr N. P. Sahni, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr Nitin Gulati, Junior Standing Counsel. Versus
M/S RITES LTD. ..... Respondent
Through:
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
O R D E R% 08.01.2016
1. The office note has been perused. Para 2 in page 2 of the order dated 18[th]
November, 2015 shall stand corrected as under:
“2. Nevertheless, the appeal has also been considered on merits. The
short question urged by the Revenue in the appeal is whether the ITAT was right in deleting the addition of prior period expenses claimed by the Assessee in its profit and loss account for the Assessment Year (AY) 2005-06. The ITAT has in the impugned order dated 1[st] March 2013 in ITA No.4233/Del/2010 followed its own order in the Assessee's case ITA No.3074/Del/2006 for AY 1988-89 allowing the claim of prior period expenses.”
S.MURALIDHAR, J
JANUARY 08, 2016/MK
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.
EaseValue