The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 3, Mumbai v. M/S.adbhut Trading Co. Private Limited
High Court
20 Jul 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 3, Mumbai v. M/S.adbhut Trading Co. Private Limited
Date of order
20 Jul 2011
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 3, Mumbai v. M/S.adbhut Trading Co. Private Limited, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.4937 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Income Tax - 3, Mumbai
..Appellant.
Versus
M/s.Adbhut Trading Co. Private Limited..Respondent.
Mr.Vimal Gupta for the appellant.Mr.J.D. Mistri, Senior Advocate with Mr.P.C. Tripathi with Mr.Raj Darak for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &
A.A. Sayed, JJ.
P.C. :
DATE : 20[th] July, 2011.
1.In the present case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has confirmed the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in deleting the addition of Rs.1.98 crores made by the Assessing Officer while computing the book profit under Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by following the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Apollo Tyres V/s. CIT reported in 255 ITR 273. According to the Revenue, the assessee has intentionally prepared a wrong profit and loss account. Once the accounts including profit and loss account are certified by the authorities under the Companies Act, it is not open to the assessing officer to contend that the profit and loss account has not been prepared in accordance with the
provisions of the Companies Act, 1956.
2.In these circumstances, deletion of the addition by the Tribunal by following the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Limited (supra) cannot be faulted. In the result, we see no merit in the appeal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.
(A.A. Sayed, J.)
(J.P. Devadhar, 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.