Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal Upholds ITO Decision on Closing Stock Valuation for Film Production</h1> <h3>INCOME TAX OFFICER. Versus SHAKTI SAMANTA.</h3> INCOME TAX OFFICER. Versus SHAKTI SAMANTA. - TTJ 016, 381, Issues Involved:1. Whether the cost of production of the film 'Balika Badhu' should be fully debited to the Profit & Loss Account.2. Application of Rule 9A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962.3. Determination of closing stock value for unsold territories.4. Validity of the CIT(A)'s reliance on general knowledge and personal understanding.Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:1. Cost of Production Debit to Profit & Loss Account:The assessee, an individual, released the film 'Balika Badhu' and declared a profit of Rs. 5,12,125 with a total realization of Rs. 29,81,600. The exploitation rights for Tamil Nadu and Andhra were not sold as the prints were not delivered. The assessee debited the full cost of production to the Profit & Loss Account. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) disallowed an amount equal to 4% of the adjusted cost of production under Rule 9A of the Income Tax Rules, considering it as closing stock. The ITO's decision was based on the fact that the prints were not delivered for Tamil Nadu and Andhra territories.2. Application of Rule 9A:The ITO and the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (IAC) applied Rule 9A rigidly, without considering the specific circumstances of the case. Rule 9A(6)(b) states that the cost of production to be allowed as a deduction should be an appropriate fraction of the entire cost, with the balance carried forward to the next year. The CIT(A) found that Rule 9A should not be applied rigidly and that events after the accounting year should be considered. The CIT(A) concluded that the closing stock value should be Rs. Nil as claimed by the assessee, based on the failure to sell the film in the unsold territories and the lack of interest from distributors.3. Determination of Closing Stock Value:The ITO valued the closing stock for Tamil Nadu and Andhra territories at 4% of the adjusted cost of production. The CIT(A) disagreed, stating that the ITO's rigid application of Rule 9A did not consider the actual circumstances, such as the film's poor performance and lack of interest from distributors. The CIT(A) held that the closing stock value should be Rs. Nil, rejecting the ITO's valuation of Rs. 97,579.4. Validity of CIT(A)'s Reliance on General Knowledge:The CIT(A) based his decision on general knowledge and personal understanding, which was contested by the revenue. The revenue argued that the CIT(A)'s decision was not substantiated by relevant reasons and was contrary to the facts. The Tribunal agreed with the revenue, stating that the CIT(A)'s reliance on personal knowledge and understanding was not a valid basis for a legal decision. The Tribunal emphasized that issues should be decided based on material evidence and legal provisions, not personal opinions.Conclusion:The Tribunal held that the ITO had reasonably exercised his jurisdiction under Rule 9A(6)(b) and Rule 9A(9)(a) and (c). The ITO's decision to disallow 4% of the adjusted cost of production as closing stock was justified. The CIT(A)'s order was set aside as it was based on personal knowledge and understanding, which is not a valid basis for a legal decision. The Tribunal restored the ITO's order, allowing the revenue's appeal.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found