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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      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 :

        1975 (11) TMI 60 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        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

        Assessee wins appeals, deductions allowed for shortages, discrepancies, and set-off losses The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing appeals and deleting additions related to shortages, discrepancies in purchases, and estimated gross ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Assessee wins appeals, deductions allowed for shortages, discrepancies, and set-off losses

                            The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing appeals and deleting additions related to shortages, discrepancies in purchases, and estimated gross profit for various assessment years. Additionally, the Tribunal permitted the set-off of losses from non-fulfillment of contracts against regular business income. The Department's cross-objection for one of the assessment years was dismissed due to procedural reasons.




                            Issues Involved:

                            1. Addition towards excessive shortage in the yield of oil and deoiled bran and on account of shortage in export of bran.
                            2. Discrepancy in purchases of bran.
                            3. Estimate of gross profit.
                            4. Losses from speculation business.

                            Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Addition towards excessive shortage in the yield of oil and deoiled bran and on account of shortage in export of bran:

                            The assessee firm, engaged in the manufacture and sale of rice-bran oil and deoiled bran, faced scrutiny for excessive shortages in yield and export of bran for the assessment years 1964-65, 1965-66, 1966-67, and 1971-72. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) observed excessive shortages without satisfactory explanations, leading to additions in the assessee's income. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC) allowed a 1% shortage in yield and exports for the first two years but confirmed the ITO's additions for the other years. The Tribunal, however, found that the assessee's records were consistent and credible, noting that variations in yield were normal due to the quality of bran and seasonal conditions. The Tribunal concluded that there was no justification for estimating the yield or disallowing the shortage in the manufacturing process for any of the years under consideration.

                            2. Discrepancy in purchases of bran:

                            For the assessment year 1966-67, the ITO noticed a discrepancy of 1,440 bags of bran, valued at Rs. 10,800, in the purchases recorded. The AAC was not fully convinced of the ITO's findings but still upheld the addition. The Tribunal, however, found that the discrepancy was due to an accounting error and that the revised figures provided by the assessee were correct. Consequently, the Tribunal held that no addition was warranted for the assessment year 1966-67 on account of the discrepancy in purchases.

                            3. Estimate of gross profit:

                            For the assessment year 1965-66, the ITO added Rs. 14,438 to the assessee's income based on an estimated gross profit. The AAC did not disturb this addition. The Tribunal, however, found that the ITO had not identified any defects in the assessee's books of account that justified rejecting the book results. The Tribunal noted that the overall gross profit disclosed by the assessee was reasonable and consistent with previous years. Therefore, the Tribunal deleted the addition of Rs. 14,438.

                            4. Losses from speculation business:

                            For the assessment years 1966-67, 1967-68, and 1971-72, the ITO classified losses incurred by the assessee due to payment of rate differences for non-fulfillment of contracts as losses from speculative business, disallowing their set-off against regular business income. The AAC confirmed this view. The Tribunal, however, found that the payments were made due to breach of contract and not as speculative transactions. The Tribunal referred to various High Court decisions and a circular from the Central Board of Revenue, concluding that the losses were part of the assessee's regular business activities and should be allowed as such. The Tribunal directed the set-off of these losses against the assessee's regular business income.

                            Conclusion:

                            The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeals, deleting the additions related to shortages, discrepancies in purchases, and estimated gross profit. It also allowed the set-off of losses from non-fulfillment of contracts against regular business income. The Department's cross-objection for the assessment year 1965-66 was dismissed as it was not raised at the earlier stages of the proceedings.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found