Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
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

        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>Tax Tribunal: Write-back in accounts not cessation of liability. Addition under Income-tax Act not justified.</h1> <h3>Ampro Products Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax.</h3> Ampro Products Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax. - ITD 066, 630, TTJ 056, 714, Issues Involved:1. Addition of Rs. 1,66,62,866 under section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act.2. Determination of cessation or remission of liability.3. Impact of unilateral write-back in books of account.4. Timing of cessation of liability.5. Legal interpretation of section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Addition of Rs. 1,66,62,866 under section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act:The appellant challenged the addition of Rs. 1,66,62,866 made by the Assessing Officer under section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act, which was confirmed by the CIT(A). The core grievance was whether the write-back of this liability in the books of account amounted to income under section 41(1).2. Determination of cessation or remission of liability:The Tribunal noted that for an amount to be deemed income under section 41(1), there must be a remission or cessation of liability. The appellant argued that the write-back was a unilateral act and did not constitute cessation of liability. The Tribunal agreed, stating that cessation or remission of liability requires bilateral acts or a legal determination, not a unilateral write-back.3. Impact of unilateral write-back in books of account:The Tribunal examined whether the unilateral write-back in the books of account could be considered as cessation of liability. It referred to various legal precedents, including the Bombay High Court's decision in Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd., which held that unilateral actions do not bring about cessation of liability unless the liability is time-barred. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant's liability had not become time-barred and thus, the unilateral write-back did not result in cessation of liability.4. Timing of cessation of liability:The Tribunal scrutinized the timeline of events, noting that the final determination of liability by the Central Excise authorities occurred on 18/19-5-1993, after the close of the relevant financial year. It emphasized that the cessation of liability, if any, could only be recognized when the final order was passed. The Tribunal disagreed with the lower authorities' view that the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals)'s order dated 16-7-1991 settled the liability, as it merely remanded the matter for further proceedings.5. Legal interpretation of section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act:The Tribunal analyzed the legal provisions of section 41(1) and relevant case laws, concluding that mere entries in the books of account do not determine the cessation of liability. It cited the Supreme Court's decision in Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd., which held that the existence or absence of entries in books of account is not decisive. The Tribunal also referred to the Gujarat High Court's decision in Bharat Iron & Steel Industries, which emphasized that the actual obtaining of an amount or benefit is necessary for section 41(1) to apply.Conclusion:The Tribunal concluded that there was no cessation or remission of the appellant's liability during the relevant financial year. The unilateral write-back in the books of account did not constitute cessation of liability, and the final determination of liability by the Central Excise authorities occurred after the relevant financial year. Therefore, the addition of Rs. 1,66,62,866 under section 41(1) was not justified. The Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal and deleted the addition.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found