Supreme Court of India
Price Waterhouse Coopers Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-1 and Anr.
INSC stands for INDIAN SUPREME COURT. A neutral citation scheme assigned by the Court itself, so a judgment can be cited without depending on a commercial law reporter. INSC is the neutral citation scheme assigned by the Supreme Court, so a judgment can be cited without depending on a commercial law reporter.
3 Supreme Court benches have cited this judgment.
What the Court ordered
We are of the view that the facts of the case are rather peculiar and somewhat unique.
Judgment, page 8
From the headnote
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961: c s.271(1)(c) read with s.40A(7) - Penalty proceedings - Computation error - Provision for payment of gratuity - Not added to total income - Held: Contents of Tax Audit Report filed along with the return stating that the provision for payment was not allowable u/s 40A(7) suggest that it was a bona fide and inadvertent computation error, as the ass~ssee while submitting its return, failed to add the provision for gratuity to its total income - It cannot be said that the assessee is guilty of either furnishing inaccurate particulars or attempting to conceal its income - In
Where later benches applied it
- 2022 Heera Traders v. Kamla Jain
- 2019 Indian Oil Corporation Limited v. State of U.P. & Ors.
- 2018 Navtej Singh Johar & Ors. v. Union of India Thr. Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice
Of those, 3 mentioned
Sign in free to read it
- The full judgment, page by page, as published in the Supreme Court Reports
- The ratio: what the Court held, verbatim, with the page it sits on
- Every bench that relied on it, and every bench that argued against it
- Search every reported judgment, by party, citation or question
- Download the PDF, copy pinpoint citations ready for a filing
An email address, no password.