ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD., NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal allowed the assessee's grounds regarding discounts and IUC charges, following earlier precedents. It also allowed the assessee's claim for deduction of spectrum charges under Section 35ABB or depreciation under Section 32. The Revenue's grounds were dismissed.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., filed appeals against disallowances related to discounts to distributors, IUC charges, and spectrum charges. The Revenue also filed appeals challenging deletions made by the CIT(A) regarding additions on account of unconfirmed amounts and depreciation on a loan treated as capital subsidy.
What were the issues?
Whether discounts to distributors and IUC charges are disallowable. Whether spectrum charges are deductible under Section 35ABB or eligible for depreciation under Section 32. Whether additions on account of unconfirmed amounts and depreciation on a loan treated as capital subsidy are valid.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 40(a)(ia),Section 40(a)(i),Section 35ABB,Section 32,Section 14A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (5 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
1
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”, NEWDELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITANo.961/DEL/2016 (AssessmentYear:2011-12) New Delhi – 110 001. (PAN: AABCB5576G) ITANo.2448/DEL/2018 (AssessmentYear:2013-14) New Delhi – 110 001. (PAN: AABCB5576G) ITANo.962/DEL/2016 (AssessmentYear:2011-12) New Delhi – 110 001. (PAN: AABCB5576G) ITANo.1772/DEL/2018 (AssessmentYear:2013-14) New Delhi – 110 001. (PAN: AABCB5576G) CO No.241/Del/2016 (in ITA No.961/DEL/2016) (AssessmentYear:2011-12) New Delhi – 110 001. (PAN: AABCB5576G) (
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)
- Rekha Agarwal, Jaipur vs ITO WD 4(1), JaipurITA 844/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Cdg Petchem Limited, Hyderabad vs ITO, Ward - 1(1), HyderabadITA 1900/HYD/2025[2018-2019]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-2019
- M/S. Shree Laminators Ltd., Kolkata vs DCIT, Circle 4(4), KolkataITA 1534/KOL/2026[2011-2012]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2011-2012
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Chandan Kumar Bathual vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Cuttack-Iii Range, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Manoranjan Sadangi vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Gopalpur Range, GanjamOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Bijaya Kumar Parekh vs. State Tax Officer, CT And GST Balangir Circle, BalangirOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Puspanjali Bhuyan vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S A2Z Infra Engineering LTD vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026