DCIT 4(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE TRANSPORT AND TRAVELS P.LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 5683/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 July 2022AY 2013-1425 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the customs duty paid on the yacht was allowable as a business expense. It also confirmed that the profit on the helicopter transfer should be treated as long-term capital gain, not short-term.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer disallowed customs duty paid on a yacht as a business expense, arguing it was for personal use and not a business asset. The Revenue also disputed the classification of profit on a helicopter transfer as long-term capital gain.

What were the issues?

Whether customs duty paid on a chartered yacht used for business purposes is a deductible business expense. Whether capital gains on the transfer of a depreciable asset should be treated as long-term or short-term for tax rate purposes.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 37(1),Section 43B,Section 50,Section 54E,Section 112

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(6)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh Yadav
For Respondent: Shri Yogesh Thar, Shri Chaitanya Joshi &, Shri Hardik Nirmal
Hearing: 21/06/2022Pronounced: 19/07/2022

PER AMIT SHUKLA, JM :

The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the impugned order dated 12.06.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Mumbai (in short „ld. CIT(A)‟) for the quantum of assessment passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short „the Act‟) for the Assessment Year 2013-14. 2 Reliance Transport & Travels Pvt. Ltd.

2.

The Revenue has raised the following grounds in its appeal:- “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to delete the disallowance of Rs.26,49,31,101/- being custom duty paid to

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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 37(1)

All 6,995 judgments and leading authorities on Section 37(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →