DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2(2)(1), MUMBAI, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, CHURCHGATE vs. MUMBAI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 7035/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 March 2026AY 2014-1537 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that Section 35DDA is not applicable as the payment was made to AAI, not directly to employees for voluntary retirement. The payment was considered a contractual obligation incurred solely for business purposes, substituting recurring revenue expenditure.

What were the facts?

The assessee company paid a lump sum amount to the Airports Authority of India (AAI) towards retrenchment compensation for employees. The Assessing Officer treated this as a capital outlay amortizable over five years under Section 35DDA, while the assessee claimed it as a revenue expenditure. The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance.

What were the issues?

Whether the lump-sum payment made to AAI for retrenchment compensation is a capital outlay or a revenue expenditure, and if Section 35DDA applies to such payments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 35DDA,Section 37(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

  • 118 Taxmann 106
    118 Taxmann 106
    8 citing

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, D BENCH MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI MAKARAND V MAHADEOKAR

For Appellant: Shri Saurabha Soparkar
For Respondent: Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Sr. AR
Hearing: 25.02.2026Pronounced: 09.03.2026

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 6692/Mum/2025
ITA No. 7035/Mum/2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER MAKARAND V MAHADEOKAR, AM: These cross appeals are directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 05.08.2025 in the case of the assessee for Assessment Year 2014–15. The assessment in the present case wa

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 35DDA

All 107 judgments and leading authorities on Section 35DDA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →