CIT vs. INDIAN SUMMER

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 446 / 2011HC Delhi16 May 201152 pages
For Petitioner: KAMAL SAWHNEY
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that the expenses incurred were for the purpose of business and not for acquiring a capital asset. Therefore, they should be allowed as revenue expenditure.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed certain expenses as business expenditure. The Assessing Officer disallowed these expenses, treating them as capital expenditure. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the Assessing Officer's decision.

What were the issues?

Whether expenses incurred for the purpose of business are to be treated as revenue or capital expenditure.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 37

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

2011:DHC:14384-DB

More judgments on Section 37

All 4,334 judgments and leading authorities on Section 37 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →