THE ACIT, CIRCLE MORBI, MORBI vs. M/S. VITA GRANITO PVT. LTD., MORBI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the gas connection charges were revenue in nature. The expenditure was incurred solely to facilitate the supply of gas, which was used as fuel, and did not result in the creation of any asset or enduring benefit for the assessee.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order allowing the assessee's claim for gas connection charges. The Assessing Officer had disallowed this claim, treating it as capital expenditure due to perceived enduring benefits.
What were the issues?
Whether gas connection charges paid to a gas company for facilitating gas supply, where ownership of pipelines remains with the gas company, constitute capital or revenue expenditure.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show listHide 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.
- Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT622 citing124 ITR 1 · 1980 · SC
- (P.) Ltd. v. CIT146 citing56 ITR 52 · 1965 · SC
- 69 citing
- 995 (Bom.), Hindustan Times Ltd. v. CIT (1980) 122 ITR 977, Sarabhai M. Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT28 citing151 ITR 726 · 1985 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT
Before: SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA & SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR
PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against order passed by the ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Rajkot [hereinafter referred to as “Ld.CIT(A)under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short) dated 14.3.2019 pertaining to the Asst.Year 2008-09. 2. This is a recalled matter. The appeal of the Revenue was earlier dismissed on account of low tax effect. However, subsequently, the Department filed an MA pleading that the appeal of t
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 37(1)
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Smit Navnitlal Soni, Ahmedabad, Gujarat vs ITO Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad, GujaratITA 1434/AHD/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Shobha Sudamrao Tagad, Ahmednagar vs ITO WD-1, AhmednagarITA 311/PUN/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2023-24
- Digjam Limited, Jamnagar vs The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 349/RJT/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Rajesh Maru, Mhow vs ITO-5(1), IndoreITA 839/IND/2025[2023-2024]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2023-2024
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Das vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Superwealth Financial Enterprises Private Limited, Khordha vs. Joint Commissioner Good And Service Tax Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Simanchal Sahoo vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Prafulla Chandra Khatua, Mayurbhanj vs. The State Tax Officer Of CT And GST, MayurbhanjOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sidhivinayak Roadways, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, RourkelaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026