(1998) 233 ITR 468 (SC) and CIT v. Engineers India Ltd.

239 ITR 237High Court1999#6731 most cited
17

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 35(1)(i)Section 92B

Judgments citing (1998) 233 ITR 468 (SC) and CIT v. Engineers India Ltd.

TATA CUMMINS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE-1-JAMSHEDPUR AND THE ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 430/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi12 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaytata Cummins Private Limited, D.C.I.T., Cummins India Office, Tower-A, 7Th Circle-1, Vs. Floor, Survey No. 21, Balewadi, Pune, Jamshedpur. Maharashtra. Pan No. Aaact 6353 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

…as the company is not a human being. At the most, the Assessing Officer can take these expenses as perquisite. If the expenses personally related to the offices of the company, our aforesaid view is duly supported by the decision of the Hon'ble High Court in 239 ITR 237 and Madras High Court 240 ITR 335 (Mad). Thus, this ground stands allowed. This disposes off all the appeals taken by the assessee." Respectfully following the judicial precedent in assessee's own case, this issue of the club expenses disallowed by the Assessing Officer stands deleted. 16 Tata Cummins Vs DCIT 6. Grounds No. 5, 6 and 7 of the ap…

VIC ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 26(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the issues raised in the captioned appeals are decided

ITA 3418/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi CAFor Respondent: Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 94(7)

…nished inaccurate particulars per se. It was contended that the club expenses incurred were allowed as revenue expenditure in many cases i.e., 195 ITR 682 (Bombay) Otis Elevator; 296 ITR 682 (Delhi) Nestle India Ltd.; 180 Taxman 82 (Delhi) Samtel Colour Ltd.; 239 ITR 237 (Delhi) Engineers India Ltd.; 209 ITR 649 (Gujarat) Gujarat State Export Ltd. 7. We find considerable merit in the plea of assessee. In the light of plethora of judicial precedents, the question of allowability of club expenses, in itself, is a debatable issue and varies from case to case. Under the circumstances imposition penalty on such conte…

VIC ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 26(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the issues raised in the captioned appeals are decided

ITA 3417/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi CAFor Respondent: Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 94(7)

…nished inaccurate particulars per se. It was contended that the club expenses incurred were allowed as revenue expenditure in many cases i.e., 195 ITR 682 (Bombay) Otis Elevator; 296 ITR 682 (Delhi) Nestle India Ltd.; 180 Taxman 82 (Delhi) Samtel Colour Ltd.; 239 ITR 237 (Delhi) Engineers India Ltd.; 209 ITR 649 (Gujarat) Gujarat State Export Ltd. 7. We find considerable merit in the plea of assessee. In the light of plethora of judicial precedents, the question of allowability of club expenses, in itself, is a debatable issue and varies from case to case. Under the circumstances imposition penalty on such conte…

VIC ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 26(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the issues raised in the captioned appeals are decided

ITA 3416/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi CAFor Respondent: Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 94(7)

…nished inaccurate particulars per se. It was contended that the club expenses incurred were allowed as revenue expenditure in many cases i.e., 195 ITR 682 (Bombay) Otis Elevator; 296 ITR 682 (Delhi) Nestle India Ltd.; 180 Taxman 82 (Delhi) Samtel Colour Ltd.; 239 ITR 237 (Delhi) Engineers India Ltd.; 209 ITR 649 (Gujarat) Gujarat State Export Ltd. 7. We find considerable merit in the plea of assessee. In the light of plethora of judicial precedents, the question of allowability of club expenses, in itself, is a debatable issue and varies from case to case. Under the circumstances imposition penalty on such conte…

PHILLIP (INDIA) P.LTD ( FORMELRY MF GLOBAL (INDIA) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT RG 6(3), MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground no. 2 raised by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3016/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar & MsFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 30Section 32

…t year onwards, assessee has directed its clients to install and subscribe directly. There is no cost to the assessee. This subscription does not give enduring benefit to assessee. Therefore, he relied on the decision in the case CIT vrs. Engineers India Ltd. 239 ITR 237. 10. Further he pleaded that in case, these expenses are considered as capital, assessee should be allowed to claim depreciation and in this respect, he relied on the decision in the case of Swaws Credit Corporation India vrs. DCIT 327 ITR 323. 11. On the other hand, Ld. DR brought to our notice para 3.11 & 3.12 and 4.5 of the order of Ld. CIT(A)…

DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. INDIAN RAILWAY FINANCE CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, appeal of the Assessing Officer and Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 6082/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit (Ltu) Indian Railway Finance Circle-1 Vs Corporation Ltd. Nbcc Plaza Pushasp Vihar Ug Floor, East Tower, New Delhi-110017 Nbcc Place, Bhisham Pitamah Marg, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. Pan : Aaaci0681C (Appellant) (Respondent) A N D Assessment Year: 2011-12 Indian Railway Finance Dcit (Ltu) Corporation Ltd. Vs Pushp Vihar, Ug Floor, East Tower, Nbcc Saket Place, Bhisham Pitamah New Delhi Marg, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. Pan : Aaaci0681C (Appellant) (Respondent) A N D Assessment Year: 2012-13 Indian Railway Finance Dcit (Ltu) Corporation Ltd. Vs Pushp Vihar, Ug Floor, East Tower, Nbcc Saket

Section 115JSection 14ASection 37(1)

…t the assessee has paid this sum for corporate membership of Airport Authority of India Officers Institute. The fact has been noted that the personal expenses of the executives are not incurred. The identical issue arose before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in 239 ITR 237 wherein it has been held that such expenditure did not bring into existence any benefit of enduring nature. Further the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana in 351 ITR 196 and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in 106 taxmann.com 395 has also taken a similar view. In view of this ground Nos. 2 and 3 of the appeal of the assessee are dismissed. 15. In the result, ap…

M/S. INDIAN RAILWAY FINANCE CORPORATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, appeal of the Assessing Officer and Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5942/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit (Ltu) Indian Railway Finance Circle-1 Vs Corporation Ltd. Nbcc Plaza Pushasp Vihar Ug Floor, East Tower, New Delhi-110017 Nbcc Place, Bhisham Pitamah Marg, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. Pan : Aaaci0681C (Appellant) (Respondent) A N D Assessment Year: 2011-12 Indian Railway Finance Dcit (Ltu) Corporation Ltd. Vs Pushp Vihar, Ug Floor, East Tower, Nbcc Saket Place, Bhisham Pitamah New Delhi Marg, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. Pan : Aaaci0681C (Appellant) (Respondent) A N D Assessment Year: 2012-13 Indian Railway Finance Dcit (Ltu) Corporation Ltd. Vs Pushp Vihar, Ug Floor, East Tower, Nbcc Saket

Section 115JSection 14ASection 37(1)

…t the assessee has paid this sum for corporate membership of Airport Authority of India Officers Institute. The fact has been noted that the personal expenses of the executives are not incurred. The identical issue arose before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in 239 ITR 237 wherein it has been held that such expenditure did not bring into existence any benefit of enduring nature. Further the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana in 351 ITR 196 and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in 106 taxmann.com 395 has also taken a similar view. In view of this ground Nos. 2 and 3 of the appeal of the assessee are dismissed. 15. In the result, ap…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S INDIAN RAILWAY FINANCE CORPORATION LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, appeal of the Assessing Officer and Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 515/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit (Ltu) Indian Railway Finance Circle-1 Vs Corporation Ltd. Nbcc Plaza Pushasp Vihar Ug Floor, East Tower, New Delhi-110017 Nbcc Place, Bhisham Pitamah Marg, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. Pan : Aaaci0681C (Appellant) (Respondent) A N D Assessment Year: 2011-12 Indian Railway Finance Dcit (Ltu) Corporation Ltd. Vs Pushp Vihar, Ug Floor, East Tower, Nbcc Saket Place, Bhisham Pitamah New Delhi Marg, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. Pan : Aaaci0681C (Appellant) (Respondent) A N D Assessment Year: 2012-13 Indian Railway Finance Dcit (Ltu) Corporation Ltd. Vs Pushp Vihar, Ug Floor, East Tower, Nbcc Saket

Section 115JSection 14ASection 37(1)

…t the assessee has paid this sum for corporate membership of Airport Authority of India Officers Institute. The fact has been noted that the personal expenses of the executives are not incurred. The identical issue arose before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in 239 ITR 237 wherein it has been held that such expenditure did not bring into existence any benefit of enduring nature. Further the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana in 351 ITR 196 and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in 106 taxmann.com 395 has also taken a similar view. In view of this ground Nos. 2 and 3 of the appeal of the assessee are dismissed. 15. In the result, ap…

M/S INDIAN RAILWAY FINANCE CORPORATION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, appeal of the Assessing Officer and Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 380/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit (Ltu) Indian Railway Finance Circle-1 Vs Corporation Ltd. Nbcc Plaza Pushasp Vihar Ug Floor, East Tower, New Delhi-110017 Nbcc Place, Bhisham Pitamah Marg, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. Pan : Aaaci0681C (Appellant) (Respondent) A N D Assessment Year: 2011-12 Indian Railway Finance Dcit (Ltu) Corporation Ltd. Vs Pushp Vihar, Ug Floor, East Tower, Nbcc Saket Place, Bhisham Pitamah New Delhi Marg, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. Pan : Aaaci0681C (Appellant) (Respondent) A N D Assessment Year: 2012-13 Indian Railway Finance Dcit (Ltu) Corporation Ltd. Vs Pushp Vihar, Ug Floor, East Tower, Nbcc Saket

Section 115JSection 14ASection 37(1)

…t the assessee has paid this sum for corporate membership of Airport Authority of India Officers Institute. The fact has been noted that the personal expenses of the executives are not incurred. The identical issue arose before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in 239 ITR 237 wherein it has been held that such expenditure did not bring into existence any benefit of enduring nature. Further the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana in 351 ITR 196 and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in 106 taxmann.com 395 has also taken a similar view. In view of this ground Nos. 2 and 3 of the appeal of the assessee are dismissed. 15. In the result, ap…

SHAILENDER MAYANK HEMCHAND,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 19(3), MUMBAI

ITA 5352/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5352/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Dr. P. Daniel, ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar
Section 30Section 37Section 37(1)

…bership to the golf club was for a limited period of five years. It was obtained for run- ning the business with a view to produce profit. Thus, the corporate membership fee paid to the golf club was of revenue expenditure. CIT v. ENGINEERS INDIA LTD. [1999] 239 ITR 237 (Delhi), CIT v. NESTLE INDIA LTD. [2008] 296 ITR 682 (Delhi), GUJARAT STATE EXPORT CORPORATION LTD. v. CIT [1994] 209 ITR 649 (Guj), CIT v. SAMTEL COLOR LTD. [2010] 326 ITR 425 (Delhi) and OTIS ELEVATOR Co. (INDIA) LTD. v. CIT [1992] 195 ITR 682 (Bom) approved. 10. In the present case, assessee has taken permanent membership of CCI Club and asse…

M/S. BIKANERVALA FOODS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3187/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2009-10 Vs Bikanervala Foods Pvt. Ltd. Acit A-28, Lawrence Road, Industrial Area, Circle-3(1) New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacb0611P

Section 2Section 37

…ember of the association, however, to continue to avail the benefits of the membership of Trade Association, the assessee is also required to pay the annual membership. On similar facts, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Engineers India Ltd. 239 ITR 237 has held that no enduring benefits results to the assessee by payment of initial membership, if annual membership also needs to be paid by the assessee. Ld. CIT(A) noted that the payment is made on account of nomination of Shri Shyam Sunder, MD as a Chief Patron by way of designated life member of the association. Therefore, the deduction is not…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 4202/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2007-08 Acit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No. 226/Del/2011 (Arising Ita No.2720/Del/2011) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.E. Dastur, Sr. Advocate and Shri Ankit Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…period of 30 years and for carrying out the activities parties have agreed for some kind of revenue sharing which is distinct from the lease of the premise. In support of his contention he further relied upon the following decision:- i. Engineers India Ltd - 239 ITR 237 (Del HC) - Admission fee of Rs.90,000 paid to a research organisation to get information was claimed as revenue expenditure. Apart from the admission fee, the assessee was to make a yearly subscription payment, failing which the assessee would not be entitled to get the required information from the research organisation. The ITO disallowed the a…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 2720/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2007-08 Acit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No. 226/Del/2011 (Arising Ita No.2720/Del/2011) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.E. Dastur, Sr. Advocate and Shri Ankit Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…period of 30 years and for carrying out the activities parties have agreed for some kind of revenue sharing which is distinct from the lease of the premise. In support of his contention he further relied upon the following decision:- i. Engineers India Ltd - 239 ITR 237 (Del HC) - Admission fee of Rs.90,000 paid to a research organisation to get information was claimed as revenue expenditure. Apart from the admission fee, the assessee was to make a yearly subscription payment, failing which the assessee would not be entitled to get the required information from the research organisation. The ITO disallowed the a…

M/S. ICI INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 852/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)

…nt of Rs. 5,00,000.—CIT vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (2000) 158 CTR (Mad) 437 : (1999) 240 ITR 335 (Mad), CIT vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 148 CTR (SC) 398 : (1998) 233 ITR 468 (SC) and CIT vs. Engineers India Ltd. (1999) 155 CTR (Del) 394 : (1999) 239 ITR 237 (Del) applied. Respectfully following the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court we allow the assessee’s ground. ITA No.2613/Kol/05,488/Kol/06, 1019 & 852/Kol/07 AYs 02-03 & 03-04 ACIT Cir-10 Kol. v. AKZO Novel India Ltd. Page 31 61. Next issue raised by assessee is that Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of AO by disallowing the expen…

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ICI INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1019/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)

…nt of Rs. 5,00,000.—CIT vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (2000) 158 CTR (Mad) 437 : (1999) 240 ITR 335 (Mad), CIT vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 148 CTR (SC) 398 : (1998) 233 ITR 468 (SC) and CIT vs. Engineers India Ltd. (1999) 155 CTR (Del) 394 : (1999) 239 ITR 237 (Del) applied. Respectfully following the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court we allow the assessee’s ground. ITA No.2613/Kol/05,488/Kol/06, 1019 & 852/Kol/07 AYs 02-03 & 03-04 ACIT Cir-10 Kol. v. AKZO Novel India Ltd. Page 31 61. Next issue raised by assessee is that Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of AO by disallowing the expen…

M/S. ICI INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 488/KOL/2006[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)

…nt of Rs. 5,00,000.—CIT vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (2000) 158 CTR (Mad) 437 : (1999) 240 ITR 335 (Mad), CIT vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 148 CTR (SC) 398 : (1998) 233 ITR 468 (SC) and CIT vs. Engineers India Ltd. (1999) 155 CTR (Del) 394 : (1999) 239 ITR 237 (Del) applied. Respectfully following the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court we allow the assessee’s ground. ITA No.2613/Kol/05,488/Kol/06, 1019 & 852/Kol/07 AYs 02-03 & 03-04 ACIT Cir-10 Kol. v. AKZO Novel India Ltd. Page 31 61. Next issue raised by assessee is that Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of AO by disallowing the expen…

ACIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ICI INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2613/KOL/2005[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)

…nt of Rs. 5,00,000.—CIT vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (2000) 158 CTR (Mad) 437 : (1999) 240 ITR 335 (Mad), CIT vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 148 CTR (SC) 398 : (1998) 233 ITR 468 (SC) and CIT vs. Engineers India Ltd. (1999) 155 CTR (Del) 394 : (1999) 239 ITR 237 (Del) applied. Respectfully following the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court we allow the assessee’s ground. ITA No.2613/Kol/05,488/Kol/06, 1019 & 852/Kol/07 AYs 02-03 & 03-04 ACIT Cir-10 Kol. v. AKZO Novel India Ltd. Page 31 61. Next issue raised by assessee is that Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of AO by disallowing the expen…