What is 201 ITR 684; Malwa Vanaspati and Chemical Co. v. CIT authority for?

The Supreme Court holds that indirect taxes paid in the course of business are admissible as business expenditure under Section 37(1). Additionally, compensatory interest incurred on delayed payment of such indirect taxes is also allowable as a business expenditure.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does 201 ITR 684; Malwa Vanaspati and Chemical Co. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 37(1), Section 201(1A), Section 143(3), Section 14A, Section 250, Section 43B.

201 ITR 684; Malwa Vanaspati and Chemical Co. v. CIT (205 ITR 163)

Q: How many judgments cite 201 ITR 684; Malwa Vanaspati and Chemical Co. v. CIT?

44 judgments on BharatTax cite 201 ITR 684; Malwa Vanaspati and Chemical Co. v. CIT (205 ITR 163), spanning 2015 to 2026.

M/S Harman Connected Services Corporation India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Range-12, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1980/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1980 To 1982/Bang/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, Sr. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sreenivas T. Bidari, D.R

Section 143(3)

…Co. (supra) also relied on the decisions of the Apex Court in the cases of Prakash Cotton Mills (P.) Lid, v. CIT [1993] 201 ITR 684 / 67 Taxman 546; Malwa Vanaspati & Chemical Co. v. CIT[1997] 225 ITR 383 and CIT v. Ahmedabad Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd. V. CIT[1994] 205 ITR 163. In all those cases, the Court was concerned with an indirect tax payable by the assessee in the course of its business and admissible as business expenditure. Further. liability for' interest which had been incurred by the assessee therein was regarded as compensatory in nature and allowable as business expenditure. 16. The ratio of those cases…

M/S Dell International Services India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Ltu, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 932/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(Tp)A No.844/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Joint Vs. M/S.Dell International Services India Commissioner Of Private Limited, Income Tax, Ltu, (For The Merged Entity Dell India Bangalore. Private Limited), No.12/1, 12/2A, 13/1A, Divyashree Gardens, Challagutta Village, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore – 560 071. Pan : Aaach1925Q Appellant Respondent It(Tp)A No.932/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S.Dell International Services Vs. The Joint Commissioner India Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Ltu, (For The Merged Entity Dell India Bangalore. Private Limited), Bangalore – 560 071. Pan : Aaach1925Q Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Assessee By : Shri T. Suryanarayana, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 07.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.11.2022

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri

Section 143(2)Section 92C

…lakshmi Sugar Mills Co. also relied on the decision of the apex court in the cases of Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 201 ITR 684; Malwa Vanaspati and Chemical Co. v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 383 and CIT v. Ahmedabad Cotton Manufacturing Co. Ltd. [1994] 205 ITR 163. In all these cases, the court was concerned with an indirect tax payable by the assessee in the course of its business and admissible as business expenditure. Further liability for interest which had been incurred by the assessee therein was regarded as compensatory in nature and allowable as business expenditure. 16. The ratio of those cases is…

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Ltu), Bangalore vs. M/S Dell International Services India Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 844/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(Tp)A No.844/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Joint Vs. M/S.Dell International Services India Commissioner Of Private Limited, Income Tax, Ltu, (For The Merged Entity Dell India Bangalore. Private Limited), No.12/1, 12/2A, 13/1A, Divyashree Gardens, Challagutta Village, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore – 560 071. Pan : Aaach1925Q Appellant Respondent It(Tp)A No.932/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S.Dell International Services Vs. The Joint Commissioner India Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Ltu, (For The Merged Entity Dell India Bangalore. Private Limited), Bangalore – 560 071. Pan : Aaach1925Q Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Assessee By : Shri T. Suryanarayana, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 07.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.11.2022

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri

Section 143(2)Section 92C

…lakshmi Sugar Mills Co. also relied on the decision of the apex court in the cases of Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 201 ITR 684; Malwa Vanaspati and Chemical Co. v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 383 and CIT v. Ahmedabad Cotton Manufacturing Co. Ltd. [1994] 205 ITR 163. In all these cases, the court was concerned with an indirect tax payable by the assessee in the course of its business and admissible as business expenditure. Further liability for interest which had been incurred by the assessee therein was regarded as compensatory in nature and allowable as business expenditure. 16. The ratio of those cases is…

Coromandel Agrico Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 5(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 7547/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar Verma, Sr. DR

Section 206Section 271Section 37

…t the above order, assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT (A). Ld. CIT (A) noted the assessee’s contention. He noted that reliance has been placed on the following case laws in this regard by the assessee:- i) CIT v Ahmedabad Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd..[ 1995] 205 ITR 163 (SC) "Therefore, what needs to be done by an assessing authority under the Income-tax Act, 1961, in examining the claim of an assessee that the payment made by such assessee was a deductible expenditure under section 37 of the Income-tax Act although called a penalty is to see whether the law or scheme under which the amount was paid required suc…

Expat Engineering India Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 503/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Rajgopal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESEIDENT AND SHRI PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SP No.31/Bang/2022 AND Assessment year : 2017-18 Expat Engineering India Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Carlton Towers, A Wing, Income Tax, 3rd Floor, Unit No.301-314, Circle 2(1)(2), No.1, Old Airport Road, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 008. PAN: AABCE 9003D APPELLANT / APPLICANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Rajgopal, CA Respondent by : Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 20.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 01.08.2022 O…

Universal Energies Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 27(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2761/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Sudesh Garg, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. K. A. Manu, Sr. DR

Section 2Section 201Section 30Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 37(1)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHIBENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice President Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 2761/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Universal Energies Ltd., Vs DCIT, 607, Somdutta Chamber-2, Bhikaji Circle-27(1), Cama Place, New Delhi-110066 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACU9022F Assessee by: Sh. Sudesh Garg, Adv. & Sh. Sahil Aggarwal, CA Revenue by: Sh. K. A. Manu, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 11.05.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 26.07.2022 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the…

M/S. Tuv Rheinland Nife Academy Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed

ITA 2633/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Nov 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Smt. Kavitha Paramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain &

Section 170Section 201Section 32(1)Section 40Section 47

…ITA No.2633/Bang/2019 TUV Rheinland NIFE Academy Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 TUV Rheinland NIFE Academy Private Limited No.27/B, 2nd Cross, 13, Konappan Agrahar Begur Hobli Vs. ACIT Circle-7(1)(1) Electronic City Bangalore Bangalore 560 100 PAN NO : AAECT8703A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Kavitha Paramesh, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Muzaffar Hussain & Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, D.Rs. Date of Hearing : 02.09.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 01.…

Subsea Pro Engineering Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle-16 (3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 5884/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Judcial Member & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2015-16 Subsea Pro Engineering Private Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, 509 & 510, Techniplex Ii, Opp Circle 16 (3), Techniplex Complex, Jn. Veer Vs. Room No. 449, Aaykar Bhavan, Savarkar Flyover, Maharashi Karve Road, Goregaon (West), Churchgate- 400020 Mumbai - 400062 Pan: Aapcs6354R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Viswas Mehandale (Ar) Revenue By : Shri Vijay Kumar Menon (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 16/07/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/08/2021

For Appellant: Shri Viswas Mehandale (AR)For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Menon (DR)

Section 139Section 201Section 37Section 37(1)

…lied on the decisions of the Apex Court in the cases of Prakash Cotton Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT[1993] 201 ITR 684/67 Taxman 546 ; Assessment Year: 2015-16 Malwa Vanaspati & Chemical Co. v. CI 1997 225 ITR 383 and CIT vs Ahmedabad Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd. v.CI 1994 205 ITR 163. In all those cases, the Court was concerned with an indirect tax payable by the assessee in the course of its business and admissible as business expenditure. Further, liability for interest which had been incurred by the assessee therein was regarded as compensatory in nature and allowable as business expenditure. 16. The ratio of those cases…

Hari Machines Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 213/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Hari Machines Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 4, Scindia House, Connaught Circle-11(1), Place, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaach0868C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 37(1)

…lakshmi Sugar Mills Co. also relied on the decision of the apex court in the cases of Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 201 ITR 684 ; Malwa Vanaspati and Chemical Co. v. CIT [19971 225 ITR 383 and CITv. Ahmedabad Cotton Manufacturing Co. Ltd. [1994] 205 ITR 163. In all these cases, the court was concerned with an indirect tax payable by the assessee in the course of its business and admissible as business expenditure. Further liability for interest which had been incurred by the assessee therein was regarded as compensatory in nature and allowable as business expenditure. 16. The ratio of those cases is…

New Modern Bazaar Departmental Store Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 31(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 590/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaa N D Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Shri S. S. Negi, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 201Section 37Section 37(1)

…lakshmi Sugar Mills Co. also relied on the decision of the apex court in the cases of Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 201 ITR 684; Malwa Vanaspati and Chemical Co. v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 383 and CIT v. Ahmedabad Cotton Manufacturing Co. Ltd. [1994] 205 ITR 163. In all these cases, the court was concerned with an indirect tax payable by the assessee in the course of its business and admissible as business expenditure. Further liability for interest which had been incurred by the assessee therein was regarded as compensatory in nature and allowable as business expenditure. 16. The ratio of those cases is…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ebony Retail Holdings Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 2825/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishnan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 37(1)

…ment of the export quota in neither a penalty nor capital expenditure but is in the nature of business loss allowable as a deduction. 3 ITA.No.2825/Del./2014 M/s. Ebony Retail Holdings Ltd., New Delhi. CIT Vs. Ahmedabad Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd. & Ors reported in 205 ITR 163 (SC) Payment though referred to as penalty, but in fact made in exercise of option available under statutory scheme, in course of assessee's business, is allowable business expenditure. Thackers H.P. & Co. Vs. CIT reported in 134 ITR 21 (MP) The contract for purchase of tendu leaves was in the course of the same business which was then carried…

Sri Saurabh Tiwary, Jamshedpur vs. ACIT Cir-3, Jamshedpur

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 350/RAN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi16 Jul 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessment Year:2013-14 बनाम Sauravh Tiwary Acit, Circle-3, Jamshedpur / Banglow No.9999/287, Vijaya V/S. Garden, 5Th Phase, Baridih, Jamshedpur-831017. Pan No.Agfpt6115J अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent ..

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234CSection 37(1)

…any purpose which is an offence or which is prohibited by law. The Assessee placed reliance on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Prakash Cotton Mill Pvt.Ltd. 201 ITR 684(SC) and CIT Vs. Ahmedabad Cotton Manufacturing Company Pvt. Ltd. 205 ITR 163 (SC). It was contended that what needs to be done by an Assessing Officer, in similar circumstances, is to examine the claim of an assessee though called a penalty is to ensure whether the law or scheme under which the amount was paid requires such payment to be made as penalty or as something akin to penalty which is imposed by way of punishment…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dlf Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2749/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi & Shri SatyajeetFor Respondent: Shri Puneet Rai, Adv. Special counsel

Section 10Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 43B

…Ltd. vs. CIT (1993) 111 CTR (SC) 389 : (1993) 201 ITR 684 (SC) : TC 17R.746, Malwa Vanaspati & Chemical Co. vs. CIT (1997) 42 CTR (SC) 137 : (1997) 225 ITR 383 (SC) : S17.1860 and CIT vs. Ahmedabad Cotton Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (1993) 115 CTR (SC) 401 (1994) 205 ITR 163 (SC) : TC 17R.848. In all these cases, the Court was concerned with an indirect tax payable by the assessee in the course of its business and admissible as business expenditure. Further liability for interest which had been incurred by the assessee therein was regarded as compensatory in nature and allowable as business expenditure. 11. The ratio…

Dlf Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 2126/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi & Shri SatyajeetFor Respondent: Shri Puneet Rai, Adv. Special counsel

Section 10Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 43B

…Ltd. vs. CIT (1993) 111 CTR (SC) 389 : (1993) 201 ITR 684 (SC) : TC 17R.746, Malwa Vanaspati & Chemical Co. vs. CIT (1997) 42 CTR (SC) 137 : (1997) 225 ITR 383 (SC) : S17.1860 and CIT vs. Ahmedabad Cotton Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (1993) 115 CTR (SC) 401 (1994) 205 ITR 163 (SC) : TC 17R.848. In all these cases, the Court was concerned with an indirect tax payable by the assessee in the course of its business and admissible as business expenditure. Further liability for interest which had been incurred by the assessee therein was regarded as compensatory in nature and allowable as business expenditure. 11. The ratio…

Vidyut Metallics P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle- 38(New Central Circle-6(3), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 5243/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5243/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5244/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S. Vidyut Metallics Pvt.Ltd. Acit-Cc 38 बनाम/ 4Th Floor, Malhotra House [New Central Circle-6(3) 19Th Floor, Air India Building Opp. Gpo, Fort Vs. Mumbai-400 001. Nariman Point, Mumbai-21. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcv-3305-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Prateek Jha and Shri Dr. Prayag Jha- Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri Rajiv Gobgtra - Ld.DR

Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 40

…Co. (supra) also relied on the decisions of the Apex Court in the cases of Prakash Cotton Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT[1993] 201 ITR 684 / 67 Taxman 546 ; Malwa Vanaspati & Chemical Co. v. CIT[1997] 225 ITR 383 and CIT v. Ahmedabad Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT[1994] 205 ITR 163. In all those cases, the Court was concerned with an indirect tax payable by the assessee in the course of its business and admissible as business expenditure. Further, liability for interest which had been incurred by the assessee therein was regarded as compensatory in nature and allowable as business expenditure. 16. The ratio of those cases i…

Swastika Commodities Pvt. Limited, Indore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1), Indore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 602/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 Swastika Commodities Acit, Pvt. Limitted बनाम/ 48, Jaora Compound, Circle-5(1), Indore Vs. M.Y.H. Road, Indore-452001 (Appellant) (Revenue) P.A. Aaccs3050K Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Yogeesh Mishra Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.10.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad, A.M: This Appeal Of Assessee Pertaining To A.Y. 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-Ii, Indore, (In Short ‘Cit(A)’), Dated 01.05.2018 Which Is Arising Out Of The Order U/S 143(3) Of The Income

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Swastika Commodities ACIT, Pvt. Limitted बनाम/ 48, Jaora Compound, Circle-5(1), Indore Vs. M.Y.H. Road, Indore-452001 (Appellant) (Revenue) P.A. AACCS3050K Appellant by None Respondent by Shri Yogeesh Mishra Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 17.10.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 23.10.2018 आदेश / O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, A.M: This appeal of Assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13 is directed against the order of Ld. Commis…

De La Rue Cash Processing Solution Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Gurgaon

ITA 2671/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 145A

…ch was infraction of law; and it did not related to any statutory breach of contract. In this regard, the Ld. AR relied upon the following case laws wherein liquidated damages have been allowed as deduction: • CIT(A) Vs. Ahmedabad Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd., [1994] 205 ITR 163 (S.C). • FL Simdth Mineral (P) Ltd. [20130] 36 taxmann. Com 72 (Madras Hon'ble High Court) • Huber + Suhner Exletroncis (P) Ltd. Vs. DICT, [2013] 34 taxmann.com 149 (Delhi Tribunal) • K.C.P. Ltd Vs. ITO, [1990] 34 ITD 50 (Hyderbad Tribunal Special Bench) 13. The Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the TPO/AO and the CIT(A). 14. We have heard both…

De La Rue Cash Systems India P, Ltd(Presently Known As - De La Rue Cash Processing Solutins P.Ltd, Gurgaon vs. ITO 1(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 5017/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 145A

…ch was infraction of law; and it did not related to any statutory breach of contract. In this regard, the Ld. AR relied upon the following case laws wherein liquidated damages have been allowed as deduction: • CIT(A) Vs. Ahmedabad Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd., [1994] 205 ITR 163 (S.C). • FL Simdth Mineral (P) Ltd. [20130] 36 taxmann. Com 72 (Madras Hon'ble High Court) • Huber + Suhner Exletroncis (P) Ltd. Vs. DICT, [2013] 34 taxmann.com 149 (Delhi Tribunal) • K.C.P. Ltd Vs. ITO, [1990] 34 ITD 50 (Hyderbad Tribunal Special Bench) 13. The Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the TPO/AO and the CIT(A). 14. We have heard both…

DCIT 2(2), Mumbai vs. Paresh Construction & Foundations P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6850/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal - DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण यकर अपीलीय अिधकरण यकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई यकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “सी मुंबई सी सी” ” ” ” खंडपीठ सी खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal “C” Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"", लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं रा मलाल नेगी, "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं रा रामलाल नेगी रा मलाल नेगी मलाल नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य Before S/Sh. Rajendra, Accountant Member & Ramlal Negi, Judicial Member आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A. No. 6850/Mum/2012, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year:2008-09 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Jaipuria Infrastructure Developers, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed partly for statistical purpose

ITA 1332/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2007-08 Vs. M/S. Dcit, Circle – 4(1), Room No. Jaipuria Infrastructure 407, C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, Developers, 9B, Hansalaya, New Delhi Connaught Place, New Delhi Pan : Aaccb1286C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Umesh Chand Dubey, Sr.Dr Respondent By S/Sh. Rupesh Jain & Dipesh Jain, Adv. Date Of Hearing 18.05.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 16.06.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against Order Dated 28/01/2011 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Vii, New Delhi [In Short “The Cit-(A)”] For Assessment Year 2007-08, Raising Following Grounds:

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37

…mpensatory in nature, and therefore allowable under Explanation to section 37(1) of the Act. In support of contention, the Ld. counsel relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT versus Ahmedabad cotton manufacturing company limited 205 ITR 163 (SC) and decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Loke Nath and Company (Construction), 147 ITR 624 (Del). 5.6 We have heard the rival submission and perused the relevant material on record. The facts that payment of Rs.5,78,78,730/-has been made as compounding fee to the GDA has not been disputed by the 11 assessee, which…

201 ITR 684; Malwa Vanaspati and Chemical Co. v. CIT