37(1) of the Act: (o) Prakash Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT

347 ITR 32High Court2012#11537 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 35ABBSection 37(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 80lacompensatory interestsection 35abbsection 80lsection 72acarry forward of lossessection 72related party transactionprohibited by lawunabsorbed depreciationbusiness expediencysection 41(1)

Judgments citing 37(1) of the Act: (o) Prakash Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT

Bharti Telemedia Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 624/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 35ASection 4

…iness, is in the nature of expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for purposes of business, allowable as deduction under section 37(1) of the Act: (o) Prakash Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT: 201 ITR 684 (SC) (p) CIT v. Desiccant Rotors International (P.) Ltd.: 347 ITR 32 (Del.) (q) CIT v. Enchante Jewellery Ltd.: 220 Taxman 8 (Del.) (r) New Mahalaxmi Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd.: 206 ITR 302 (Bom.) (s) Golder v. Great Boulder Mines: 33 TC 75 (t) Sardar Prit Inder Singh vs. CIT: 27 Taxman 524 (P&H) (u) CIT v. Neo Structo Construction Ltd: 218 Taxman 24 (Gujarat) (v) Huber Suhner Electronics (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT: 59 SOT 59 (D…

DCIT, Circle 4(2), New Delhi vs. M/S Bharti Telemedia Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4966/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 35ASection 4

…iness, is in the nature of expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for purposes of business, allowable as deduction under section 37(1) of the Act: (o) Prakash Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT: 201 ITR 684 (SC) (p) CIT v. Desiccant Rotors International (P.) Ltd.: 347 ITR 32 (Del.) (q) CIT v. Enchante Jewellery Ltd.: 220 Taxman 8 (Del.) (r) New Mahalaxmi Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd.: 206 ITR 302 (Bom.) (s) Golder v. Great Boulder Mines: 33 TC 75 (t) Sardar Prit Inder Singh vs. CIT: 27 Taxman 524 (P&H) (u) CIT v. Neo Structo Construction Ltd: 218 Taxman 24 (Gujarat) (v) Huber Suhner Electronics (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT: 59 SOT 59 (D…

Bharti Telemedia Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4960/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 35ASection 4

…iness, is in the nature of expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for purposes of business, allowable as deduction under section 37(1) of the Act: (o) Prakash Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT: 201 ITR 684 (SC) (p) CIT v. Desiccant Rotors International (P.) Ltd.: 347 ITR 32 (Del.) (q) CIT v. Enchante Jewellery Ltd.: 220 Taxman 8 (Del.) (r) New Mahalaxmi Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd.: 206 ITR 302 (Bom.) (s) Golder v. Great Boulder Mines: 33 TC 75 (t) Sardar Prit Inder Singh vs. CIT: 27 Taxman 524 (P&H) (u) CIT v. Neo Structo Construction Ltd: 218 Taxman 24 (Gujarat) (v) Huber Suhner Electronics (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT: 59 SOT 59 (D…

DCIT, Circle 4(2), New Delhi vs. Ms Bharti Telemedia Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4868/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 35ASection 4

…iness, is in the nature of expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for purposes of business, allowable as deduction under section 37(1) of the Act: (o) Prakash Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT: 201 ITR 684 (SC) (p) CIT v. Desiccant Rotors International (P.) Ltd.: 347 ITR 32 (Del.) (q) CIT v. Enchante Jewellery Ltd.: 220 Taxman 8 (Del.) (r) New Mahalaxmi Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd.: 206 ITR 302 (Bom.) (s) Golder v. Great Boulder Mines: 33 TC 75 (t) Sardar Prit Inder Singh vs. CIT: 27 Taxman 524 (P&H) (u) CIT v. Neo Structo Construction Ltd: 218 Taxman 24 (Gujarat) (v) Huber Suhner Electronics (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT: 59 SOT 59 (D…

DCIT, Circle 1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Aia Engineering Ltd, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, whereas, the

ITA 565/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Annapurna Gupta1. आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.565/Ahd/2025 – Asst.Year 2014-15 2. आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.351/Ahd/2025 – Asst. Year 2014-15 1. The Dcit Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad – 380 015 बनाम / V/S. 2. Aia Engineering Ltd. 115, Gvmm Estate Odhav Road, Odhav Ahmedabad - 382 415 1. Aia Engineering Ltd. 115, Gvmm Estate Odhav Road, Odhav Ahmedabad – 382 415 2. The Dcit Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabca 2777 J (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 29/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 01/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Are Cross-Appeals, One By The Assessee & The Other By The Revenue Preferred Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)'] Dated 13/01/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act') For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-2015. Both The Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. First, We Take Up Revenue'S Appeal In Ita No.565/Ahd/2025 For Ay 2014-15 For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 2(17)Section 250

…government" in nature of any penalty, fees, etc. • Thus, the payment on patent infringement or settlement of payment dispute is "compensatory & not penal in nature". Reliance is placed on the followings: ➤ CIT v. Desiccant Rotors International P. Ltd. [2012] 347 ITR 32 (Delhi) ➤ Harbinger Systems P. Ltd. v. DCIT [2017] 77 taxmann.com 284 (Pune- Trib.) ➤ ITO v. MPR Marketings P. Ltd. - ITA No. 1514/Kol/2012 • The amount payable to Ml represents compensatory damages as evident from the followings: ➤ Counter claim filed by MI claiming "compensation" -Pgs.148-62 @ Pg. 160 of P/b. ➤ US District Court order dt. 02.07.…

Aia Engineering Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, whereas, the

ITA 351/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Annapurna Gupta1. आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.565/Ahd/2025 – Asst.Year 2014-15 2. आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.351/Ahd/2025 – Asst. Year 2014-15 1. The Dcit Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad – 380 015 बनाम / V/S. 2. Aia Engineering Ltd. 115, Gvmm Estate Odhav Road, Odhav Ahmedabad - 382 415 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabca 2777 J (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 29/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 01/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Are Cross-Appeals, One By The Assessee & The Other By The Revenue Preferred Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)'] Dated 13/01/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act') For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-2015. Both The Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. First, We Take Up Revenue'S Appeal In Ita No.565/Ahd/2025 For Ay 2014-15 For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 2(17)Section 250

…to government" in nature of any penalty, fees, etc. • Thus, the payment on patent infringement or settlement of payment dispute is "compensatory & not penal in nature". Reliance is placed on the followings: CIT v. Desiccant Rotors International P. Ltd. [2012] 347 ITR 32 (Delhi) Harbinger Systems P. Ltd. v. DCIT [2017] 77 taxmann.com 284 (Pune- Trib.) ITO v. MPR Marketings P. Ltd. - ITA No. 1514/Kol/2012 • The amount payable to MI represents compensatory damages as evident from the followings: Counter claim filed by MI claiming "compensation" -Pgs.148-62 @ Pg. 160 of P/b. US District Court order dt. 02.07.2012 awa…

M/S A.C.Chokshi Share Brokers Pvt Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2990/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S. Ac Chokshi Acit, Cc-1(3) Share Brokers Pvt Ltd, 905, 9Th Floor, बनाम/ 2Nd Floor, Itts House, Pratishtha Bhavan, Vs. 28K Dubash Marg, Old Cgo Annex, Kala Ghoda, Fort, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400023. Mumbai-400020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabca3464E (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri.Dharan Gandhi.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Manoj Kumar Sinha.DR
Section 271(1)(C)Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI BR BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. AC Chokshi ACIT, CC-1(3) Share Brokers Pvt Ltd, 905, 9th Floor, बनाम/ 2nd Floor, ITTS House, Pratishtha Bhavan, Vs. 28K Dubash Marg, Old CGO Annex, Kala Ghoda, Fort, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400023. Mumbai-400020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AABCA3464E (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) Assessee by : Shri.Dharan Gandhi.AR Revenue by : Shri.Manoj Kumar Sinha.DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing 08/12/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement 23/01/2024 आदे…

M/S. Peerless Hospitex Hospital & Research Centre Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 11(2), Kolkata

In the result, both appeals of the assessee( in ITA No

ITA 738/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.737 & 738/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2009-10 & 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate, Shri S. Dey, CA & Ms. Puja Somani, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 154Section 72

…Income-tax Act, 1961 however, it is defined in section 3(38) of the General Clauses Act, 1897. In this regard it would be relevant to refer here, the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Desiccant Rotors International Pvt. Ltd [2012] 347 ITR 32 (Del). In this case, the Court observed as follows: “Dilating on this submission, she argued that the expression "offence" and "prohibited by law" occurring in the Explanation to section 37(1) of the Act are not defined in the Act. However, section 3(38) of the General Clauses Act, 1897, defines "offence" to mean "any act or omission made punisha…

M/S. Peerless Hospitex Hospital & Research Centre Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 11(2), Kolkata

In the result, both appeals of the assessee( in ITA No

ITA 737/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.737 & 738/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2009-10 & 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate, Shri S. Dey, CA & Ms. Puja Somani, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 154Section 72

…Income-tax Act, 1961 however, it is defined in section 3(38) of the General Clauses Act, 1897. In this regard it would be relevant to refer here, the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Desiccant Rotors International Pvt. Ltd [2012] 347 ITR 32 (Del). In this case, the Court observed as follows: “Dilating on this submission, she argued that the expression "offence" and "prohibited by law" occurring in the Explanation to section 37(1) of the Act are not defined in the Act. However, section 3(38) of the General Clauses Act, 1897, defines "offence" to mean "any act or omission made punisha…

37(1) of the Act: (o) Prakash Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT (347 ITR 32) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax