4 SOT 859 (Delhi), Asstt. CIT v. Medicamen Biotech Ltd.

3 SOT 572Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2005#11494 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2022.

Judgments citing 4 SOT 859 (Delhi), Asstt. CIT v. Medicamen Biotech Ltd.

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ADANI ENTERPRISE LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby partly allowed

ITA 523/AHD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Respondent: Shri Vartik Choksi, A.R
Section 1Section 143(3)

…unt. In a number of judgments viz. Amar Raja Batteries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2004] 91 ITD 280 (Hyd.), Jt. CIT v. Modi Olivetti Ltd. [2005] 4 SOT 859 (Delhi), Asstt. CIT v. Medicamen Biotech Ltd. [2005] 1 SOT 347 (Delhi), Hero Honda Motors Ltd. v. Jt. CIT [2005] 3 SOT 572 (Delhi) and Charak Pharmaceuticals v. Jt. CIT [2005] 4 SOT 393 (Mum.), it has been affirmed that where any expenditure is treated as a deferred revenue expenditure, it presupposes that the concerned expenditure, creating benefit is in the revenue field and is a revenue expenditure, but considering its enduring benefits as well as the fact that it d…

THE DCIT CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ADANI ENTERPRISE LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby partly allowed

ITA 472/AHD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Respondent: Shri Vartik Choksi, A.R
Section 1Section 143(3)

…unt. In a number of judgments viz. Amar Raja Batteries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2004] 91 ITD 280 (Hyd.), Jt. CIT v. Modi Olivetti Ltd. [2005] 4 SOT 859 (Delhi), Asstt. CIT v. Medicamen Biotech Ltd. [2005] 1 SOT 347 (Delhi), Hero Honda Motors Ltd. v. Jt. CIT [2005] 3 SOT 572 (Delhi) and Charak Pharmaceuticals v. Jt. CIT [2005] 4 SOT 393 (Mum.), it has been affirmed that where any expenditure is treated as a deferred revenue expenditure, it presupposes that the concerned expenditure, creating benefit is in the revenue field and is a revenue expenditure, but considering its enduring benefits as well as the fact that it d…

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby partly allowed

ITA 336/AHD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Respondent: Shri Vartik Choksi, A.R
Section 1Section 143(3)

…unt. In a number of judgments viz. Amar Raja Batteries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2004] 91 ITD 280 (Hyd.), Jt. CIT v. Modi Olivetti Ltd. [2005] 4 SOT 859 (Delhi), Asstt. CIT v. Medicamen Biotech Ltd. [2005] 1 SOT 347 (Delhi), Hero Honda Motors Ltd. v. Jt. CIT [2005] 3 SOT 572 (Delhi) and Charak Pharmaceuticals v. Jt. CIT [2005] 4 SOT 393 (Mum.), it has been affirmed that where any expenditure is treated as a deferred revenue expenditure, it presupposes that the concerned expenditure, creating benefit is in the revenue field and is a revenue expenditure, but considering its enduring benefits as well as the fact that it d…

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby partly allowed

ITA 285/AHD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Respondent: Shri Vartik Choksi, A.R
Section 1Section 143(3)

…unt. In a number of judgments viz. Amar Raja Batteries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2004] 91 ITD 280 (Hyd.), Jt. CIT v. Modi Olivetti Ltd. [2005] 4 SOT 859 (Delhi), Asstt. CIT v. Medicamen Biotech Ltd. [2005] 1 SOT 347 (Delhi), Hero Honda Motors Ltd. v. Jt. CIT [2005] 3 SOT 572 (Delhi) and Charak Pharmaceuticals v. Jt. CIT [2005] 4 SOT 393 (Mum.), it has been affirmed that where any expenditure is treated as a deferred revenue expenditure, it presupposes that the concerned expenditure, creating benefit is in the revenue field and is a revenue expenditure, but considering its enduring benefits as well as the fact that it d…

ASSTT. CIT, CIR- 7, NAGPUR vs. M/S. NEWQUEST CORPORATION LTD., CHANDRAPUR

ITA 328/NAG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2008-2009 The Acit Vs. M/S.Newquest Corporation Ltd. Circle-7, (Now Known As M/S. Avantha Nagpur Holding Ltd. Ballalrpur Paper Mills P.O. Ballarpur, Distt. Chandrapur Pan No.:Aabcb 6134 E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani (Adv.)For Respondent: ShriPiyushKolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 40

…h Court. In a number of judgments viz. Amar Raja Batteries Ltd, v. Asstt.CIT [2004] 91 ITD 280 (Hyd.), it.CIT v. Modi Olivetti Ltd. [2005] 4 SOT 859 (Delhi), Asstt.CIT v. Medicamen Biotech Ltd. [2005] 1 SOT 347 (Delhi), Hero Honda Motors Ltd. v. it.CIT [2005] 3 SOT 572 (Delhi) and Charak Pharmaceuticals v. it. CIT [2005] 4 SOT 393 (Mum.), it has been affirmed that where any expenditure is treated as a deferred revenue expenditure, it presupposes that the concerned expenditure, creating benefit is in the revenue field and is a revenue expenditure, but considering its enduring benefits as well as the fact that it d…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CITI FINANCIAL COSUMER FINANCE INDIA LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3118/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

…r of judgments viz. Amar Raja Batteries Ltd. v. ACIT [(2004) 91 1TD 280 (Hyd)J, JCIT v. Modi Olivetti Ltd. [(2005)4 SOT 859 (Delhi)], ACIT vs. Medicamen Biotech Ltd. [(2005) 1 SOT 347 (Delhi)],Hero Honda Motors Ltd. v. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax [(2005) 3 SOT 572 (Delhi)] ;Charak Pharmaceuticals v. JCIT [(2005) 4SOT 393 ITA No.- 3118/Del/2016. M/s Citi Financial Consumer Finance India Ltd. &5191,2687&2688/Del./2010 (Mumbai)], and ACIT vs. Ashima Syntex Ltd., 117 ITD 1 (Ahd.)(SB)it has been affirmed that where any expenditure is treated as a deferred revenue expenditure, it presupposes that the concerned exp…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CITI FINANCIAL COSUMER FINANCE INDIA LTD.,, NEW DELHI

ITA 2638/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singhito, Ward 6 (2), Vs. M/S. Citi Financial Consumer Finance New Delhi. India Ltd., 3, Local Shopping Centre, Pushpa Bhawan, Pushp Vihar, New Delhi – 110 062. (Pan : Aabca3223B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri C.S. Agarwal, Senior Advocate Shri Shailesh Gupta, Advocate Revenue By : Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.05.2019 Date Of Order : 23.05.2019

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Agarwal, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘I-2’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITO, Ward 6 (2), vs. M/s. Citi Financial Consumer Finance New Delhi. India Ltd., 3, Local Shopping Centre, Pushpa Bhawan, Pushp Vihar, New Delhi – 110 062. (PAN : AABCA3223B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri C.S. Agarwal, Senior Advocate Shri Shailesh Gupta, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 02.05.2019 Date of Order : 23.05.2019 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : Appellant, Income-tax Officer, Ward 6 (…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 8,, PUNE vs. M/S. DYNOMERK CONTROLS,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 904/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: "ी "वकास अव"थी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma
Section 143(2)

…contentions, the ld.A.R. placed reliance on following decisions : 4 1. Amar Raja Batteries Ltd. Vs. ACIT 91 ITD 280. 2. JCIT Vs. Modi Olivetti Ltd. 4 SOT 859 (Delhi). 3. ACIT Vs. Medicamen Biotech Ltd. 1 SOT 347 (Delhi). 4. Hero Honda Motors Ltd. Vs. JCIT 3 SOT 572 (Delhi). 5. Charak Pharmaceuticals Vs. JCIT 4SOT 393. 6. Madras Industrial Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT 225 ITR 802. 7. Kedatnath Jute Manufacturing Co Ltd. Vs. CIT 82 ITR 363 SC. 5. Shri M.K. Verma representing the Department submitted that huge expenditure has been incurred by assessee for product development which would result in enduring benefit…

M/S. BIOTRONIK MEDICAL DEVICES INDIA PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2427/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10

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

…ial Consumer Fin. Ltd. (201 1) 335 ITR 29 (Del) " Amar Raja Batteries Ltd. Vs ACIT (2004) 91 ITD 280 (Hyd.) " JCIT Vs Modi Olivetti Ltd. (2005) 4 SOT 859 (Delhi) " ACIT Vs Medicamen Biotech Ltd. (2005) 1 SOT 347 (Delhi) " Hero Honda Motors Ltd. Vs JCIT (2005) 3 SOT 572 (Delhi) " Charak Pharmaceuticals Vs JCIT (2005) 4 SOT 393 (Mumbai) " CIT Vs Industrial Finance Corporation of India (2209) 185 Taxman 296 (Delhi) " ACIT Vs Ashina Syntex Lid. (ITA Nos. 2001 & 2002, A HD (Spl. Bench) " CIT Vs Pancea Biotech Ltd. (ITA No. 22/2012) (Del). 10 We have considered the submissions of Id. Senior DR. The assessee’s claim was…

4 SOT 859 (Delhi), Asstt. CIT v. Medicamen Biotech Ltd. (3 SOT 572) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax