49 ITR 160 (SC); International Airport Authority of India v. CIT

218 ITR 598High Court1996#5463 most cited

What is 49 ITR 160 (SC); International Airport Authority of India v. CIT authority for?

The nature of expenditure, whether capital or revenue, is determined by its aim, object, and resultant advantage.

21

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2023.

Also referred to as

International Airport Authority of India v. CIT · 49 ITR 160 · expenditure nature · capital vs revenue · aim and object · resultant advantage · business expenditure

Issues it is cited on

section 274(1)section 43b(f)section 2(45)section 36(l)(iii)section 211section 271(l)section 32(1)(iia)house property incomesection 140full and true disclosuresection 271(l)(c)additional depreciation

Judgments citing 49 ITR 160 (SC); International Airport Authority of India v. CIT

Airports Authority of India vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms

ITA - 432 / 2008HC Delhi16 Dec 2011

…08,ITA 1250/2008,ITA 1251/2008 payment would be a capital payment. Two more decisions of Supreme Court in Sitalur Sugar Works Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 491 ITR 160 and Bombay High Court in Hardiallia Chemicals Ltd. Vs. CIT, 218 ITR 598 were noted wherein the Court had held that where expenditure was incurred by the assessee for shifting the factory from one place to another to improve the business, the same was capital expenditure in nature. 9. However, at the time of arguments nobody had appeared on behalf of the assessee. An application was filed for setting aside…