Which sections of the Income Tax Act does 53 ITR 140 (SC), CIT v. Birla Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 36(1)(iii), Section 14A, Section 143(3), Section 1961, Section 133(6), Section 147.

53 ITR 140 (SC), CIT v. Birla Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. (82 ITR 166)

Q: What is 53 ITR 140 (SC), CIT v. Birla Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. authority for?

The expression 'for the purpose of business' is broader than 'for the purpose of earning profits' and includes measures for the preservation and protection of the business.

Q: How many judgments cite 53 ITR 140 (SC), CIT v. Birla Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd.?

126 judgments on BharatTax cite 53 ITR 140 (SC), CIT v. Birla Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. (82 ITR 166), spanning 2006 to 2025.

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Chennai vs. Shri. Moolchand Kiran Kumar Jain, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 6/CHNY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 5 & 6/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22 The Dy. Commissioner Of Shri. Moolchandkiran Kumar Income Tax, V. Jain, Central Circle -1(4), No. 123, Usman Road, T.Nagar, Chennai-34. Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Achpm-2247-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. D. Anand, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.05.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am: These Appeals Are Preferred By The Revenue Against The Common Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, (Hereinafter In Short "The Ld.Cit(A)”), Chennai, Dated 15.11.2022 Against The Assessment Order U/S.153A/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter In Short "The Act”) For :-2-: Ita. Nos: 5 & 6/Chny/2024

For Appellant: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. D. Anand, Advocate

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

…dly held by this Court that the expression "or the purpose of business" is wider in scope than the expression" for the purpose of earning profits" vide CIT Vs. Malayalam Plantations Ltd. (1964) 53 TR 140, CIT Vs Birla Coton Spinning & Weaving Mills 1td (197l) 82 ITR 166 etc. The High Court and the other authorities should have examined the purpose for which the assessee advanced the money to its sister concern, and what the sister concern did with this money in order to decide whether it was for commercial expediency, but that has not been done. It is true that the borrowed amount in question was rot utilized by…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(4), Chennai vs. Shri. Moolchand Kiran Kumar Jain, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 5 & 6/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22 The Dy. Commissioner Of Shri. Moolchandkiran Kumar Income Tax, V. Jain, Central Circle -1(4), No. 123, Usman Road, T.Nagar, Chennai-34. Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Achpm-2247-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. D. Anand, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.05.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am: These Appeals Are Preferred By The Revenue Against The Common Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, (Hereinafter In Short "The Ld.Cit(A)”), Chennai, Dated 15.11.2022 Against The Assessment Order U/S.153A/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter In Short "The Act”) For :-2-: Ita. Nos: 5 & 6/Chny/2024

For Appellant: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. D. Anand, Advocate

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

…dly held by this Court that the expression "or the purpose of business" is wider in scope than the expression" for the purpose of earning profits" vide CIT Vs. Malayalam Plantations Ltd. (1964) 53 TR 140, CIT Vs Birla Coton Spinning & Weaving Mills 1td (197l) 82 ITR 166 etc. The High Court and the other authorities should have examined the purpose for which the assessee advanced the money to its sister concern, and what the sister concern did with this money in order to decide whether it was for commercial expediency, but that has not been done. It is true that the borrowed amount in question was rot utilized by…

Ind Swift Laboratories Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal is allowed, as indicated

ITA 350/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri T.N.Singla, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT-DR

Section 250Section 35Section 35(1)Section 35(1)(i)Section 35(2)

…ess' is wider in scope than the expression 'for the purpose of earning profits'. The following case laws were cited: ० 'CIT versus Malayalam Plantations Limited', [1964] 53 ITR 140 (SC) ० 'CIT versus Birla Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Limited', [1971] 82 ITR 166 (SC). 37.11. It was noted that the process, the Supreme Court also agreed that the view taken by the Delhi High Court in 'CIT versus Dalmia Cement (B.) Limited', [2002] 254 ITR 377 (Delhi), wherein, the High Court had held that once it is established that there is nexus between the expenditure and the purpose of business, which need not necessa…

Crm Services India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed with consequential effect

ITA 1519/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 254

…llowing judgments for supporting the aforsaid contentios; - CIT vs. Malayalam Plantations Limited: 53 ITR 140 (SC) - CIT v. Walchand& Co. etc. (1967) 65 ITR 381 - J K Woollen Manufacturers v. CIT: 72 ITR 612(SC) - CIT v. Birla Cotton Spg. And Wvg. Mills Ltd.: 82 ITR 166 (SC) - Madhav Prasad Jatia v. CIT U.P.: 118 ITR 200 (SC) - S.A. Builders Ltd. vs. CIT : 288 ITR 1 (SC) - CIT V. Bharti Televentures Ltd: 331 ITR 502 (Del) - CIT vs. Padmani Packaging (P) Ltd. : 155 Taxmann 268 (Del) - CIT v. Rockman Cycle Industries Ltd.: 331 ITR 401 (P&H) (FB) - CIT vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. : ITA No. 1068/2011 & 1070/2011 (Del HC)…

Crm Services India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed with consequential effect

ITA 1518/DEL/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 254

…llowing judgments for supporting the aforsaid contentios; - CIT vs. Malayalam Plantations Limited: 53 ITR 140 (SC) - CIT v. Walchand& Co. etc. (1967) 65 ITR 381 - J K Woollen Manufacturers v. CIT: 72 ITR 612(SC) - CIT v. Birla Cotton Spg. And Wvg. Mills Ltd.: 82 ITR 166 (SC) - Madhav Prasad Jatia v. CIT U.P.: 118 ITR 200 (SC) - S.A. Builders Ltd. vs. CIT : 288 ITR 1 (SC) - CIT V. Bharti Televentures Ltd: 331 ITR 502 (Del) - CIT vs. Padmani Packaging (P) Ltd. : 155 Taxmann 268 (Del) - CIT v. Rockman Cycle Industries Ltd.: 331 ITR 401 (P&H) (FB) - CIT vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. : ITA No. 1068/2011 & 1070/2011 (Del HC)…

J.P Tobaco Producta Pvt. Ltd., Damoh vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle - Sagar, Sagasr

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 128/JAB/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur21 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 37(1)Section 40

…eld by this Court that the expression "for the purpose of business" is wider in scope than the expression " for the purpose of earning profits" vide CIT us. Malayalam Plantations Ltd. (1964) 53 ITR 140, CIT vs. Birla Cotton Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd (1971) 82 ITR 166 etc. The High Court and the other authorities should have examined the purpose for which the assessee advanced the money to its sister concern, and what the sister concern did with this money, in order to decide whether it was for commercial expediency, but that has not been done. It is true that the borrowed amount in question was not utilized by…

J.P Tobacco Product Pvt. Ltd., Damoh vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3, Sagar

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 127/JAB/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur21 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 37(1)Section 40

…eld by this Court that the expression "for the purpose of business" is wider in scope than the expression " for the purpose of earning profits" vide CIT us. Malayalam Plantations Ltd. (1964) 53 ITR 140, CIT vs. Birla Cotton Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd (1971) 82 ITR 166 etc. The High Court and the other authorities should have examined the purpose for which the assessee advanced the money to its sister concern, and what the sister concern did with this money, in order to decide whether it was for commercial expediency, but that has not been done. It is true that the borrowed amount in question was not utilized by…

J.P Tobacco Product Pvt. Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 263/JAB/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur21 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 37(1)Section 40

…eld by this Court that the expression "for the purpose of business" is wider in scope than the expression " for the purpose of earning profits" vide CIT us. Malayalam Plantations Ltd. (1964) 53 ITR 140, CIT vs. Birla Cotton Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd (1971) 82 ITR 166 etc. The High Court and the other authorities should have examined the purpose for which the assessee advanced the money to its sister concern, and what the sister concern did with this money, in order to decide whether it was for commercial expediency, but that has not been done. It is true that the borrowed amount in question was not utilized by…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Katni, Katni vs. J.P Tobacco Products Pvt. Ltd, Damoh

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 94/JAB/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur22 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40

…eld by this Court that the expression "for the purpose of business" is wider in scope than the expression " for the purpose of earning profits" vide CIT us. Malayalam Plantations Ltd. (1964) 53 ITR 140, CIT vs. Birla Cotton Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd (1971) 82 ITR 166 etc. The High Court and the other authorities should have examined the purpose for which the assessee advanced the money to its sister concern, and what the sister concern did with this money, in order to decide whether it was for commercial expediency, but that has not been done. It is true that the borrowed amount in question was not utilized by…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-Katni, Katni vs. J.P. Tobacco Products Pvt. Ltd, Damoh

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 93/JAB/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur22 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40

…eld by this Court that the expression "for the purpose of business" is wider in scope than the expression " for the purpose of earning profits" vide CIT us. Malayalam Plantations Ltd. (1964) 53 ITR 140, CIT vs. Birla Cotton Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd (1971) 82 ITR 166 etc. The High Court and the other authorities should have examined the purpose for which the assessee advanced the money to its sister concern, and what the sister concern did with this money, in order to decide whether it was for commercial expediency, but that has not been done. It is true that the borrowed amount in question was not utilized by…

DCIT, Circle-21(1), New Delhi vs. Religare Arts Initiative Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7554/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Garg, CIT- DR

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 40A(2)(b)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2013-14 DCIT, Circle 21(1) Vs. Religare Arts Initiative Ltd. Room No. 202B, 2nd Floor, 2nd Floor, Rajlok Building, 24, C.R. Building, Nehru Place, I.P. Estate, New Delhi – 110 019 New Delhi – 110 002 PAN AADCR7075A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate Ms. Somya Jain, CA Department by: Shri Rohit Garg, CIT- DR Date of Hearing: 13.07.2023 Date of 09.08.2023 pronouncement: O R D E R PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM The appeal filed by the Reven…

ACIT, Circle- 17(1), New Delhi vs. Modi Rubber Ltd., New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4864/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shuklaasstt. Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Maninder Kaur, Sr. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)

…facts of the case is not permissible. Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Id. CIT(A) who has relied upon the following decisions: a)CIT Vs. Malayalam Plantations Ltd 53 ITR 140 (SC) b) CIT V Birla Cotton Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd 82 ITR 166 [SC] c) Madhav Prasad Jatia Vs. CIT 118 ITR 200 [SC] 8. Reliance was also placed by the Id. counsel for the assessee on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of J.J. Enterprises Vs. CIT reported at 254 ITR 216 [SC] where, as per the ‘Head Notes’, it has been held as under: "In its principal order, the Tribunal had concluded that t…