87 ITR 650 (AP), CIT v. Late G.D.Naidu and Ors. (1987) 165 ITR 63 (Mad), DCIT v. McDowell & Co. Ltd.

122 ITR 995High Court1980#1993 most cited
57

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 234ASection 244ASection 115JBSection 135Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 35etest of enduring benefitrelinquishment of rightsection 10(2)(xv)section 10(5)section 2(31)non-compete feebusiness transfer agreementresulting companysection 80msection 92esection 92ba

Judgments citing 87 ITR 650 (AP), CIT v. Late G.D.Naidu and Ors. (1987) 165 ITR 63 (Mad), DCIT v. McDowell & Co. Ltd.

Barmer Lignite Mining Co. Ltd., C-Scheme, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, ITA No. 457/JPR/2023 is partly allowed, whereas the ITA

ITA 459/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 250

…ture partner, i.e. M/s. Rajasthan State Mines and Mineral Ltd., RSMML, (Govt. of Rajasthan under taking) for facilitating routine operations and smooth functioning of the business of the assessee. It was held in the case of CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. [1980] 122 ITR 995/4 Taxman 89 (Bom.) “That the power line remained the property of the District Board and the assessee had not acquired any capital asset or any enduring benefit or advantage. The payment was made for commercial expediency. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) had rightly held the expenditure as revenue expenditure. “Regarding expenditure incurred…

Barmer Lignite Mining Co. Ltd., C-Scheme, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, ITA No. 457/JPR/2023 is partly allowed, whereas the ITA

ITA 458/JPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 250

…ture partner, i.e. M/s. Rajasthan State Mines and Mineral Ltd., RSMML, (Govt. of Rajasthan under taking) for facilitating routine operations and smooth functioning of the business of the assessee. It was held in the case of CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. [1980] 122 ITR 995/4 Taxman 89 (Bom.) “That the power line remained the property of the District Board and the assessee had not acquired any capital asset or any enduring benefit or advantage. The payment was made for commercial expediency. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) had rightly held the expenditure as revenue expenditure. “Regarding expenditure incurred…

Barmer Lignite Mining Co. Ltd., C-Scheme, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, ITA No. 457/JPR/2023 is partly allowed, whereas the ITA

ITA 457/JPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 250

…ture partner, i.e. M/s. Rajasthan State Mines and Mineral Ltd., RSMML, (Govt. of Rajasthan under taking) for facilitating routine operations and smooth functioning of the business of the assessee. It was held in the case of CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. [1980] 122 ITR 995/4 Taxman 89 (Bom.) “That the power line remained the property of the District Board and the assessee had not acquired any capital asset or any enduring benefit or advantage. The payment was made for commercial expediency. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) had rightly held the expenditure as revenue expenditure. “Regarding expenditure incurred…

Barmer Lignite Mining Co. Ltd., C-Scheme, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

ITA 463/JPR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 234ASection 250Section 94E

…nture partner, i.e. M/s. Rajasthan State Mines and Mineral Ltd., RSMML, (Govt. of Rajasthan under taking) for facilitating routine operations and smooth functioning of the business of the assessee. It was held in the case of CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd.[1980] 122 ITR 995/4 Taxman 89 (Bom.) “That the power line remained the property of the District Board and the assessee had not acquired any capital asset or any enduring benefit or advantage. The payment was made for commercial expediency. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) had rightly held the expenditure as revenue expenditure. “Regarding expenditure incurred…

Barmer Lignite Mining Co. Ltd., C-Scheme, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

ITA 462/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 234ASection 250Section 94E

…nture partner, i.e. M/s. Rajasthan State Mines and Mineral Ltd., RSMML, (Govt. of Rajasthan under taking) for facilitating routine operations and smooth functioning of the business of the assessee. It was held in the case of CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd.[1980] 122 ITR 995/4 Taxman 89 (Bom.) “That the power line remained the property of the District Board and the assessee had not acquired any capital asset or any enduring benefit or advantage. The payment was made for commercial expediency. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) had rightly held the expenditure as revenue expenditure. “Regarding expenditure incurred…

Barmer Lignite Mining Co. Ltd., C-Scheme, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

ITA 461/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 234ASection 250Section 94E

…nture partner, i.e. M/s. Rajasthan State Mines and Mineral Ltd., RSMML, (Govt. of Rajasthan under taking) for facilitating routine operations and smooth functioning of the business of the assessee. It was held in the case of CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd.[1980] 122 ITR 995/4 Taxman 89 (Bom.) “That the power line remained the property of the District Board and the assessee had not acquired any capital asset or any enduring benefit or advantage. The payment was made for commercial expediency. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) had rightly held the expenditure as revenue expenditure. “Regarding expenditure incurred…

Barmer Lignite Mining Co. Ltd., C-Scheme, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

ITA 460/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Dec 2024AY 2016-17
Section 234ASection 250Section 94E

…nture partner, i.e. M/s. Rajasthan State Mines and Mineral Ltd., RSMML, (Govt. of Rajasthan under taking) for facilitating routine operations and smooth functioning of the business of the assessee. It was held in the case of CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd.[1980] 122 ITR 995/4 Taxman 89 (Bom.) “That the power line remained the property of the District Board and the assessee had not acquired any capital asset or any enduring benefit or advantage. The payment was made for commercial expediency. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) had rightly held the expenditure as revenue expenditure. "Regarding expenditure incurred…

DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur, Ncrb vs. Barmer Lignite Mining Company Limited, Udyog Bhawan, Jaipur

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

ITA 455/JPR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 234ASection 250Section 94E

…nture partner, i.e. M/s. Rajasthan State Mines and Mineral Ltd., RSMML, (Govt. of Rajasthan under taking) for facilitating routine operations and smooth functioning of the business of the assessee. It was held in the case of CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd.[1980] 122 ITR 995/4 Taxman 89 (Bom.) “That the power line remained the property of the District Board and the assessee had not acquired any capital asset or any enduring benefit or advantage. The payment was made for commercial expediency. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) had rightly held the expenditure as revenue expenditure. “Regarding expenditure incurred…

DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur, Ncrb vs. Barmer Lignite Mining Company Limited, Udyog Bhawan, Jaipur

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

ITA 454/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 234ASection 250Section 94E

…nture partner, i.e. M/s. Rajasthan State Mines and Mineral Ltd., RSMML, (Govt. of Rajasthan under taking) for facilitating routine operations and smooth functioning of the business of the assessee. It was held in the case of CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd.[1980] 122 ITR 995/4 Taxman 89 (Bom.) “That the power line remained the property of the District Board and the assessee had not acquired any capital asset or any enduring benefit or advantage. The payment was made for commercial expediency. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) had rightly held the expenditure as revenue expenditure. “Regarding expenditure incurred…

DCIT, Circle 6, Jaipur, Ncrb, Jpr vs. Barmer Lignite Mining Company Limited, Udyog Bhawan Jaipur

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

ITA 453/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 234ASection 250Section 94E

…nture partner, i.e. M/s. Rajasthan State Mines and Mineral Ltd., RSMML, (Govt. of Rajasthan under taking) for facilitating routine operations and smooth functioning of the business of the assessee. It was held in the case of CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd.[1980] 122 ITR 995/4 Taxman 89 (Bom.) “That the power line remained the property of the District Board and the assessee had not acquired any capital asset or any enduring benefit or advantage. The payment was made for commercial expediency. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) had rightly held the expenditure as revenue expenditure. “Regarding expenditure incurred…

DCIT, Circle-6 Jaipur, Ncrb, Jaipur vs. Barmer Lignite Mining Company Limited, Udyog Bhawan, Tilak Nagar Jpr

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

ITA 452/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 234ASection 250Section 94E

…nture partner, i.e. M/s. Rajasthan State Mines and Mineral Ltd., RSMML, (Govt. of Rajasthan under taking) for facilitating routine operations and smooth functioning of the business of the assessee. It was held in the case of CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd.[1980] 122 ITR 995/4 Taxman 89 (Bom.) “That the power line remained the property of the District Board and the assessee had not acquired any capital asset or any enduring benefit or advantage. The payment was made for commercial expediency. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) had rightly held the expenditure as revenue expenditure. “Regarding expenditure incurred…

Bajaj Holdngs & Investment Ltd ( Erstwhile Bajaj Auto Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3043/MUM/2010[2002-013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2024AY 2002-013

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhbajaj Holdings & Vs. Additional Commissioner Investment Ltd. Of Income-Tax, Range 3(1) Erstwile Bajaj Auto Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, Bajaj Bhavan, 226, M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacb3370K Appellant .. Respondent Dcit-3(4) Vs. M/S Bajaj Holding & Room No. 481-2, 4Th Floor, Investment Limited Aaykar Bhavan, (Erstwhile Bajaj Auto Ltd) Mumbai – 400020 226, Bajaj Bhavan, 2Nd Floor, Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacb3370K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Percy Pardiwala & Vasanti Patel Respondent By : Ankush Kapoor

For Appellant: Percy Pardiwala &For Respondent: Ankush Kapoor
Section 143(3)Section 2(47)

…decision of ITAT referred by the ld. Counsel which is reproduced as under: “(a) ITAT-A.Y.-1984-85 (b) ITAT-AY-1985-86- (ITA No. 7037/Bom/88) (c) ITAT-A.Y.-1986-87-(ITA No. 7058/Bom/88) (d) ITAT-A.Y.-1987-88- (ITA No. 49/Bom/1991) (e) CIT vs. Excel Industries (122 ITR 995) (Bom)” The extract of decision of ITAT pertaining to assessment year 1987-88 vide ITA No. 49/Mum/2011 which is reproduced as under: “55. We have carefully considered the arguments of both the sides and perused the material placed before us, From the perusal of the assessment order, it is evident that the AO has nowhere mentioned that the assesse…

Addl CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2899/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhbajaj Holdings & Vs. Additional Commissioner Investment Ltd. Of Income-Tax, Range 3(1) Erstwile Bajaj Auto Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, Bajaj Bhavan, 226, M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacb3370K Appellant .. Respondent Dcit-3(4) Vs. M/S Bajaj Holding & Room No. 481-2, 4Th Floor, Investment Limited Aaykar Bhavan, (Erstwhile Bajaj Auto Ltd) Mumbai – 400020 226, Bajaj Bhavan, 2Nd Floor, Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacb3370K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Percy Pardiwala & Vasanti Patel Respondent By : Ankush Kapoor

For Appellant: Percy Pardiwala &For Respondent: Ankush Kapoor
Section 143(3)Section 2(47)

…decision of ITAT referred by the ld. Counsel which is reproduced as under: “(a) ITAT-A.Y.-1984-85 (b) ITAT-AY-1985-86- (ITA No. 7037/Bom/88) (c) ITAT-A.Y.-1986-87-(ITA No. 7058/Bom/88) (d) ITAT-A.Y.-1987-88- (ITA No. 49/Bom/1991) (e) CIT vs. Excel Industries (122 ITR 995) (Bom)” The extract of decision of ITAT pertaining to assessment year 1987-88 vide ITA No. 49/Mum/2011 which is reproduced as under: “55. We have carefully considered the arguments of both the sides and perused the material placed before us, From the perusal of the assessment order, it is evident that the AO has nowhere mentioned that the assesse…

DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S Dalmia Bharat Sugar and Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Revenue for AY 2009-10 to 2010-

ITA 5677/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4317/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 बनाम Dcit (Ltu) Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Vihar, Vs. (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd.) 11Th & 12Th Floors, Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4338/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 बनाम Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Dcit (Ltu) (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Bharat Vs. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Sugar & Industries Ltd.) Vihar, 11Th & 12Th Floors, Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4447/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 बनाम Dcit (Ltu) Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Vihar, Vs. (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd.) 11Th & 12Th Floors, Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 80I

…efficiently, which may perhaps be an enduring advantage, but intended to enable the assessed to carry on its business more efficiently and profitably leaving the fixed capital untouched. 12. Reference has also been made to CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. [1980] 122 ITR 995 (Bom) wherein the same principle was adopted and it was held that though the service lines were laid for the benefit of the assessed being the property of the Gujarat Electricity Board, that did not mean that the assessed had acquired any capital asset or an enduring benefit or advantage and the object of making the payment was purely one of comm…

Dalmia Bharat Sugar and Industries Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Revenue for AY 2009-10 to 2010-

ITA 5019/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4317/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 बनाम Dcit (Ltu) Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Vihar, Vs. (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd.) 11Th & 12Th Floors, Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4338/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 बनाम Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Dcit (Ltu) (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Bharat Vs. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Sugar & Industries Ltd.) Vihar, 11Th & 12Th Floors, Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4447/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 बनाम Dcit (Ltu) Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Vihar, Vs. (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd.) 11Th & 12Th Floors, Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 80I

…efficiently, which may perhaps be an enduring advantage, but intended to enable the assessed to carry on its business more efficiently and profitably leaving the fixed capital untouched. 12. Reference has also been made to CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. [1980] 122 ITR 995 (Bom) wherein the same principle was adopted and it was held that though the service lines were laid for the benefit of the assessed being the property of the Gujarat Electricity Board, that did not mean that the assessed had acquired any capital asset or an enduring benefit or advantage and the object of making the payment was purely one of comm…

DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. Dalmia Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Revenue for AY 2009-10 to 2010-

ITA 4572/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4317/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 बनाम Dcit (Ltu) Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Vihar, Vs. (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd.) 11Th & 12Th Floors, Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4338/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 बनाम Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Dcit (Ltu) (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Bharat Vs. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Sugar & Industries Ltd.) Vihar, 11Th & 12Th Floors, Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4447/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 बनाम Dcit (Ltu) Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Vihar, Vs. (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd.) 11Th & 12Th Floors, Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 80I

…efficiently, which may perhaps be an enduring advantage, but intended to enable the assessed to carry on its business more efficiently and profitably leaving the fixed capital untouched. 12. Reference has also been made to CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. [1980] 122 ITR 995 (Bom) wherein the same principle was adopted and it was held that though the service lines were laid for the benefit of the assessed being the property of the Gujarat Electricity Board, that did not mean that the assessed had acquired any capital asset or an enduring benefit or advantage and the object of making the payment was purely one of comm…

DCIT(Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. Dalmia Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Revenue for AY 2009-10 to 2010-

ITA 4447/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4317/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 बनाम Dcit (Ltu) Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Vihar, Vs. (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd.) 11Th & 12Th Floors, Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4338/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 बनाम Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Dcit (Ltu) (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Bharat Vs. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Sugar & Industries Ltd.) Vihar, 11Th & 12Th Floors, Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4447/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 बनाम Dcit (Ltu) Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Vihar, Vs. (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd.) 11Th & 12Th Floors, Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 80I

…efficiently, which may perhaps be an enduring advantage, but intended to enable the assessed to carry on its business more efficiently and profitably leaving the fixed capital untouched. 12. Reference has also been made to CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. [1980] 122 ITR 995 (Bom) wherein the same principle was adopted and it was held that though the service lines were laid for the benefit of the assessed being the property of the Gujarat Electricity Board, that did not mean that the assessed had acquired any capital asset or an enduring benefit or advantage and the object of making the payment was purely one of comm…

Dalmia Bharat Sugar and Industries Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Revenue for AY 2009-10 to 2010-

ITA 4394/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4317/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 बनाम Dcit (Ltu) Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Vihar, Vs. (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd.) 11Th & 12Th Floors, Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4338/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 बनाम Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Dcit (Ltu) (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Bharat Vs. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Sugar & Industries Ltd.) Vihar, 11Th & 12Th Floors, Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4447/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 बनाम Dcit (Ltu) Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Vihar, Vs. (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd.) 11Th & 12Th Floors, Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 80I

…efficiently, which may perhaps be an enduring advantage, but intended to enable the assessed to carry on its business more efficiently and profitably leaving the fixed capital untouched. 12. Reference has also been made to CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. [1980] 122 ITR 995 (Bom) wherein the same principle was adopted and it was held that though the service lines were laid for the benefit of the assessed being the property of the Gujarat Electricity Board, that did not mean that the assessed had acquired any capital asset or an enduring benefit or advantage and the object of making the payment was purely one of comm…

Dalmia Bharat Sugar and Industries Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Revenue for AY 2009-10 to 2010-

ITA 4393/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4317/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 बनाम Dcit (Ltu) Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Vihar, Vs. (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd.) 11Th & 12Th Floors, Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4338/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 बनाम Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Dcit (Ltu) (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Bharat Vs. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Sugar & Industries Ltd.) Vihar, 11Th & 12Th Floors, Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4447/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 बनाम Dcit (Ltu) Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Vihar, Vs. (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd.) 11Th & 12Th Floors, Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 80I

…efficiently, which may perhaps be an enduring advantage, but intended to enable the assessed to carry on its business more efficiently and profitably leaving the fixed capital untouched. 12. Reference has also been made to CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. [1980] 122 ITR 995 (Bom) wherein the same principle was adopted and it was held that though the service lines were laid for the benefit of the assessed being the property of the Gujarat Electricity Board, that did not mean that the assessed had acquired any capital asset or an enduring benefit or advantage and the object of making the payment was purely one of comm…

M/S. Dalmia Bharat Sugar and Industries Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Revenue for AY 2009-10 to 2010-

ITA 4338/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4317/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 बनाम Dcit (Ltu) Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Vihar, Vs. (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd.) 11Th & 12Th Floors, Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4338/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 बनाम Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Dcit (Ltu) (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Bharat Vs. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Sugar & Industries Ltd.) Vihar, 11Th & 12Th Floors, Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4447/Del/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 बनाम Dcit (Ltu) Dalmia Cement (Bharat)Ltd. Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Vihar, Vs. (Now Known As M/S Dalmia Sector-Iii, New Delhi. Bharat Sugar & Industries Ltd.) 11Th & 12Th Floors, Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaacd2281K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 80I

…efficiently, which may perhaps be an enduring advantage, but intended to enable the assessed to carry on its business more efficiently and profitably leaving the fixed capital untouched. 12. Reference has also been made to CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. [1980] 122 ITR 995 (Bom) wherein the same principle was adopted and it was held that though the service lines were laid for the benefit of the assessed being the property of the Gujarat Electricity Board, that did not mean that the assessed had acquired any capital asset or an enduring benefit or advantage and the object of making the payment was purely one of comm…

87 ITR 650 (AP), CIT v. Late G.D.Naidu and Ors. (1987) 165 ITR 63 (Mad), DCIT v. McDowell & Co. Ltd. (122 ITR 995) — Cited in 57 Judgments | BharatTax