ADIT v. Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait

44 SOT 693Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2011#10628 most cited

What is ADIT v. Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait authority for?

Expenses incurred exclusively for an Indian project can be excluded from revenue under Section 44C of the Income Tax Act if the assessee proves it with daily timesheets and man-hour records.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

ADIT v. Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait · Section 44C · head office expenditure · Indian project expenses · timesheets · man hours · deduction ceiling

Issues it is cited on

section 293section 40a(i)section 44csection 10(5)section 32asection 74section 73section 42section 32(1)(iia)initial assessment yearsection 72vsv scheme

Judgments citing ADIT v. Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait

Director of Income Tax (It)-I, Mumbai vs. M/S. American Express Bank Ltd

C.A. No.-008291-008291 - 2015Supreme Court15 Dec 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA

Section 28Section 37(1)Section 44C

…perate for allowing deduction in full u/s 37(1) where the expenditure is exclusive. In a case of allocated expenses, the amount can be considered only u/s 44C. The Mumbai bench of the tribunal in the case of ADIT (I.T.) Vs. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait (2011) 44 SOT 693 (Mum) has canvassed similar view by holding that the exclusive expenses incurred by the head office for Indian branch are outside the purview of sec. 44C and only common head office expenses are governed by this section. There can be no quarrel over this proposition of law. But the fact of the matter is that the expenses which are subject ma…

Sheladia Associates Inc, Hyderabad vs. ADIT(Int Taxn)-2, Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 423/HYD/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Oct 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Ms.Aluru V Sai Sudha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…n extenso in the light of the decision of coordinate bench in the case of DDIT Vs.Samsung Engg.Co.Ltd (2011) 43 SOT 38, Fraport A.G. Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwise Vs. ACIT/ADIT [2023] 151 taxmann.com 370 and Addl.DIT Vs. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait [2011] 44 SOT 693 and the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs Emirates Commercial Bank Ltd.[2004] 134 Taxman 682 (Bombay) reached a conclusion that when the assessee proves that certain expenditure exclusively incurred for the Indian project and are not in nature of overheads by producing time sheet on daily basis for each employee in the organizatio…

Sheladia Associates Inc, Sd Road vs. ADIT(Int Taxn)-2, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 537/HYD/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 537/Hyd/2023 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Sheladia Associates Inc, Adit (Int Taxn)-2, Secunderabad Vs. Hyderabad [Pan No. Aafcs7792F] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Aluru V. Sai Sudha, ARFor Respondent: Ms. L. Sunitha Rao, CIT-DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 37Section 44C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No. 537/Hyd/2023 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Sheladia Associates INC, ADIT (INT TAXN)-2, Secunderabad Vs. Hyderabad [PAN No. AAFCS7792F] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent धििााररती द्वारा/Assessee by: Ms. Aluru V. Sai Sudha, AR राजस्‍व द्वारा/Revenue by: Ms. L. Sunitha Rao, CIT-DR सुिवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 06/05/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Pronouncement on: 21/06/2024 आदेश…

Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Intl. Taxation, Circle, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 6278/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT-DR
Section 40aSection 57Section 80I

…er section 44C of the Act. This judgment was followed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of John Wyeth And Brother Ltd. vs. CIT [(2008) 174 Taxman 451 (Bom.)] and also by the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ADIT vs. Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait [(2011) 44 SOT 693 (Mum)]. 60. It was argued that the assessee would qualify for head office expenditure, on the grounds that, • that section 44C of the Act begins with a non obstante clause; • it restricts deduction to least of two parameters mentioned in clauses (a) and (c) of section 44C of the Act and in the absence of any one out of the two prescribed paramet…

Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Intl. Taxation, Circle, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 6277/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT-DR
Section 40aSection 57Section 80I

…er section 44C of the Act. This judgment was followed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of John Wyeth And Brother Ltd. vs. CIT [(2008) 174 Taxman 451 (Bom.)] and also by the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ADIT vs. Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait [(2011) 44 SOT 693 (Mum)]. 60. It was argued that the assessee would qualify for head office expenditure, on the grounds that, • that section 44C of the Act begins with a non obstante clause; • it restricts deduction to least of two parameters mentioned in clauses (a) and (c) of section 44C of the Act and in the absence of any one out of the two prescribed paramet…

DCIT, Intl. Taxation, Circle, Gurgaon vs. Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5989/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT-DR
Section 40aSection 57Section 80I

…er section 44C of the Act. This judgment was followed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of John Wyeth And Brother Ltd. vs. CIT [(2008) 174 Taxman 451 (Bom.)] and also by the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ADIT vs. Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait [(2011) 44 SOT 693 (Mum)]. 60. It was argued that the assessee would qualify for head office expenditure, on the grounds that, • that section 44C of the Act begins with a non obstante clause; • it restricts deduction to least of two parameters mentioned in clauses (a) and (c) of section 44C of the Act and in the absence of any one out of the two prescribed paramet…

DCIT, Intl. Taxation, Circle, Gurgaon vs. Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5988/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT-DR
Section 40aSection 57Section 80I

…er section 44C of the Act. This judgment was followed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of John Wyeth And Brother Ltd. vs. CIT [(2008) 174 Taxman 451 (Bom.)] and also by the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ADIT vs. Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait [(2011) 44 SOT 693 (Mum)]. 60. It was argued that the assessee would qualify for head office expenditure, on the grounds that, • that section 44C of the Act begins with a non obstante clause; • it restricts deduction to least of two parameters mentioned in clauses (a) and (c) of section 44C of the Act and in the absence of any one out of the two prescribed paramet…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Cairn Energy Hydrocarbons Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 6357/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT-DR
Section 40aSection 57Section 80I

…er section 44C of the Act. This judgment was followed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of John Wyeth And Brother Ltd. vs. CIT [(2008) 174 Taxman 451 (Bom.)] and also by the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ADIT vs. Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait [(2011) 44 SOT 693 (Mum)]. 60. It was argued that the assessee would qualify for head office expenditure, on the grounds that, • that section 44C of the Act begins with a non obstante clause; • it restricts deduction to least of two parameters mentioned in clauses (a) and (c) of section 44C of the Act and in the absence of any one out of the two prescribed paramet…

Cairn Energy Hydrocarbons Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DDIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 6346/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT-DR
Section 40aSection 57Section 80I

…er section 44C of the Act. This judgment was followed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of John Wyeth And Brother Ltd. vs. CIT [(2008) 174 Taxman 451 (Bom.)] and also by the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of ADIT vs. Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait [(2011) 44 SOT 693 (Mum)]. 60. It was argued that the assessee would qualify for head office expenditure, on the grounds that, • that section 44C of the Act begins with a non obstante clause; • it restricts deduction to least of two parameters mentioned in clauses (a) and (c) of section 44C of the Act and in the absence of any one out of the two prescribed paramet…

DDIT (It) 4(2) vs. Pansonic Aviation Corporation, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 525/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2016AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Awungshi Gimson
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 44C

…it is seen that section 44C refers to common head office expenses and cannot encompass the expenses exclusively incurred by the head office for Indian branch. The Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Addl.DIT (IT) v. Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait [(2011) 44 SOT 693 (Mum.)] has held so. As the amount in question represents the expenses incurred by head office employees exclusively for rendering services in India, this cannot be covered within the ambit of section 44C from this angle also.” 4. It is pertinent to mention here that appeal filed by the revenue against the order of Tribunal dated 28.3.2013 before…

ADIT v. Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait (44 SOT 693) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax