Agricultural Produce Market Committee v. CIT

301 ITR 1Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#7553 most cited
15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 10BSection 10ASection 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 43B(f)Section 92CSection 92DSection 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 43b(f)section 92drelated party transactionsection 92ca(1)working capital adjustmentbenchmarking analysiscomputer softwaresection 10acomparable companiessection 92ca(3)arm's length pricefurnishing inaccurate particulars

Judgments citing Agricultural Produce Market Committee v. CIT

DCIT, GURGAON vs. M/S. MOTOROLA INDIA PVT. LTD., GURGAON

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 3646/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 May 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Veer Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 43B

…ereby ignoring the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT in Appellant's own case for the AY 2007-08, wherein the ITAT has directed the AO to decide the issue in the light of guidelines laid down by Special Bench of ITAT in the case of Amway India Enterprises vs. DCIT (301 ITR 1). 3.2 The Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in disallowing these expenses by not appreciating the various judicial precedents (High Court) relied upon by the Appellant, wherein the software expense has been allowed as revenue expenditure. 3.3 The Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that relief was granted by the Hon'ble ITAT as well as the CIT(A)…

MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 3641/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 May 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Veer Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 43B

…ereby ignoring the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT in Appellant's own case for the AY 2007-08, wherein the ITAT has directed the AO to decide the issue in the light of guidelines laid down by Special Bench of ITAT in the case of Amway India Enterprises vs. DCIT (301 ITR 1). 3.2 The Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in disallowing these expenses by not appreciating the various judicial precedents (High Court) relied upon by the Appellant, wherein the software expense has been allowed as revenue expenditure. 3.3 The Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that relief was granted by the Hon'ble ITAT as well as the CIT(A)…

M/S. MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ACIT, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 4789/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 May 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Veer Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 43B

…ereby ignoring the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT in Appellant's own case for the AY 2007-08, wherein the ITAT has directed the AO to decide the issue in the light of guidelines laid down by Special Bench of ITAT in the case of Amway India Enterprises vs. DCIT (301 ITR 1). 3.2 The Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in disallowing these expenses by not appreciating the various judicial precedents (High Court) relied upon by the Appellant, wherein the software expense has been allowed as revenue expenditure. 3.3 The Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that relief was granted by the Hon'ble ITAT as well as the CIT(A)…

J.P. MORGAN INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO RG 4(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2745/MUM/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. S. Pannu, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2745/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2004-05) In The Matter Of: J. P. Morgan India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit Range -4(3)(1), J. P. Morgan Towers, Aayakarbhavan, M.K. बिधम/ Off- Cst Road, Kalina Road, Vs. Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400098. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2452/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit Range -4(3)(1), J. P. Morgan India Pvt. Aayakarbhavan, M.K. Road, Ltd. बिधम/ Mumbai-400020. J. P. Morgan Towers, Off- Cst Road, Kalina Vs. Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400098. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacj1022G आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2746/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2005-06) J. P. Morgan India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit Range -4(3)(1), J. P. Morgan Towers, Aayakarbhavan, M.K. बिधम/ Off- Cst Road, Kalina Road, Vs. Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400098. & आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2453/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2005-06) Dcit Range -4(3)(1), J. P. Morgan India Pvt. Aayakarbhavan, M.K. Road, Ltd. बिधम/ Mumbai-400020. J. P. Morgan Towers, Off- Cst Road, Kalina Vs. Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400098. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacj1022G अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Madhur Agrawal, Ar प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri V. Jenardhanan & Subhas Kulkarni, Drs सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 05/04/2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 26.06.2019 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri V. Jenardhanan &
Section 250

…assessee's own case, for A.Y.2001-02, the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal had remanded the matter back to the AO to decide the allowability in the light of the decision of the Delhi Special Bench ruling of the Tribunal in the case of Amway India Enterprises (301 ITR 1). Subsequently, the AO in the order pursuant to the directions of the Tribunal, having regard to the facts and relying on the principles laid out in the case of Amway India (supra) held that the software expenses were revenue in nature and allowed the same as business expenses. Thereafter in all the subsequent years, the appellate authorities have…

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIRMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIRMAL

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 402/HYD/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

…n section 2(15) of the Act and the proviso to the section is not applicable to the assessees' cases. We have considered the earlier order of the Tribunal and also the judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of Agricultural Produce Market Committee vs. CIT (301 ITR 1). We take support from the judgement of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Agricultural Market Committee (336 ITR 641) (AP), wherein the High Court held as under: "Charitable purpose" in section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 includes relief to the poor, education, medical relief and the advancement of any other object of general p…

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIRMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIRMAL

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 401/HYD/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 May 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

…n section 2(15) of the Act and the proviso to the section is not applicable to the assessees' cases. We have considered the earlier order of the Tribunal and also the judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of Agricultural Produce Market Committee vs. CIT (301 ITR 1). We take support from the judgement of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Agricultural Market Committee (336 ITR 641) (AP), wherein the High Court held as under: "Charitable purpose" in section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 includes relief to the poor, education, medical relief and the advancement of any other object of general p…

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,SARANGAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIRMAL

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 400/HYD/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 May 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

…n section 2(15) of the Act and the proviso to the section is not applicable to the assessees' cases. We have considered the earlier order of the Tribunal and also the judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of Agricultural Produce Market Committee vs. CIT (301 ITR 1). We take support from the judgement of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Agricultural Market Committee (336 ITR 641) (AP), wherein the High Court held as under: "Charitable purpose" in section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 includes relief to the poor, education, medical relief and the advancement of any other object of general p…

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,SARANGAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIRMAL

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 399/HYD/2019[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 May 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

…n section 2(15) of the Act and the proviso to the section is not applicable to the assessees' cases. We have considered the earlier order of the Tribunal and also the judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of Agricultural Produce Market Committee vs. CIT (301 ITR 1). We take support from the judgement of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Agricultural Market Committee (336 ITR 641) (AP), wherein the High Court held as under: "Charitable purpose" in section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 includes relief to the poor, education, medical relief and the advancement of any other object of general p…

HARLAND CLARKE HOLDING SOFTWARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT COMPANY CIRCLE 2(2), CHENN

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

ITA 113/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S.Jayaraman

For Appellant: Mr.V.Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Mr.Srinivasa Rao Vara,CIT,D.R

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘ D’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी जॉज" माथन, "या"यक सद"य के सम" एवं एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S.JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.113/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2013-14 M/s.Harland Clarke Holding Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Software India Pvt Ltd., Income Tax, Suite 305,Delta Wing, Corporate Circle-2(2), 3rd Floor, Raheja Towers, Wanaparthy Block, No.177,Anna Salai, Chennai.34 Chennai. 600 002. [PAN AAHCS 4742 D ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. CHENNAI PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 853/CHNY/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.Prabhu Mukunth Arun-
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40

…for the system which is used by the refinery for making decision support solutions for optimizing production. It was a ITA Nos.687 & 853/Mds/2013 :- 8 -: submission that Special Bench of Delhi High Court in the case of M/s.Amway India Enterprises reported in 301 ITR 1 Delhi (AT) (SB) (2008) had laid down test as follows: 59. Our conclusions on the issue under consideration thus can be summarized, as under: (i) When the assessee acquires a computer software or for that matter the license to use such software, he acquires a tangible asset and becomes owner thereof as held above relying on the decision of Hon’ble…

CHENNAI PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 687/CHNY/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.Prabhu Mukunth Arun-
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40

…for the system which is used by the refinery for making decision support solutions for optimizing production. It was a ITA Nos.687 & 853/Mds/2013 :- 8 -: submission that Special Bench of Delhi High Court in the case of M/s.Amway India Enterprises reported in 301 ITR 1 Delhi (AT) (SB) (2008) had laid down test as follows: 59. Our conclusions on the issue under consideration thus can be summarized, as under: (i) When the assessee acquires a computer software or for that matter the license to use such software, he acquires a tangible asset and becomes owner thereof as held above relying on the decision of Hon’ble…

KUONI TRAVEL (INDIA) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 3(2), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 4285/MUM/2014[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2017AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Deym/S. Kuoni Travel (India) Pvt. Ltd. (Merged With Travel Corporate (India) Ltd.) 8Th Floor, Tower A, Urmi Estate ……………. Appellant 95 Ganpatrao Kadam Marg Lower Parel(W), Mumbai 400013 Pan Aaacs0170L V/S Dcit, Circle – 3(2) Room No. 609, 6Th Floor ……………. Respondent Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg Mumbai 400020 Appellant By : Shri Jay Bhansali Respondent By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Jay BhansaliFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav
Section 143(3)

…resaid disallowance travelled up to the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide order dated 18.08.2009 remitted the issue back to the Assessing Officer to examine afresh in the light of the Special Bench decision of the ITAT in the case of M/s. Amway India Enterprises 301 ITR 1(AT). In the fresh proceedings in pursuance of the directions of the Tribunal, the Assessing Officer called upon the assessee to justify the deduction claimed on account of software development. In response, it was submitted by the assessee that he wanted to computerize its package tours accounting with the general operating system to ensure efficie…

M/S SONY INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 4994/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.M. Govil, CIT(DR)
Section 143Section 143(3)

…raised by the assessee in the present appeal the Ld. AR submitted that the issues raised may be decided in the light of the order of the Special Bench in the case of the Amway India Page 2 of 9 Sony India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT Enterprises vs. DCIT (2008) (SB) 301 ITR 1 (Del). Specific attention was invited to para 61 and 62 of the said order. 5. The Ld. CIT(DR) on the other hand submitted that the AO at page 27 of the assessment order vide para 9 in his order passed u/s 143 r.w.s 144 (c) relying on Sudarshan Chemical Industries Limited , 110 ITD 171 has decided the issue against the assessee. Accordingly it was…

MOOG CONTROLS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. CIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 551/BANG/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala, Jt. CIT(DR)
Section 92C

…s to use the application software and hence the ownership and the intellectual properties of the software continue to remain with the licensor. 41. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Special Bench Delhi in the case of Amway India Enterprises v. DCIT, 301 ITR 1 (AT)(Del)(SB), wherein certain tests had been laid down for ascertaining whether the expenditure on purchase of software is to be treated as revenue or capital. The below tests are cumulative and not mutually exclusive. In case the transaction of purchase of software satisfies all the tests mentioned below, it will be considered as a capital expend…

ING VYSYA BANK LTD. vs. ACIT,

In the result, revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2007-08 is dismissed

ITA 898/BANG/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Feb 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Farhat Hussain Qureshi, CIT (D.R)
Section 115JSection 143(3)

…ed within a short span of time. In support of its contentions, the assessee, inter alia, relied on the following judicial decisions :- (i) CIT V IBM India Ltd. of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in ITA No.130/2007; (ii) Amway India Enterprises V DCIT (2008) 301 ITR 1 (Delhi Tribunal – Special Bench); (iii) IBM India V CIT in ITA No.755/Bang/2003 (ITAT, Bangalore); (iv) Assessee's own case in ITA Nos.733 & 748/Bang/2011 dt.28.8.2014 for A.Y. 2001-02. 5.3 Per contra, the learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of the authorities below. ITA Noss.898 & 967/Bang/2013 5 5.4.1 We have heard the riva…