Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. v. CIT

177 ITR 377Supreme Court of India1989#288 most cited

What is Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Expenditure that provides a commercial advantage of an enduring nature may still be classified as revenue expenditure if its purpose is to facilitate existing trading operations, improve business efficiency, or upgrade existing products, depending on the specific context and objective.

275

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,659 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. v. CIT · Section 37(1) · revenue expenditure · capital expenditure · enduring benefit test · commercial advantage · upgrading existing products · business efficiency · existing business · product improvement

Also reported as

43 Taxmann 312

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 250Section 32Section 35(1)(iv)Section 35(2AB)Section 234BSection 35D
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

test of enduring benefitenduring benefitsection 35(2ab)section 40a(2)(b)revenue expenditurecapital expendituresection 35section 32fair market valuesection 40(a)section 40aassociated enterprise

Judgments citing Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. v. CIT

Empire Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 6(2), Mumbai

Appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 4065/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4065/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Empire Industries Limited Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax Empire House बनाम/ 414, Senapati Bapat Marg Range 6(2) Lower Parel Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Mumbai – 400 013 M.K.Road Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaace-2757-R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: K.K.Ved & N.A.Patade, Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Naveen Gupta, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 69ASection 69C

…ITA No.4065/M/2013 Empire Industries Ltd. Assessment Year-2009-10 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ई” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी महावीर िसंह,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम" । BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4065/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Empire Industries Limited Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Empire House बनाम/ 414, Senapati Bapat Marg Range 6(2) Lower Parel Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Mumbai – 400 013 M.K.Road Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AAACE-2757-R (अप…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Hitz Fm Radio India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 4407/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 4407/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Acit, Vs Hitz Fm Radio India Pvt. Ltd., Circle-12(1), M-168, Lower Ground Floor, New Delhi Greater Kailash, Part-Ii, Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacch9041D Assessee By : Sh. Sanjiv Sapra, Fca & Sh. Amit, Fca Revenue By : Sh. Amit Lal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.05.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 29.05.2014 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xv, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjiv Sapra, FCA &For Respondent: Sh. Amit Lal, Sr. DR

…spent in a special campaign of advertisement must necessarily be capital expenditure. 15. The apex court decisions on which reliance has been placed by the Tribunal, namely, Empire Jute Co. Ltd. [1980] 124 ITR 1 (SC) and Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. [1989] 177 ITR 377 (SC) specifically lay down that the nature of advantage has to be considered in a commercial sense and the test of enduring benefit is not a certain or conclusive test and cannot be applied blindly and mechanically without regard to the particular facts and circumstances of a given case. The expression "asset or advantage of an enduring nature" h…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mail Today Newspapers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4252/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini & Smt. Beena A. Pillaidcit Mail Today Newspapers Pvt. Ltd. A Circle-6(1), F- 26, Connaught Place New Delhi Vs. New Delhi Gir/Pan: Aafcm1533J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Rachna Singh, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Salil Aggarwal
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT Mail Today Newspapers Pvt. Ltd. A Circle-6(1), F- 26, Connaught Place New Delhi Vs. New Delhi GIR/PAN: AAFCM1533J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Ms. Rachna Singh, Sr. DR Respondent by : Sh. Salil Aggarwal, Sh. Shailesh Gupta, Advs. Date of hearing : 25.04.2017 Date of pronouncement : 27.04.2017 O R D E R PER BEENA A. PILLAI, J.M : 1. The present appeal has been preferred by revenue against order dated 19.05.2014 passed by Ld. CIT (A)-9, New Delhi,…

Addll. CIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Rambagh Palace Hotel Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result disallowance made by Ld

ITA 3801/DEL/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishirambagh Palace Hotels Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Ito, C/O Pricewater House Coopers Ward-15(2), Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi Sucheta Bhawan, (Gate No. 2, 3Rd Floor) 11-A, New Delhi Pan:Aaach6899P (Appellant) (Respondent) Addll. Cit, Vs. Rambagh Palace Hotels Pvt. Ltd, Range- 15(1), Cr Building, C/O Pricewater House Coopers Pvt. New Delhi Ltd, Sucheta Bhawan, (Gate No. 2, 3Rd Floor) 11-A, New Delhi Pan:Aaach6899P (Appellant) (Respondent) Rambagh Palace Hotels Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dcit C/O Pricewater House Coopers Ward-15(1), Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi Sucheta Bhawan, (Gate No. 2, 3Rd Floor) 11-A, New Delhi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri FR Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…ITAT Delhi) • Liberty Cinema, vs CIT (52 ITR 153) (Calcutta High Court) • CIT Vs Glen View Rubber Company P. Limited. 291 ITR 1 KERALA High Court • K. T. M. T. M. Abdul Kayoom And Another, vs CIT 44 ITR 689(SC) • Alembic Chemical Works Company Limited, vs CIT 177 ITR 377 (SC) • Assam Bengal Cement Company Limited, vs CIT 27 ITR 34 (SC) • Bikaner Gypsums Limited, vs CIT 187 ITR 39 (SC) 1% • Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay City vs Associated • Companies Limited. 172 ITR 257 (SC) To the contrary, the Appellant distinguished above case laws from its facts and also relied on several case laws to support its claim:…

Ramabagh Palace Hotels Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result disallowance made by Ld

ITA 3605/DEL/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishirambagh Palace Hotels Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Ito, C/O Pricewater House Coopers Ward-15(2), Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi Sucheta Bhawan, (Gate No. 2, 3Rd Floor) 11-A, New Delhi Pan:Aaach6899P (Appellant) (Respondent) Addll. Cit, Vs. Rambagh Palace Hotels Pvt. Ltd, Range- 15(1), Cr Building, C/O Pricewater House Coopers Pvt. New Delhi Ltd, Sucheta Bhawan, (Gate No. 2, 3Rd Floor) 11-A, New Delhi Pan:Aaach6899P (Appellant) (Respondent) Rambagh Palace Hotels Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dcit C/O Pricewater House Coopers Ward-15(1), Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi Sucheta Bhawan, (Gate No. 2, 3Rd Floor) 11-A, New Delhi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri FR Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…ITAT Delhi) • Liberty Cinema, vs CIT (52 ITR 153) (Calcutta High Court) • CIT Vs Glen View Rubber Company P. Limited. 291 ITR 1 KERALA High Court • K. T. M. T. M. Abdul Kayoom And Another, vs CIT 44 ITR 689(SC) • Alembic Chemical Works Company Limited, vs CIT 177 ITR 377 (SC) • Assam Bengal Cement Company Limited, vs CIT 27 ITR 34 (SC) • Bikaner Gypsums Limited, vs CIT 187 ITR 39 (SC) 1% • Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay City vs Associated • Companies Limited. 172 ITR 257 (SC) To the contrary, the Appellant distinguished above case laws from its facts and also relied on several case laws to support its claim:…

Dci India Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-10(1) Kolkata, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 126/KOL/2017[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Apr 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh, I.T. A.No. 126 /Kol/2017 Assessment Years: 2010-11 Dic India Ltd. Dcit, Cir-10(1), Kolkata -Vs- [Pan :Aabbcc0703C] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant Sri D. S. Damle, Fca Sri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit, Dr. For The Respondent Date Of Hearing 22.03.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 05.04.2017

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 263Section 92E

…doctrine of res-judicata can‟t be applied here in the case of assessee and should. not be treated as settled for ever. The ld. CIT placed reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Alembi Chemical Works Co. Ltd vs CIT reported in (1989) 177 ITR 377 (SC) held. that the royalty payment made by the assessee needs to be construed as capital in nature. Therefore, he issued show cause notice as to why the same should. not be treated as capital expenditure and depreciation at 25% be granted to the assessee by treating the same as intangible asset of enduring nature and since this was not done by t…

Scci (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3574/DEL/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A. K. Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…pages 10 to 16 of his order. It was argued that Hon’ble Supreme Court had decided and rendered the decision therein on different facts. Ld. AR submitted that the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Alembic Chemical Works Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 177 ITR 377, on identical facts is applicable as in case of assessee. Ld. CIT(A) observed that assessee had paid royalty to Japanese company from 01.04.2000 to 31.03.2007. It was also absurd by Ld. CIT(A) that Japanese company paid royalty on sale to M/s MUL at 3% on the coolant of brand being “golden cruiser”. It has also been observed by Ld. CIT (A) that,…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Scci (India) Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3487/DEL/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A. K. Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…pages 10 to 16 of his order. It was argued that Hon’ble Supreme Court had decided and rendered the decision therein on different facts. Ld. AR submitted that the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Alembic Chemical Works Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 177 ITR 377, on identical facts is applicable as in case of assessee. Ld. CIT(A) observed that assessee had paid royalty to Japanese company from 01.04.2000 to 31.03.2007. It was also absurd by Ld. CIT(A) that Japanese company paid royalty on sale to M/s MUL at 3% on the coolant of brand being “golden cruiser”. It has also been observed by Ld. CIT (A) that,…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Vatika Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2331/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, Vatika Hospitality Central Circle-20, Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Room No. 333, E- 621A, Devika Tower, 2, Ara Centre, 6, Nehru Tower, New Jhandewalan Extn, Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacv0695D (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vatika Hospitality Central Circle-20, Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Room No. 333, E- 621A, Devika Tower, 2, Ara Centre, 6, Nehru Tower, New Jhandewalan Extn, Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacv0695D (Appellant) (Respondent) Vatika Hospitality Dcit, Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-20, Vs. 621A, Devika Tower, Room No. 333, 6, Nehru Tower, New E-2, Ara Centre, Delhi Jhandewalan Pan:Aaacv0695D Extn, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. SS Rana, CIT DRFor Respondent: Sh. CS Agarwal, Sr. Adv
Section 271

…each case depend on its own facts and close similarity between one case in another is not enough because even a single insignificant detail may alter the entire aspect. Furthermore Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of alembic chemical works company Ltd versus CIT 177 ITR 377 (SC) has again reiterated that the question in each case would necessarily be whether the test relevant and significant in one set of circumstances are relevant and significant in the case on hand. Nonetheless we have considered the ratios laid down by all the case laws cited before us in reaching at our decision.” 15. Now we attempt to look at t…

M/S Hero Honda Motors Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2148/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh C.M.Garg & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Honda Motors Ltd, Dcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, Circle-12(1), Vs. New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacg0812J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. AK Saroha, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 263Section 32Section 37(1)Section 40Section 9

…ondition of an agreement which entitled the assessee to the benefit of using the trade marks and special processes of the collaborator to be revenue expenditure. The Supreme Court reiterated the same view in the case of Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. v. CIT: 177 ITR 377. The Court in that case observed that the limitation placed in the agreement on the rights of the appellant in dealing with the know-how and the condition as to the non-partibility, confidentiality and secrecy of the know-how pertained more to (he use of the know-how than to its exclusive acquisition. The Court further observed that "it would be…

DCIT 10(1), Mumbai vs. Music Broadcast P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the revenue is hereby Dismissed

ITA 3532/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.3532/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dcit 10(1) बनाम/ M/S. Music Broadcast Pvt. 455, Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd. Vs. 4Th Floor, M. K. Marg, 5Th Floor, Mumbai - 400020 Rna Corporate Park, Opp. Western Express Highway, Kalanagar, Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400051 C.O. No.143/Mum/2014 (I.T.A. No. 3532/Mum/2013) (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Music Broadcast Pvt. बनाम/ Dcit 10(1) Ltd. 455, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 5Th Floor, 4Th Floor, M. K. Marg, Rna Corporate Park, Mumbai - 400020 Opp. Western Express Highway, Kalanagar, Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400051 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccm4036H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) .. (""थ" /Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri L.N. MalikFor Respondent: Shri N. P. Singh (CIT-DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 28

…आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, मुंबई"ायपीठ‘बी’मुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL“B” BENCH, MUMBAI "ीजी.एस.प"ू,लेखा सद", एवं"ी अमरजीत िसंह, "ाियक सद", के सम" BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.3532/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) DCIT 10(1) बनाम/ M/s. Music Broadcast Pvt. 455, Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd. Vs. 4th Floor, M. K. Marg, 5th Floor, Mumbai - 400020 RNA Corporate Park, Opp. Western Express Highway, Kalanagar, Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400051 C.O. No.143/Mum/2014 (I.T.A. No. 3532/Mum/2013) (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/s. Music Broadcast Pvt. बनाम/ DCIT 10(…

DCIT RG. - 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4374/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2017AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Gujarat Ambuja Cements Limited, The Dy. Commissioner Of 122, Maker Chambers, Iii, Income-Tax- Range 3(1), फनधभ/ Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400021. M K Marg, Mumbai-400020 Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Gujarat Ambuja Cements Tax-Range 3(1), Limited, 122, Maker फनधभ/ Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Chambers, Iii, Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400021 Vs. M K Marg, Mumbai-400020 स्थधमी रेखध सं./ Pan : Aaacg0569P (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: S/Shri Soumen Adak & HarishFor Respondent: Shri K B Shukla

…city, therefore, the same were admissible u/s 37(1) of the Act as revenue nature incurred to dismantle old plant and replace by new one. In support of this contention, the assessee placed reliance on the decision in the case of Alembic Glass Works ltd V/s CIT 177 ITR 377 and the decision of the Hon‟ble Kerala High Court in the case of Vanaja Textiles Ltd V/s CIT (208 ITR 161). The AO rejected the contention of the assessee and added Rs. 1,52,84,680/- to the total income of the assessee by treating it as capital expenditure. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before ld. CIT(A), who foll…

M/S. Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT RG. 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3360/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2017AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Gujarat Ambuja Cements Limited, The Dy. Commissioner Of 122, Maker Chambers, Iii, Income-Tax- Range 3(1), फनधभ/ Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400021. M K Marg, Mumbai-400020 Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Gujarat Ambuja Cements Tax-Range 3(1), Limited, 122, Maker फनधभ/ Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Chambers, Iii, Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400021 Vs. M K Marg, Mumbai-400020 स्थधमी रेखध सं./ Pan : Aaacg0569P (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: S/Shri Soumen Adak & HarishFor Respondent: Shri K B Shukla

…city, therefore, the same were admissible u/s 37(1) of the Act as revenue nature incurred to dismantle old plant and replace by new one. In support of this contention, the assessee placed reliance on the decision in the case of Alembic Glass Works ltd V/s CIT 177 ITR 377 and the decision of the Hon‟ble Kerala High Court in the case of Vanaja Textiles Ltd V/s CIT (208 ITR 161). The AO rejected the contention of the assessee and added Rs. 1,52,84,680/- to the total income of the assessee by treating it as capital expenditure. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before ld. CIT(A), who foll…

Asst CIT 14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Godrej Industries Ltd, Mumbai

In the results, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of revenue stands dismissed

ITA 164/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Godrej Industries Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of Kalyaniwlla & Mistry, Income-Tax-10(2), फनधभ/ Room No.475, 4Th Floor, Army & Navi Building, 148, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, M K Marg, Mumbai-400001 Mumbai-400020 Asst. Commissioner Of Income- Godrej Industries Ltd., Tax-14(1)(2), Pirojsha Nagar, Eastern फनधभ/ Room No.460, 4Th Floor, Express Highway, Aayakar Bhavan, Vikhroli, Vs. M K Marg, Mumbai-400079 Mumbai-400020 स्थधमी रेखध सं./ Pan : Aaacg2953R (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri F V IraniFor Respondent: Ms.Vidisha Kalra
Section 37(1)

…must, viz. (i) there should be benefit of enduring nature; (ii) the expenditure must give rise to creation of new capital asset. The observations of Hon’ble Supreme Court were reiterated in subsequent judgment in the case of Alembic Chemical Works ltd vs CIT 177 ITR 377 (SC) and thereafter many judgements came from various courts from all over the country wherein similar views were taken. In the facts of the case before us, admittedly, there is no creation of new assets. Thus, the impugned expenditure cannot be held to be a capital expenditure. Similar view has been taken by Hon'ble Mumbai Bench of ITAT in the c…

Godrej Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 10(2), Mumbai

In the results, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of revenue stands dismissed

ITA 151/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Godrej Industries Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of Kalyaniwlla & Mistry, Income-Tax-10(2), फनधभ/ Room No.475, 4Th Floor, Army & Navi Building, 148, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, M K Marg, Mumbai-400001 Mumbai-400020 Asst. Commissioner Of Income- Godrej Industries Ltd., Tax-14(1)(2), Pirojsha Nagar, Eastern फनधभ/ Room No.460, 4Th Floor, Express Highway, Aayakar Bhavan, Vikhroli, Vs. M K Marg, Mumbai-400079 Mumbai-400020 स्थधमी रेखध सं./ Pan : Aaacg2953R (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri F V IraniFor Respondent: Ms.Vidisha Kalra
Section 37(1)

…must, viz. (i) there should be benefit of enduring nature; (ii) the expenditure must give rise to creation of new capital asset. The observations of Hon’ble Supreme Court were reiterated in subsequent judgment in the case of Alembic Chemical Works ltd vs CIT 177 ITR 377 (SC) and thereafter many judgements came from various courts from all over the country wherein similar views were taken. In the facts of the case before us, admittedly, there is no creation of new assets. Thus, the impugned expenditure cannot be held to be a capital expenditure. Similar view has been taken by Hon'ble Mumbai Bench of ITAT in the c…

M/S. Tata Motors Ltd., Mumbai vs. Jt. CIT Spl. RG. - 2, Mumbai

Appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 7148/MUM/2004[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2017AY 1998-1999
For Appellant: Shri Dinesh VyasFor Respondent: Shri-Anand Mohan-CIT-DR
Section 254(1)Section 37

…y and Petrochemicals Ltd.(supra)and directed the AO to allow the expenditure fully in the year under consideration. 28.2.The DR supported the order of the AO.The AR relied upon the order of the FAA and relied upon the cases of Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd.(177 ITR 377). 28.3.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials before us.We find that the assessee had incurred an expenditure of Rs.37.70 crores,that in the books of account it had treated the expenditure as deferred revenue expenditure, that in the computation of income and during the assessment proceedings it claimed that expenditure wa…

Tata Motors Ltd vs. DCIT RG - 2(1)

Appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 6214/MUM/2003[1997 - 98]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2017
For Appellant: Shri Dinesh VyasFor Respondent: Shri-Anand Mohan-CIT-DR
Section 254(1)Section 37

…y and Petrochemicals Ltd.(supra)and directed the AO to allow the expenditure fully in the year under consideration. 28.2.The DR supported the order of the AO.The AR relied upon the order of the FAA and relied upon the cases of Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd.(177 ITR 377). 28.3.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials before us.We find that the assessee had incurred an expenditure of Rs.37.70 crores,that in the books of account it had treated the expenditure as deferred revenue expenditure, that in the computation of income and during the assessment proceedings it claimed that expenditure wa…

Hindustan Ice Cold Storage Co Ltd, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T, Cir- 8, Kolkata.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 203/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Dec 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.203/Kol/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2006-2007) Hindusthan Ice & Cold Vs. Dcit, Circle-8, Kolkata Storage Limited, Aayakar Bhavan, P-7, C/O D.J.Shah & Co., Chowringhee Square, Kalyan Bhavan, Kolkata-69 2 Elgin Road, Kolkata-20 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaach 6265 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R Revenue By : Md. Ghayas Uddin, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 07/12/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 21/12/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2006-2007, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxxii, Kolkata In Appeal No.32/Xxxii/11-12/R&T/Cir-8/Kol, Dated 07.11.2012, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated 28.11.2008. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Filed Its The Return Of Income On 27.11.2006 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.16,45,711/- For The Assessment Year 2006-07. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny U/S. 143(3) Of The Act & The Ao Has Completed The Assessment By Making The Addition On Account Of Revenue Expenditure Claimed By The Assessee In Respect Of Repairs & Replacement Of Block Hindusthan Ice & Cold Storage Co. Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/RFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…jected the claim of the assessee. Ld. AR submitted that these are revenue expenditure for the purpose of business. For this purpose, ld. AR relied on the following judgments :- Hindusthan Ice & Cold Storage Co. Ltd. i) Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd., [1989] 177 ITR 377; ii) Assam Bengal Cement Companies Ltd. [1955] 27 ITR 34 iii) Associated Cement Companies ltd. [1988] 172 ITR 257 iv) Empire Jute Co. Ltd. [1980] 124 ITR 1(SC) v) Tea Estate P. Ltd. [1992] 198 ITR 535 (Cal) Saravana Spt. Mills (P) Ltd. 293 ITR 201 vi) 5.2 On the other hand, Ld. DR for the revenue has primarily reiterated the stand taken by the…

Sanofi Synthelabo India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 8(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6302/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ashwani Taneja, Am Sanofi Synthelabo India Ltd. Addl. Commissioner Of Income 54-A, Sir M.V. Rd Andheri (E), Tax Vs. 8(3), Aayakar Bhavan, 2 Nd Floor, Mumbai-400093 Pan No.Aaccs1421J M.K. Rd, Mumbai-400020 Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By .. Shri. Sanjiv M Shah, Ar Revenue By .. Shri. B.S. Bist, Dr Date Of Hearing .. 15-12-2016 Date Of Pronouncement .. 15-12-2016 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

Section 143(3)

…the opinion that there was no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A), who relied on the ratios laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Empire Jute Co. Ltd. vs CIT reported in 124 ITR 01 and Alembic Chemicals Works Company Ltd. vs CIT, reported in 177 ITR 377. 14. We, therefore, sustain the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and rejected the ground of appeal taken by the department.” When this was pointed out to the learned Sr. DR, he could not reply on the same. Page 4 of 5 6. After hearing both the sides and going through the facts of the case, we find that the facts and circumstances are exactly id…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Modi Apollo International Group Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue for A

ITA 223/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri L.P. Sahu & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 195Section 35ASection 40

…IT v. Lumax Industries Limited: 173 Taxman 390 (Del.) • CIT v J.K. Synthetics Ltd: 309 ITR 371 (Del.) - SLP dismissed vide order dated 16.11.2009 in S.L.P.(C) No.17346 of 2009 • CIT v. Ciba India Ltd: 69 ITR 692 (SC) • Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. vs. CIT: 177 ITR 377 • CIT v Shriram Pistons and Rings Limited -CC 12154/2009 (Supreme Court) (dismissing the SLP filed by the revenue against the order of the Delhi High Court in ITA No. 167/2008) • Shriram Refrigeration Industries Ltd. v, CIT: 127 ITR 746 (Del) • Triveni Engineering Works Ltd. v. CIT: 136 ITR 340 (Del) • CIT vs. Prem Heavy Engineering Works P. Lim…