Bikaner Gypsums Ltd. v. CIT

187 ITR 39Supreme Court of India1991#3452 most cited

What is Bikaner Gypsums Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Expenditure incurred to remove a restriction, obstruction, or disability preventing the carrying on of an existing business is revenue expenditure, provided no capital asset is acquired. The nature of the lease, purpose of expenditure, and its relation to profitable business operations are key considerations in mining cases.

34

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Bikaner Gypsums Ltd. v. CIT · SC · 1991 · section 35E · section 37(1) · revenue expenditure · mining business · removal of obstruction · existing business · capital asset

Also reported as

53 Taxmann 279

Sections most often in play

Section 35ESection 37(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 35esection 24asection 269uasection 75section 52section 32(1)(ii)interest under section 201(1a)commercial rightssection 192enduring benefitput to usesection 32(1)

Judgments citing Bikaner Gypsums Ltd. v. CIT

El El Hotels & Investments Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 918/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2021AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…n nature:- i) Addl.CIT vs. J.S.S. (P) Ltd., (1984) 19 Taxman 521 (Delhi); ii) Gopal Das Estates & Housing (P) Ltd. vs. CIT, (2019) 412 ITR 489 (Del); iii) Shyam Buriap Company Ltd. vs. CIT (2016) 380 ITR 151 (Calcutta); iv) Bikaner Gypsums Ltd. vs. CIT (1991) 187 ITR 39; v) CIT vs. Associated Cement Companies Ltd. (1988) 172 ITR 257 (SC); vi) Empire Jute Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1980) 124 ITR 1 (SC); 14 vii) CIT vs. Ashok Leyland Ltd. (1972) 86 ITR 549 (SC); viii) Airport Authority of India vs. CIT (2012) 340 ITR 407 (Del); ix) CIT, Bombay vs. Airlines Hotel (P) Ltd.; x) CIT vs. UTI Bank Ltd. (2013) 32 taxmann.com 282…

Muchhala Magic Land Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, 10 (2)(2) Earlier DCIT 8 (2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6931/MUM/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 6931 & 6932/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2006-07 & 2013-14) Muchhala Magic Land Pvt. बिधम/ Dcit, 10(2)(2) Earlier Dcit Ltd. 8(2) Vs. Amar Mahal, Gr. Floor, Room No.209, Aayakar Anandrao Deole Marg, Near Bhavan, M. K. Road, Chandan Cinema, Juhu, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400049. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcm1017B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Y. P. Trivdedi Shri D. C. Jain Revenue By: Shri Manpreet S. Duggal (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/12/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/02/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Different Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys. 2006-07 & 2013-14. Ita. No.6931/M/2019

For Appellant: Shri Y. P. TrivdediFor Respondent: Shri Manpreet S. Duggal (Sr. AR)
Section 143

…ed 124 ITR 01. The said expenses are liable to be treated to be paid for business expenses. Moreover disturbance on account of administrative act if any and payment accordingly is liable to be treated as revenue expenses in view of the decision in the case of 187 ITR 39 SC of Bikaner Gypsum Ltd. Vs. CIT. Accordingly, when the amount seems to be paid prima- facie for the business expediency, therefore, we are of the view that the said amount is ITA. Nos.6931 & 6932/M/2019 A.Y. 206-07 & 2013-14 liable to be treated as revenue in nature. Accordingly, we set aside the finding of the CIT(A) on this issue and allow th…

Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2278/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Shri ParinFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…penditure. In appeal the Ld. CIT(A) upheld such disallowance holding the expenditure as capital in nature. The assessee before the Ld. AO further relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter Bikaner Gypsum Ltd. vs. CIT, reported in 187 ITR 39. We have considered the same wherein we find that the Railway authorities shifted the Railway establishment to facilitate the assessee to carry on - 7 - ITA Nos. 2277&2278/Ahd/2018 Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. vs. ACIT A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 his business in a profitable manner and for this purpose the assessee paid a sum of Rs.…

Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2277/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Shri ParinFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…penditure. In appeal the Ld. CIT(A) upheld such disallowance holding the expenditure as capital in nature. The assessee before the Ld. AO further relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter Bikaner Gypsum Ltd. vs. CIT, reported in 187 ITR 39. We have considered the same wherein we find that the Railway authorities shifted the Railway establishment to facilitate the assessee to carry on - 7 - ITA Nos. 2277&2278/Ahd/2018 Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. vs. ACIT A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 his business in a profitable manner and for this purpose the assessee paid a sum of Rs.…

Ntpc Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 4754/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 80I

…ecision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of L.H. Sugar Factory & Oil Mills (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 125 ITR 293 (SC) and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in cases of Airport Authority of India vs. CIT - 2012-TIOL-09-HC-DEL-IT-LB and Bikaner Gypsusms Ltd. vs. CIT – 187 ITR 39, which are applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case as the 13 ITA No.4183/Del./2015 ITA No.4754/Del./2015 Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that when the roads were constructed around the factory with an amount incurred by the assessee existing on the land owned by Government of UP, the assessee did not acquire any asset of an enduring n…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ntpc Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 4183/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 80I

…ecision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of L.H. Sugar Factory & Oil Mills (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 125 ITR 293 (SC) and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in cases of Airport Authority of India vs. CIT - 2012-TIOL-09-HC-DEL-IT-LB and Bikaner Gypsusms Ltd. vs. CIT – 187 ITR 39, which are applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case as the 13 ITA No.4183/Del./2015 ITA No.4754/Del./2015 Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that when the roads were constructed around the factory with an amount incurred by the assessee existing on the land owned by Government of UP, the assessee did not acquire any asset of an enduring n…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Atlas Copco (India) Ltd., Pune

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2286/PUN/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jan 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 154

…her tangible or intangible has come into existence which would provide any advantage of enduring nature to the assessee. To buttress this argument the ld. AR placed reliance on the following decisions : i. Bikaner Gypsums Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, 187 ITR 39 (SC); 14 ITA No. 2286/PUN/2014, A.Y. 2005-06 ii. Airport Authority of India Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, 340 ITR 407 (Delhi); iii. Jamna Auto Industries Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, 299 ITR 92 (P&H); iv. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. S.A. Builders (P.) Ltd., 299 ITR 88 (P&H). The ld. AR submitted that thus, in view of the facts of the ca…

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)

…ited. 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:  Modi Spinning & Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd vs. CIT : 200 ITR 544 (Delhi)  CIT v. Hindustan Times Ltd. [1999] 107 Taxm…

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)

…ited. 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:  Modi Spinning & Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd vs. CIT : 200 ITR 544 (Delhi)  CIT v. Hindustan Times Ltd. [1999] 107 Taxm…

DCIT, Circle - 5, Kolkata vs. M/S. Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 589/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri D.S.Damle, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Subhra Biswas, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘A’ KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] Assessment Year : 2007-08 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd. -versus- Addl. C.I.T., Range-5, Kolkata Kolkata (PAN:AAACE6607L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2007-08 D.C.I.T., Circle-5, -versus- Essel Mining & Industries Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata (PAN:AAACE6607L) (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Assessee: Shri D.S.Damle, FCA For the Department : Shri Rajat Subhra Biswas, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 17.05.2016. Date of Pronouncement :20.05.2016. ORDER Per N.V.Vasudevan, JM ITA No.352/Ko…

Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Kolkata vs. Addl. CIT, Range - 5, Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 352/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri D.S.Damle, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Subhra Biswas, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘A’ KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] Assessment Year : 2007-08 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd. -versus- Addl. C.I.T., Range-5, Kolkata Kolkata (PAN:AAACE6607L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2007-08 D.C.I.T., Circle-5, -versus- Essel Mining & Industries Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata (PAN:AAACE6607L) (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Assessee: Shri D.S.Damle, FCA For the Department : Shri Rajat Subhra Biswas, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 17.05.2016. Date of Pronouncement :20.05.2016. ORDER Per N.V.Vasudevan, JM ITA No.352/Ko…

ACIT, Circle - 5, Kolkata vs. M/S. Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 56/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri. Snehotpal Datta, JCIT, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri D.S.Damle, FCA
Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “A”, KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri Waseem Ahmed, AM] Assessment Year : 2006-07 A.C.I.T., Circle-5, .-versus- M/s. Essel Mining & Inds.Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata (PAN:AAACE6607L) (APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) For the Appellant : Shri. Snehotpal Datta, JCIT, Sr.DR For the Respondent : Shri D.S.Damle, FCA Date of Hearing : 10.02.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 02.03.2016. ORDER Per Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM This is an appeal by the Revenue directed against the order dated 27.10.2009 of CIT(A)- V, Kolkata relating to A.Y.2006-07. 2. Ground No.1 raised by th…

Arun Kumar Gupta (HUF), New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 871/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri A.T. Varkey

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Saxena, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.K. Jaiswal, Senior DR
Section 142Section 143Section 37(1)

…2008-09 wherein the ITAT considered the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. J.K. Synthetics Ltd. (2009) 309 ITR 371 (Delhi) as well as the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bikaner Gypsums Ltd. vs. CIT (1991) 187 ITR 39 (SC) and in para 10 held as follows :- “10. In the present case, the assessee had paid amounts for one time conversion charges and for parking charges at the two outlets, the benefits of which might accrue to the assessee for indefinite period of time yet these were incurred to enable the profit making structures to work more efficiently leaving…

Airports Authority of India vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms

ITA - 432 / 2008HC Delhi16 Dec 2011

…08,ITA 437/2008,ITA 517/2008 Page 12 of 26 ITA 792/2008,ITA 1250/2008,ITA 1251/2008 11. The argument of Mr. Bajpai was that identical issue had fallen for consideration in Bikaner Gypsum Vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (1991) 187 ITR 39 and the Supreme Court had held such an expenditure to be the revenue in nature. It would, therefore, be necessary to find out the ratio of Bikaner (supra). . In that case the assessee company had taken over a lease of 4.27 square miles for mining gypsum for a period of 20 years with provision for renewal for a further period of 20 years a…