Carefour WC& C India (P) Ltd. v. DCIT

53 Taxmann.com 289High Court2015#11704 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,854 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Carefour WC& C India (P) Ltd. v. DCIT

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-10(1), New Delhi, ITO C.R. Building New Delhi vs. Ikea India Pvt. Ltd., Jasola District New Delhi

ITA 2991/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwalita No. 2990/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Ita No. 2991/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Dcit, Vs M/S Ikea India Pvt. Ltd., Central 10(1), Unit No. 421, Dlf Tower, New Delhi-110002 Jasola District Centre, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadci3006N Assessee By : Ms. Shurti Khimta, Ar Revenue By : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.09.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: These Revenue’S Twin Appeals In Ita Nos. 2990 & 2991/Del/2023 For Assessment Years 2016-17 & 2017-18, Arise Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1055437476(1) & 1055440298(1) Dated 25.08.2023, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), Respectively.

For Appellant: Ms. Shurti Khimta, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 35D

…cement’ and has, therefore, fallen into error while disallowing the expenses. In our view, the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Ikea India Pvt. Ltd. the case of Carefour WC& C India (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT (2015) 53 Taxmann.com 289 (supra), wherein, the Hon'ble High Court while considering identical nature of dispute has held as under: “There is no dispute about the factual aspect of the expenses incurred by the assessee. The position of the primary obje4ctives of the assessee company is also not in dispute. In the facts of the instant case, the assessee company was…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-10(1) New Delhi, ITO C.R. Building New Delhi vs. Ikea India Private Limited, New Delhi

ITA 2990/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwalita No. 2990/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Ita No. 2991/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Dcit, Vs M/S Ikea India Pvt. Ltd., Central 10(1), Unit No. 421, Dlf Tower, New Delhi-110002 Jasola District Centre, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadci3006N Assessee By : Ms. Shurti Khimta, Ar Revenue By : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.09.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: These Revenue’S Twin Appeals In Ita Nos. 2990 & 2991/Del/2023 For Assessment Years 2016-17 & 2017-18, Arise Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1055437476(1) & 1055440298(1) Dated 25.08.2023, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), Respectively.

For Appellant: Ms. Shurti Khimta, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 35D

…cement’ and has, therefore, fallen into error while disallowing the expenses. In our view, the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Ikea India Pvt. Ltd. the case of Carefour WC& C India (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT (2015) 53 Taxmann.com 289 (supra), wherein, the Hon'ble High Court while considering identical nature of dispute has held as under: “There is no dispute about the factual aspect of the expenses incurred by the assessee. The position of the primary obje4ctives of the assessee company is also not in dispute. In the facts of the instant case, the assessee company was…

Messung Systems Private Limited, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 14 (4), Pune

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

ITA 683/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.683/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Messung Systems Private Vs. Ito, Ward-14(4), Pune. Limited, 501, Lunkad Skyvista, Sr. No.230/A/3/2, Viman Nagar, Pune- 411014. Pan : Aabcm1832E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani Date Of Hearing : 29.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.11.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 15.02.2018 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Briefly, The Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Company Incorporated Under The Provisions Of The Companies Act, 1956. It Is Engaged In The Business Of Trading Of Programmable Logic Controllers (Plc) & Parts Thereof. The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2014-15 Was Filed On 30.09.2014 Declaring Total

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.683/PUN/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Messung Systems Private Vs. ITO, Ward-14(4), Pune. Limited, 501, Lunkad Skyvista, Sr. No.230/A/3/2, Viman Nagar, Pune- 411014. PAN : AABCM1832E Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Nikhil Pathak Revenue by : Shri M. G. Jasnani Date of hearing : 29.08.2022 Date of pronouncement : 07.11.2022 आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against t…

DCIT Corporate Circle 1 (2), Chennai vs. M/S Bharatiya Nabhikiya Vidyut Nigam Ltd, Chennai

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

ITA 1304/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1304/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-2014. The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Bharatiya Nabhikiya Income Tax, Vidyut Nigam Ltd, No.51, 1St Floor, Corporate Circle 1(2) Chennai 600 034. Montieth Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008. [Pan Aaccb 3460C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. V.M. Mahidar, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. Y. Sridhar, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 35D

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘ B’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी इंटूर" रामा राव, लेखा सद"य के सम" [BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1304/CHNY/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2013-2014. The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Bharatiya Nabhikiya Income Tax, Vidyut Nigam Ltd, No.51, 1st floor, Corporate Circle 1(2) Chennai 600 034. Montieth Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008. [PAN AACCB 3460C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by :…

Asst CIT Cir 6(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Booker India P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 535/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.535/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Acit (Cir)-6(1)(2) बिधम/ M/S. Booker India Pvt. Ltd. R.No. 563, 5Th Floor, No. 607, Trade Centre, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Bandra Kurla Complex, Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051. 400051. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcb3571B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Aliasger Rampurawla & Shri Ravi Sawana सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 14.08.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12.10.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 02.11.2016 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -12, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2009- 10 In Which The Penalty Levied By The Ao Has Been Ordered To Be Deleted. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - "1. "Whether On (He Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Taw, The Id Cit(A) Was Right In Deleting The Penalty Levied U/S 271(1)(C) Of Rs.98,05,079/- & Failed To Appreciate That Penalty Has Been Levied On Account Of The A.Y.2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Aliasger Rampurawla &For Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 27l(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 37A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G. S. PANNU, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.535/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) ACIT (Cir)-6(1)(2) बिधम/ M/s. Booker India Pvt. Ltd. R.No. 563, 5th Floor, No. 607, Trade Centre, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Bandra Kurla Complex, Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051. 400051. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AADCB3571B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue by: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria (DR) Assessee by: Shri Aliasger Rampurawla & Shri Ravi Sawana सुनवाई की तारीख / Date o…

Carefour WC& C India (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (53 Taxmann.com 289) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax