Chinai & Co. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT

206 ITR 616High Court1994#6003 most cited

What is Chinai & Co. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Expenses incurred by a company solely to maintain its status as a company are allowable as deductions. However, the core principle is that expenses incurred for earning income are direct expenses and must be allowed in full.

19

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2023.

Also referred to as

Chinai & Co. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT · 206 ITR 616 · company status expenses · expenses incurred on earning income · allowable expenses · indirect expenses · direct expenses · estimated expenses

Issues it is cited on

actual payment basissection 36(2)section 153(1)section 36(1)(vii)disallowance u/s 14asection 43bsection 14aprescribedcompanyindiatotal incomeinterest

Judgments citing Chinai & Co. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT

THE GODAVARI SUGAR MILLS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 2(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 3592/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2023AY 2006-07
Section 143(3)

…generation and since the bad debts written off pertain to the discontinued business of the assessee company, the ld. CIT(A) by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisidictional High Court in the case of Chinai & Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT reported in 206 ITR 616 upheld the action of the ld. AO in disallowing the bad debts. We have gone through the said decision relied upon by the ld. CIT(A) and find that the said decision is factually distinguishable. In that case, there was no evidence to prove that assessee company carried on any business and that mere obligation to have its accounts presented and pass…

FUTURE POLYESTERS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 5 (1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and 2014-15

ITA 7557/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2022AY 2014-15
Section 14A

…tice that the LdCIT(A) has allowed deduction of 20% of commission and other income towards expenses on estimated basis. We also notice that the Ld CIT(A) has taken support of the decision rendered by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Chinai& Co. P Ltd (206 ITR 616)(Bom). However, the ratio of the above said decision is that the expenses incurred on maintaining its status as company should be allowed. Besides the above, the expenses incurred on earning the income are direct expenses, which are required to be allowed fully. In addition to the direct expenses, in our view, the indirect expenses may be allowed…

FUTURA POLYESTERS LTD.,MUMBAI vs. CIT 5 (1) (2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and 2014-15

ITA 7024/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2022AY 2012-13
Section 14A

…tice that the LdCIT(A) has allowed deduction of 20% of commission and other income towards expenses on estimated basis. We also notice that the Ld CIT(A) has taken support of the decision rendered by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Chinai& Co. P Ltd (206 ITR 616)(Bom). However, the ratio of the above said decision is that the expenses incurred on maintaining its status as company should be allowed. Besides the above, the expenses incurred on earning the income are direct expenses, which are required to be allowed fully. In addition to the direct expenses, in our view, the indirect expenses may be allowed…

FUTURA POLYESTERS LTD.,MUMBAI vs. CIT 5 (1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and 2014-15

ITA 7023/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2022AY 2011-12
Section 14A

…tice that the LdCIT(A) has allowed deduction of 20% of commission and other income towards expenses on estimated basis. We also notice that the Ld CIT(A) has taken support of the decision rendered by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Chinai& Co. P Ltd (206 ITR 616)(Bom). However, the ratio of the above said decision is that the expenses incurred on maintaining its status as company should be allowed. Besides the above, the expenses incurred on earning the income are direct expenses, which are required to be allowed fully. In addition to the direct expenses, in our view, the indirect expenses may be allowed…

MR.M J ARAVIND ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(3)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 222/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 48Section 57

…ch expenses incurred were wholly and exclusively for the activities to earn income and it was held that such expenses are allowable. For the same ratio, judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of Chinai & Co. (P.) Ltd. Vs. CIT a reported in 206 ITR 616 was also followed and the judgment of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court rendered in the case of Rampur Timbur & Turnery Co. Ltd. as reported in 129 ITR 58 was also followed. Since in the present case, the assessee is not a company, these judgments of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ganga Properties Ltd. Page 23 of 24 (supra), Hon'b…

MR. M J ARAVIN,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1510/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14ASection 48Section 57

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2013-14 Mr. M J Aravind, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Nirvana, 329, 18th Cross, of Income Tax, Ideal Homes Layout, Phase I, Circle 2(3)(1), Rajarajeshwari Nagar, Bengaluru. Bangalore – 560 098. PAN: ACBPA 0889J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Narendra Sharma, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 06.09.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 06.09.2021 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accou…

SMT. ZEELIA ZEENA MAYZEAN SHENOY,MANGALURU vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), MANGALURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1716/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Apr 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Smt.Sheethal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 234B

…ch expenses incurred were wholly and exclusively for the activities to earn income and it was held that such expenses are allowable. For the same ratio, judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of Chinai & Co. (P.) Ltd. Vs. CIT a reported in 206 ITR 616 was also followed and the judgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court rendered in the case of Rampur Timbur & Turnery Co. Ltd. as reported in 129 ITR 58 was also followed. Since in the present case, the assessee is not a company, these judgments of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ganga Properties Ltd. (supra), Hon’ble Bombay High…

SMT. ZEELIA ZEENA MAYZEAN SHENOY,MANGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), MANGALURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1715/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Apr 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Smt.Sheethal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 234B

…ch expenses incurred were wholly and exclusively for the activities to earn income and it was held that such expenses are allowable. For the same ratio, judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of Chinai & Co. (P.) Ltd. Vs. CIT a reported in 206 ITR 616 was also followed and the judgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court rendered in the case of Rampur Timbur & Turnery Co. Ltd. as reported in 129 ITR 58 was also followed. Since in the present case, the assessee is not a company, these judgments of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ganga Properties Ltd. (supra), Hon’ble Bombay High…

M/S. ELEL HOTELS AND INVESTMENTS LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue and the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 are dismissed

ITA 4654/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Elel Hotels & Vs. Dcit, Investments Ltd., Central Circle-13, New Delhi Mandlik House, Mandlik Road, Colaba, Mumbai Pan :Aaace2846D (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Years: 2012-13 M/S. Elel Hotels & Vs. Acit, Investments Ltd., Central Circle-03, R/O. Mandlik House, Mandlik Jhandewalan, New Delhi Road, Colaba, Mumbai Pan :Aaace2846D (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Years: 2010-11 Acit, Vs. M/S. Elel Hotels & Central Circle-13, Investments Ltd., New Delhi R/O. Mandlik House, Mandlik Road, Colaba, Mumbai Pan :Aaace2846D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(2)

…the corporate structure is in allowable deduction in view of the following precedents: (i) CIT Vs. Rampur Timber Company Limited, 129 ITR 58(Allahabad HC) (ii) Nakodar Bus Services Private Ltd., 179 ITR 506 (Punjab HC) (iii) Chinai & Co. Private Ltd. Vs. CIT, 206 ITR 616 (Bom HC) (iv) Hindustan Chemicals Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 124 ITR 561 (v) Birla Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT, 64 ITR 568, 584 (Cal.) 3.1 The Assessing Officer, however, noted that in earlier assessment years 2005-06 to 2009-10 also similar situation was observed. In view of the Assessing Officer, the assessee had no 6 ITA Nos.4807/D…

DCIT 2(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. SHEBA PROPERTIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals stands dismissed

ITA 699/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 660 To 664/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2012-13) Tata Motors Finance Limited Dy. Cit (Osd), 2(3) 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, (Formerly Known As Sheba Properties बनाम/ Limited) M. K. Marg, Mumbai -400 020 10Th Floor, 106A & B, Maker Chambers Vs. Iii, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecs 0591 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 699 To 703/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2012-13, 2008-09, 2011-12) Dy. Cit, Circle-2(3)(2), Tata Motors Finance Limited Room No. 552, 5Th Floor, (Formerly Known As Sheba बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Marg, Properties Limited) 3Rd Floor, Nanavati Mahalaya, 18 Mumbai -400 020 Vs. Homi Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecs 0591 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. R. Vohra & Shri Nikhil Tiwari ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri V. Justin

For Appellant: Shri R. R. Vohra &For Respondent: Shri V. Justin
Section 23Section 23(1)(a)

…tors as indirect administrative charges for the purpose of making the disallowance u/s. 14A. In this regard, the ld. Counsel of the assessee has placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Chennai & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT 206 ITR 616 (Bom). 27. Upon careful consideration, we note that this decision has been cited by the ld. Counsel of the assessee is for the proposition that a statutory expenses incurred is allowable expenditure even if no active business is conducted. We fail to understand as to how this decision is relevant here in deciding the expenses which are incurred…

SHEBA PROPERTIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (OSD) 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals stands dismissed

ITA 660/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 660 To 664/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2012-13) Tata Motors Finance Limited Dy. Cit (Osd), 2(3) 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, (Formerly Known As Sheba Properties बनाम/ Limited) M. K. Marg, Mumbai -400 020 10Th Floor, 106A & B, Maker Chambers Vs. Iii, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecs 0591 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 699 To 703/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2012-13, 2008-09, 2011-12) Dy. Cit, Circle-2(3)(2), Tata Motors Finance Limited Room No. 552, 5Th Floor, (Formerly Known As Sheba बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Marg, Properties Limited) 3Rd Floor, Nanavati Mahalaya, 18 Mumbai -400 020 Vs. Homi Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecs 0591 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. R. Vohra & Shri Nikhil Tiwari ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri V. Justin

For Appellant: Shri R. R. Vohra &For Respondent: Shri V. Justin
Section 23Section 23(1)(a)

…tors as indirect administrative charges for the purpose of making the disallowance u/s. 14A. In this regard, the ld. Counsel of the assessee has placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Chennai & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT 206 ITR 616 (Bom). 27. Upon careful consideration, we note that this decision has been cited by the ld. Counsel of the assessee is for the proposition that a statutory expenses incurred is allowable expenditure even if no active business is conducted. We fail to understand as to how this decision is relevant here in deciding the expenses which are incurred…

MR.M.J ARAVIND,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

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

ITA 1991/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaassessment Year :2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Ramadhyani, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.R. Ramesh, JCIT (DR)
Section 14ASection 48Section 57

…uch expenses incurred were wholly and exclusively for the activities to earn income and it was held that such expenses are allowable. For the same ratio, judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of Chinai& Co. (P.) Ltd. Vs. CIT a reported in 206 ITR 616 was also followed and the judgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court rendered in the case of Rampur Timbur & Turnery Co. Ltd. as reported in 129 ITR 58 was also followed. Since in the present case, the assessee is not a company, these judgments of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ganga Properties Ltd. (supra), Hon’ble Bombay High…

M/S. AMIN MANILAL & CO., PVT. LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1303/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryawanshi, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 153CSection 57

…cture are not allowed as deduction while computing the profits of the business, the same should be allowed in earning income from other sources such as interest, dividend, etc., u/s. 57(iii) of the Act. He cited the decision of Chinai and Co Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT (206 ITR 616) in support of his contention. The plea of the assessee that the expenses incurred by the appellant for maintaining its corporate structure, audit fees, directors remuneration should have been allowed. The case laws cited by the appellant are distinguishable on facts. The assessee has claimed these expenses as regular business expenditure but as…

RANGJI REALTIES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 1(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby

ITA 708/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. No.708/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. Shri Rangji Realties Pvt. बनाम/ Income Tax Officer 1(3)(1) Aayakar Bhavan, 5Th Floor, Ltd. (Formerly Known As Shri Vs. Rangji Investments Pvt. Ltd.) M.K.Road, 1B, 1St Floor, Mumbai - 400020 35 Court Chambers, Sir Vithaldas Thackersey Marg, New Marine Lines Mumbai – 400 020 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaics5225J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil HirawatFor Respondent: ShriC. S. Sharma
Section 115JSection 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…rred to maintain the establishment, therefore, the same is liable to allowable in view of the law settled in Rampur Timber and Turney Co. Ltd. (1981) 129 ITR 58, 59 (All.) and Ganga Properties Ltd. (1993) 199 ITR (Cal.) 94,95 and Chinai & Co. Pvt. Ltd. (1994) 206 ITR 616, 617 (Bom). Since the material produced before the CIT(A) has not been discussed or examined, A.Y.2010-11 therefore in the similar circumstances this issue is required to be examined at the end of the Assessing Officer in accordance with law. In the said circumstances we set aside the order of the CIT(A) in question on this issue and remand this…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S VIRAT INVESTMENT AND MERCA

ITA/37/2005HC Delhi19 Jan 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 143Section 57

…e expenditure lay properly in the capital side and, ITA Nos.709/2004, 37/2005 & 636/2004 Page 4 of 9 therefore, had to be disallowed under Section 57 (iii). He also relied upon Bombay High Court’s judgment in Chinai and Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (1994) 206 ITR 616 (Bom). Learned counsel further relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court reported as Brooke Bond India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, W.B.III, Calcutta, (1997) 10 SCC 362 as well as Punjab State Industrial Development Corpn. Ltd. v. CIT (1997) 10 SCC 184. 6. Counsel for the assessee relied upon the findings of the CIT (A) and…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VI vs. M/S VIRAT INVESTMENT & MERCANT

ITA/636/2004HC Delhi19 Jan 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 143Section 57

…e expenditure lay properly in the capital side and, ITA Nos.709/2004, 37/2005 & 636/2004 Page 4 of 9 therefore, had to be disallowed under Section 57 (iii). He also relied upon Bombay High Court’s judgment in Chinai and Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (1994) 206 ITR 616 (Bom). Learned counsel further relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court reported as Brooke Bond India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, W.B.III, Calcutta, (1997) 10 SCC 362 as well as Punjab State Industrial Development Corpn. Ltd. v. CIT (1997) 10 SCC 184. 6. Counsel for the assessee relied upon the findings of the CIT (A) and…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VI vs. M/S VIRAT INVESTMENT & MERCANT

ITA/709/2004HC Delhi19 Jan 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 143Section 57

…e expenditure lay properly in the capital side and, ITA Nos.709/2004, 37/2005 & 636/2004 Page 4 of 9 therefore, had to be disallowed under Section 57 (iii). He also relied upon Bombay High Court’s judgment in Chinai and Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (1994) 206 ITR 616 (Bom). Learned counsel further relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court reported as Brooke Bond India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, W.B.III, Calcutta, (1997) 10 SCC 362 as well as Punjab State Industrial Development Corpn. Ltd. v. CIT (1997) 10 SCC 184. 6. Counsel for the assessee relied upon the findings of the CIT (A) and…

M/S.MONARCH COMMODITIES PVT. LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1302/BANG/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Oct 2016AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryawanshi, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 153CSection 57

…cture are not allowed as deduction while computing the profits of the business, the same should be allowed in earning income from other sources such as interest, dividend, etc., u/s. 57(iii) of the Act. He cited the decision of Chinai and Co Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT (206 ITR 616) in support of his contention. The plea of the assessee that the expenses incurred by the appellant for maintaining its corporate structure, audit fees, directors remuneration should have been allowed. The case laws cited by the appellant are distinguishable on facts. The assessee has claimed these expenses as regular business expenditure but as…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ELEL HOTELS & INVESTMENT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1080/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

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

Section 153A

…plained that these expenses were incurred for maintaining its corporate structure, existence and preserving the assets-infrastructure. It was explained 129 ITR 58 Allahabad; Nokodar Bus Services Pvt. Ltd., 179 ITR 506 (Punj); Chennai & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT 206 ITR 616 (Bom); Hindustan Chemicals Works Ltd. V. CIT, 124 ITR 561; Birla Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. v. CIT 64 ITR 568, 584 (cal.) and affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as reported in 82 ITR 166. 2.1. The following details in respect of the expenses claimed were filed by way of a chart vide letter dated 15.11.2010:- Page 2 of 10 I.T.A…

Chinai & Co. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (206 ITR 616) — Cited in 19 Judgments | BharatTax