CIT Assam v. The Panbari

57 ITR 422Supreme Court of India1965#2292 most cited

What is CIT Assam v. The Panbari authority for?

Expenditure incurred for acquiring a lease is capital expenditure if it brings into existence an asset or advantage for the enduring benefit of the business. The court distinguishes between 'premium' and 'rent' based on the parties' conscious choice of terms.

50

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT vs. The Panbari Tea Company Limited · 57 ITR 422 · capital expenditure · lease acquisition · enduring benefit · business asset · premium · rent · lease · Supreme Court · India

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 201(1A)Section 234BSection 234CSection 234DSection 271(1)(c)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 80IA(4)

Issues it is cited on

section 80iasection 80irevenue expendituresection 80transferprevious yearcompanyindiabusinesspersonsection 14section 143(3)

Judgments citing CIT Assam v. The Panbari

The ACIT-3(1), Indore vs. M/S. Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (I) Ltd., Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 533/IND/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…her reliance was placed on the judgment of AP High Court in the case of Aditya Minerals Pvt Ltd. 167 ITR 774 which was relied upon by the ld. CIT(A) in AY 92-93. The reliance was also placed on the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Panbari Tea Co Ltd. 57 ITR 422. -: 61 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore The ITAT Pune bench after considering the arguments of the revenue and various judgment of the Supreme Court and other High Courts has held: In our opinion, it is the settled legal proposition that where lump-sum money is paid before acquiring leasehold rights then such payment has to be cons…

The ACIT-3(1), Indore vs. M/S. Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (I) Ltd., Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 532/IND/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…her reliance was placed on the judgment of AP High Court in the case of Aditya Minerals Pvt Ltd. 167 ITR 774 which was relied upon by the ld. CIT(A) in AY 92-93. The reliance was also placed on the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Panbari Tea Co Ltd. 57 ITR 422. -: 61 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore The ITAT Pune bench after considering the arguments of the revenue and various judgment of the Supreme Court and other High Courts has held: In our opinion, it is the settled legal proposition that where lump-sum money is paid before acquiring leasehold rights then such payment has to be cons…

The ACIT-3(1), Indore vs. M/S. Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (I) Ltd., Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 531/IND/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…her reliance was placed on the judgment of AP High Court in the case of Aditya Minerals Pvt Ltd. 167 ITR 774 which was relied upon by the ld. CIT(A) in AY 92-93. The reliance was also placed on the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Panbari Tea Co Ltd. 57 ITR 422. -: 61 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore The ITAT Pune bench after considering the arguments of the revenue and various judgment of the Supreme Court and other High Courts has held: In our opinion, it is the settled legal proposition that where lump-sum money is paid before acquiring leasehold rights then such payment has to be cons…

The ACIT-3(1), Indore vs. M/S. Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (I) Ltd., Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 530/IND/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…her reliance was placed on the judgment of AP High Court in the case of Aditya Minerals Pvt Ltd. 167 ITR 774 which was relied upon by the ld. CIT(A) in AY 92-93. The reliance was also placed on the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Panbari Tea Co Ltd. 57 ITR 422. -: 61 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore The ITAT Pune bench after considering the arguments of the revenue and various judgment of the Supreme Court and other High Courts has held: In our opinion, it is the settled legal proposition that where lump-sum money is paid before acquiring leasehold rights then such payment has to be cons…

M/S. Sez Indore Limted, Indore vs. The DCIT Circle -3(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 206/IND/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…her reliance was placed on the judgment of AP High Court in the case of Aditya Minerals Pvt Ltd. 167 ITR 774 which was relied upon by the ld. CIT(A) in AY 92-93. The reliance was also placed on the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Panbari Tea Co Ltd. 57 ITR 422. -: 61 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore The ITAT Pune bench after considering the arguments of the revenue and various judgment of the Supreme Court and other High Courts has held: In our opinion, it is the settled legal proposition that where lump-sum money is paid before acquiring leasehold rights then such payment has to be cons…

M/S. Sez Indore Limted, Indore vs. The DCIT Circle -3(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 205/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…her reliance was placed on the judgment of AP High Court in the case of Aditya Minerals Pvt Ltd. 167 ITR 774 which was relied upon by the ld. CIT(A) in AY 92-93. The reliance was also placed on the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Panbari Tea Co Ltd. 57 ITR 422. -: 61 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore The ITAT Pune bench after considering the arguments of the revenue and various judgment of the Supreme Court and other High Courts has held: In our opinion, it is the settled legal proposition that where lump-sum money is paid before acquiring leasehold rights then such payment has to be cons…

M/S. M.P. Audhyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam, Indore vs. The DCIT 3(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 761/IND/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…her reliance was placed on the judgment of AP High Court in the case of Aditya Minerals Pvt Ltd. 167 ITR 774 which was relied upon by the ld. CIT(A) in AY 92-93. The reliance was also placed on the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Panbari Tea Co Ltd. 57 ITR 422. -: 61 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore The ITAT Pune bench after considering the arguments of the revenue and various judgment of the Supreme Court and other High Courts has held: In our opinion, it is the settled legal proposition that where lump-sum money is paid before acquiring leasehold rights then such payment has to be cons…

M/S. Sez Indore Limited, Indore vs. The CIT-I, Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 571/IND/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…her reliance was placed on the judgment of AP High Court in the case of Aditya Minerals Pvt Ltd. 167 ITR 774 which was relied upon by the ld. CIT(A) in AY 92-93. The reliance was also placed on the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Panbari Tea Co Ltd. 57 ITR 422. -: 61 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore The ITAT Pune bench after considering the arguments of the revenue and various judgment of the Supreme Court and other High Courts has held: In our opinion, it is the settled legal proposition that where lump-sum money is paid before acquiring leasehold rights then such payment has to be cons…

M/S Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (Indore) Ltd., Indore vs. The ACIT3(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 351/IND/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…her reliance was placed on the judgment of AP High Court in the case of Aditya Minerals Pvt Ltd. 167 ITR 774 which was relied upon by the ld. CIT(A) in AY 92-93. The reliance was also placed on the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Panbari Tea Co Ltd. 57 ITR 422. -: 61 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore The ITAT Pune bench after considering the arguments of the revenue and various judgment of the Supreme Court and other High Courts has held: In our opinion, it is the settled legal proposition that where lump-sum money is paid before acquiring leasehold rights then such payment has to be cons…

M/S Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (Indore) Ltd., Indore vs. The ACIT3(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 350/IND/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…her reliance was placed on the judgment of AP High Court in the case of Aditya Minerals Pvt Ltd. 167 ITR 774 which was relied upon by the ld. CIT(A) in AY 92-93. The reliance was also placed on the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Panbari Tea Co Ltd. 57 ITR 422. -: 61 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore The ITAT Pune bench after considering the arguments of the revenue and various judgment of the Supreme Court and other High Courts has held: In our opinion, it is the settled legal proposition that where lump-sum money is paid before acquiring leasehold rights then such payment has to be cons…

M/S Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (Indore) Ltd., Indore vs. The ACIT3(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 349/IND/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…her reliance was placed on the judgment of AP High Court in the case of Aditya Minerals Pvt Ltd. 167 ITR 774 which was relied upon by the ld. CIT(A) in AY 92-93. The reliance was also placed on the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Panbari Tea Co Ltd. 57 ITR 422. -: 61 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore The ITAT Pune bench after considering the arguments of the revenue and various judgment of the Supreme Court and other High Courts has held: In our opinion, it is the settled legal proposition that where lump-sum money is paid before acquiring leasehold rights then such payment has to be cons…

M/S Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (Indore) Ltd., Indore vs. The ACIT3(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 348/IND/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…her reliance was placed on the judgment of AP High Court in the case of Aditya Minerals Pvt Ltd. 167 ITR 774 which was relied upon by the ld. CIT(A) in AY 92-93. The reliance was also placed on the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Panbari Tea Co Ltd. 57 ITR 422. -: 61 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore The ITAT Pune bench after considering the arguments of the revenue and various judgment of the Supreme Court and other High Courts has held: In our opinion, it is the settled legal proposition that where lump-sum money is paid before acquiring leasehold rights then such payment has to be cons…

M/S Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (Indore) Ltd., Indore vs. The ACIT3(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 347/IND/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…her reliance was placed on the judgment of AP High Court in the case of Aditya Minerals Pvt Ltd. 167 ITR 774 which was relied upon by the ld. CIT(A) in AY 92-93. The reliance was also placed on the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Panbari Tea Co Ltd. 57 ITR 422. -: 61 :- MPAKVN AND SEZ (Indore ) & SEZ Ltd.,Indore The ITAT Pune bench after considering the arguments of the revenue and various judgment of the Supreme Court and other High Courts has held: In our opinion, it is the settled legal proposition that where lump-sum money is paid before acquiring leasehold rights then such payment has to be cons…

ACIT(TDS) Circle - 1, Kolkata vs. M/S. Earnest Towers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 243/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Jan 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble]

Section 194Section 194ASection 194ISection 250

…ed covering the transaction, governing use of the land, alteration etc. 4. That on the facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the applicability of the ratio of judicial pronouncement in the case of CIT vs. Panbari Tea Co. Ltd. [57 ITR 422 (SC)(1965)] on the issue. 5. That on the facts & circumstances of the case, the department craves to add, alter, modify the above grounds of appeal, during the course of appellate proceedings.” As the Grounds of Appeal for the Assessment Year 2011-12, are identical as that for the Assessment Year 2010-11, they are not reproduced for the sake of b…

ACIT(TDS) Circle - 1, Kolkata vs. M/S. Earnest Towers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 242/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Jan 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble]

Section 194Section 194ASection 194ISection 250

…ed covering the transaction, governing use of the land, alteration etc. 4. That on the facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the applicability of the ratio of judicial pronouncement in the case of CIT vs. Panbari Tea Co. Ltd. [57 ITR 422 (SC)(1965)] on the issue. 5. That on the facts & circumstances of the case, the department craves to add, alter, modify the above grounds of appeal, during the course of appellate proceedings.” As the Grounds of Appeal for the Assessment Year 2011-12, are identical as that for the Assessment Year 2010-11, they are not reproduced for the sake of b…

Hero Motocorp Limited, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1545/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. NC Sawain, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…unt paid at the commencement of the lease was the advance rent that could be amortized. At the same time, there are other rulings by the Supreme Court in (Assam Bengal Cement Company Limited Vs. CIT (1955) 27 ITR 34, CIT vs. Panbari Tea Company Limited (1965) 57 ITR 422 and DurgaMadiraSangh vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (1969) 72 ITR 769. In all these cases, the Court upheld the Revenue‘s contention and stated that the expenditure towards acquisition of lease amounted to "brining into existence an asset or advantage for enduring benefit of the business" and was properly attributable by way of capital expenditure…

Millenium Corporation, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO TDS 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4496/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma(Am) & Shri Sandeep Gosain (Jm) Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri. Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri. Randhir Gupta
Section 133ASection 194Section 196Section 201Section 201(1)Section 271

…liberation, the material available on record and the assertions made by the ld. DR, we find that the Tribunal, following the decision from Hon’ble Apex Court in Madhavrao Sindhia vs Union of India AIR 1971 SC 530 (at page 533), and in Panwari Tea Company Ltd. 57 ITR 422 (SC) held that lease premium paid is a capital receipt and not of revenue in nature, thus, we find no infirmity in the conclusion drawn by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Even otherwise, the case of the assesses find support from the decision in the case of Wadhwa & Associates Realtors Pvt. Ltd. (ITA NO.695/Mum/2012) wherein, lease…

Indiawin Sports P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 35, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 5290/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.5290&5291/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2009-2010 & 2010-2011) Indianwin Sports Private Vs. Acit, Cc-35, Room Limited, Court House, 3Rd No.104, Aayakar Bhavan, Floor, Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Mumbai-400020 Dhobi Talao, Mumbai- 400002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcr 8195 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Arvind Sonde राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri B.C.S.Naik सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 25/05/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 22/07/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2009-2010 & 2010-2011, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of The I.T.Act. 2. In Both These Appeals The Assessee Is Aggrieved For Decline Of Annual Payment Being Franchise Fees Paid To Bcci To Participate In The Indian Premier League (Ipl) By Holding The Same As Capital In Nature For Both The Assessment Years Under Consideration. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Owning, Managing & Operating 'Mumbai Indian' Team Of Indian Premier League (Ipl). The Assessee Has Been Granted Perpetual Franchisee For The 'Mumbai Indian' Team. The Assessee Is Franchise Holder Of Ipl I.E. Indian

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri B.C.S.Naik
Section 139Section 143(3)

…ii) In the case of lease of immovable property, the Supreme Court has held that any premium paid for acquisition of the right to lease would constitute capital payment but not a periodic payment for the actual use of the property [CIT v. Panbari Tea Co. Ltd, 57 ITR 422 (SC)]. While tenancy right per se is considered as a capital asset [5.5 (2)], payment for the usage of such tenancy right is always revenue expenditure. (iv) The Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. HMT Ltd. 203 ITR 820 has held that even though lump sum amount paid as premium in connection with lease of property as long as it is towards ren…

ITO (TDS) 2(5), Mumbai vs. Pyramid Properties, Navi Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5163/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2011-12 Ito(Tds)-2(5), M/S Pyramid Properties, R. No.706, 7Th Floor, Plot No.Pap-R-24, बनाम/ Smt. K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Ttc Industrial Area, Vs. Hospital Building, Midcrabale, Charni Road (W), Navi Mumbai-400701 Mumbai-400002 Pan No. Aalfp4402A (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee)

Section 194Section 196Section 201Section 201(1)

…Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), it was explained that lease premium cannot be quoted to rent as defined u/s 194 I of the Act as it categorically distinguishes rent from lease premium. Reliance was placed upon the decision in CIT vs Panbari Tea Company 57 ITR 422 (SC), CIT vs Khimline Pumps Ltd. 258 ITR 459 (Bom.) and JCIT vs Mukund Limited (106 ITD 231) (Tribunal). The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) considering the decision of the Tribunal in case of M/s Shah Group Builders Ltd. (ITA No.4523/Mum/2012) dated 14/08/2013, deleted the addition. 2.3. The Revenue is aggrieved and is in appeal befo…

Asian Heart Institute & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T. 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2865/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar
Section 14A

…issue was considered by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Gail India Ltd Vs. JCIT (ITA 956/2011 and 957/2011 dated 05-11-2012) and the Hon’ble Delhi, by following the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Panbari Tea Corporation Ltd (57 ITR 422)(SC), has held that the assessee is not entitled to claim amortisation of proportionate amount of lease premium paid for taking the land on lease for a longer period. In view 3 Asian Heart Institute & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. ITA Nos. 2865 & 2257/Mum/2012 of the above, we do not find any infirmity in the order of Ld CIT(A) on this issue. 7. Th…