CIT v. Amway India Enterprises

346 ITR 341High Court2012#1591 most cited

What is CIT v. Amway India Enterprises authority for?

Expenditure incurred by an assessee on software license purchases, development of miscellaneous software, website maintenance, distributor incentives, market development, and brand promotion is revenue in nature.

71

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Amway India Enterprises · 346 ITR 341 · revenue expenditure · capital expenditure · Section 37(1) · software license expenses · brand promotion costs · distributor incentives · website maintenance expenditure · business expenditure classification · Delhi High Court

Also reported as

22 Taxmann.com 22

Sections most often in play

Section 35DSection 40(a)(i)Section 80HHCSection 28(iiid)Section 143(3)Section 35(2AB)Section 37(1)Section 14A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 17(1)section 35ddsection 92asection 36(l)(va)section 35dsection 36(l)section 36(va)enhanced compensationsection 34(1)benchmarking analysissection 80hhcsection 145a

Judgments citing CIT v. Amway India Enterprises

D.C.I.T, Cir-2, Kolkata vs. M/S Pricewaterhouse Coopers Pvt, Kolkata

In the result, to sum up, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1521/KOL/2013[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jul 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Pandey, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri M. Balaganesh, AM & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM] I.T.A No.1521/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2003-04 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. M/s. Pricewaterhouse Coopers Pvt. Ltd. Circle-2, Kolkata. (PAN: AABCP9181H) (Appellant) (Respondent) & I.T.A No.2033/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2003-04 M/s. Pricewaterhouse Coopers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax, Range-2, Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & I.T.A No.1523/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2005-06 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. M/s. Pricewaterhouse Coopers Pvt. Ltd. Circle-…

DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai vs. Export Credit Guarangee Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 6495/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6495/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) D.C.I.T., Circle 3(1) M/S. Export Credit बनाम/ Room No.607, Guarantee Corporation Of Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, India Ltd. Mumbai - 400020 5Th Floor, Nirmal Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaace0296K

For Appellant: Shri S. VenkatramanFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 40A(9)Section 44

…e but has granted depreciation. The said addition has been deleted by the CIT(A) as revenue expenditure. Before us, the Ld. Counsel relied upon the following decisions:- i CIT v Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. 347 ITR 329 (Del) ii CIT v Amway India Enterprises 346 ITR 341 (Del) iii CIT v Raychem RPG Ltd. 347 ITR 138 (Bom) 12. After considering the rival contentions, we agree with the finding given by the CIT(A), because here is this case, the expenditure has been incurred on antivirus software which is used in the operating system of the computer which in turn is for running of the business more efficiently. No ca…

DCIT 1(1), Mumbai vs. Clariant Chemicals (India) Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4804/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Sanjay Garg, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3902/Mum/2013 (यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Clariant Chemicals (India) Ltd, बनाम/ Addl. Commissioner Of Income P O Sandoz Baug, Tax, Range 1(1), Vs. Kolshet Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Thane -400607 M K Road, Mumbai. (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Salman KhanFor Respondent: S/Shri F V Irani and R P Acharya
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण “सी” न्यायऩीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ C ” BENCH, MUMBAI सर्वश्री संजय गगव, न्याययक सदस्य एवुं श्री राजेश क मार, ऱेखा सदस्य के समऺ । BEFORE HON’BLE S/SHRI SANJAY GARG, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3902/Mum/2013 (यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Clariant Chemicals (India) Ltd, बनाम/ Addl. Commissioner of Income P O Sandoz Baug, Tax, Range 1(1), Vs. Kolshet Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Thane -400607 M K Road, Mumbai. (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4804/Mum/2013 (यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) D…

Clariant Chemicals (India) Ltd, Thane vs. Addl CIT RG 1(1), Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 3902/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Sanjay Garg, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3902/Mum/2013 (यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Clariant Chemicals (India) Ltd, बनाम/ Addl. Commissioner Of Income P O Sandoz Baug, Tax, Range 1(1), Vs. Kolshet Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Thane -400607 M K Road, Mumbai. (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Salman KhanFor Respondent: S/Shri F V Irani and R P Acharya
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण “सी” न्यायऩीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ C ” BENCH, MUMBAI सर्वश्री संजय गगव, न्याययक सदस्य एवुं श्री राजेश क मार, ऱेखा सदस्य के समऺ । BEFORE HON’BLE S/SHRI SANJAY GARG, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3902/Mum/2013 (यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Clariant Chemicals (India) Ltd, बनाम/ Addl. Commissioner of Income P O Sandoz Baug, Tax, Range 1(1), Vs. Kolshet Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Thane -400607 M K Road, Mumbai. (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4804/Mum/2013 (यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) D…

DCIT Cir 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Siro Clinpharm P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 1493/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2016AY 2010-11
Section 144Section 14ASection 92C(3)

…the agreements were perused by the DRP and then they came to this conclusion about the expenditure being in the nature of annual licencing fees. The DRP also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Amway Enterprises [(2012) 346 ITR 341 (Del)]. The Assessing Officer is not satisfied and is in appeal before us. I.T.A. Nos. 1269 amd 1493/Mum/2015 Assessment year: 2010-11 Page 7 of 7 17. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of the applicable legal position. 18. We find that once it is not in dispute…

Siro Clinpharm P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 3(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 1269/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2016AY 2010-11
Section 144Section 14ASection 92C(3)

…the agreements were perused by the DRP and then they came to this conclusion about the expenditure being in the nature of annual licencing fees. The DRP also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Amway Enterprises [(2012) 346 ITR 341 (Del)]. The Assessing Officer is not satisfied and is in appeal before us. I.T.A. Nos. 1269 amd 1493/Mum/2015 Assessment year: 2010-11 Page 7 of 7 17. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of the applicable legal position. 18. We find that once it is not in dispute…

Addl CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai vs. Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, revenue’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes whereas the CO of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1971/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Respondent: Shri S Venkatraman
Section 143(3)Section 40A(9)Section 44

…e but has granted depreciation. The said addition has been deleted by the CIT(A) as revenue expenditure. Before us, the Ld. Counsel relied upon the following decisions :- i CIT v Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. 347 ITR 329 (Del) ii CIT v Amway India Enterprises 346 ITR 341 (Del) iii CIT v Raychem RPG Ltd. 347 ITR 138 (Bom) 12. After considering the rival contentions, we agree with the finding given by the CIT(A), because here in this case, the expenditure has been incurred on antivirus software which is used in the operating system of the computer which in turn is for running of the business more efficiently. No ca…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ge Capital Business Process Management Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2124/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha, CIT/DR
Section 32Section 37

…s placed on the following decisions : (i). CIT vs. Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. 203 Taxman 277 (Del.) (ii). SLP(C)CC No. 10108/2012 CIT vs. M/s. Asahi Safety Glass Ltd. (iii). Empire Jute Company vs. CIT, 124 ITR 1 (SC) (iv). CIT vs. Amway India Enterprises, 346 ITR 341 (Del.) (v). CIT vs. IAEC (Pumps) Ltd., 232 ITR 316 (SC) (vi). DCIT vs. Eicher Motors Ltd., 53 Taxman 317 (Delhi Tri.) (vii). CIT vs. Modi Revlon (P) Ltd., 26 Taxman.com 133 (Del.) (viii). CIT vs. G4S Securities System (India) Ltd., 338 ITR 46 (Del) He also contended that the learned CIT(A) in the subsequent assessment years 2008-09, 2010-11 and 2…

CIT vs. Bharti Infotel Ltd

ITA - 387 / 2012HC Delhi03 Feb 2015
Section 35A

…Enterprises v. DCIT, to hold that there has to be further determination of an application of the functional test, and that the expenditure claimed should not be processed only on whether it is capital expenditure. In CIT v. Amway India Enterprises (2012) 346 ITR 341 (Delhi), it was held as follows: - “the first issue being: the treatment to be accorded to expenditure incurred by the assessee on purchase of software applications. These applications being : MS office software, antivirus software, Lotus notes software and message 2015:DHC:1097-DB ITA Nos.1110/2011, 386/2012, 387/2012 & 193/2013 Page…

CIT vs. Bharti Infotel Ltd

ITA - 386 / 2012HC Delhi03 Feb 2015
Section 35A

…Enterprises v. DCIT, to hold that there has to be further determination of an application of the functional test, and that the expenditure claimed should not be processed only on whether it is capital expenditure. In CIT v. Amway India Enterprises (2012) 346 ITR 341 (Delhi), it was held as follows: - “the first issue being: the treatment to be accorded to expenditure incurred by the assessee on purchase of software applications. These applications being : MS office software, antivirus software, Lotus notes software and message 2015:DHC:1097-DB ITA Nos.1110/2011, 386/2012, 387/2012 & 193/2013 Page…

CIT vs. Bharti Telenet Ltd

ITA - 1110 / 2011HC Delhi03 Feb 2015
Section 35A

…Enterprises v. DCIT, to hold that there has to be further determination of an application of the functional test, and that the expenditure claimed should not be processed only on whether it is capital expenditure. In CIT v. Amway India Enterprises (2012) 346 ITR 341 (Delhi), it was held as follows: - “the first issue being: the treatment to be accorded to expenditure incurred by the assessee on purchase of software applications. These applications being : MS office software, antivirus software, Lotus notes software and message 2015:DHC:1097-DB ITA Nos.1110/2011, 386/2012, 387/2012 & 193/2013 Page…