CIT v. Arawali Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd.

259 ITR 30High Court2003#2708 most cited

What is CIT v. Arawali Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Expenditure incurred for the acquisition, development, or purchase of computer software is classified as capital expenditure, not revenue expenditure.

43

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2023.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Arawali Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. · 259 ITR 30 · computer software expenditure · software acquisition · software development · capital expenditure · revenue expenditure · classification of expenditure · business deductions · Rajasthan High Court

Issues it is cited on

related party transactioncomputer softwareput to usesection 36(1)(vii)comparable companiesmost appropriate methodarm's length pricesection 92carevenue expenditurecapital expendituretransfer pricing adjustmenttnmm

Judgments citing CIT v. Arawali Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd.

DCIT, Cir-22, Kolkata vs. M/S. Lovelock & Lewes, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for A

ITA 1020/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri A.T. Varkey

Section 143(3)

…quired to be decided by applying a functional test and onus in this regard was on the assessee-company, which it failed to discharge. He relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Arawali Construction Co. Pvt. Limited [259 ITR 30], wherein it was held that the expenditure incurred by the assessee on acquiring computer software was rightly disallowed being expenditure of capital nature. Assessment Years: 2007-2008 & 2010-2011 M/s. Lovelock & Lewes 30. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, submitted that the assessee engaged in the profession of Chartered A…

Asst CIT 11(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Total Lubricants India Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands partly allowed

ITA 898/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

For Appellant: Shri V. Justin
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…ature. 2 M/s. Total Lubricants India Ltd. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Arawali Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd.(259 ITR 30) wherein the Hon'ble High Court observed that acquisition of computer software is akin to acquisition of technical know-how. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the penalty imposed in respect of the disallowance of advertisement expenses, and interest paid to HDFC on behalf of its emplo…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-7 vs. M/S Rmsi Private Limited

ITA/104/2018HC Delhi31 Jan 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

Section 10(9)Section 10A

…that the expenditure was revenue in nature. In support of this argument, the Revenue relies ITA Nos.103/2018 & 104/2018 Page 1 of 3 upon a judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Aravalli Construction Company 259 ITR 30. On the other hand, the ITAT held that for the past years in 1996-97 and 1997-98 relief had been given to the assessee. During that period, the rationale followed was that in the field of computer softwares new devices and user friendly concepts were developed and introduced which needed to be upgraded. This Court sees no infirmity in the…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-7 vs. M/S Rmsi Private Limited

ITA/103/2018HC Delhi31 Jan 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

Section 10(9)Section 10A

…that the expenditure was revenue in nature. In support of this argument, the Revenue relies ITA Nos.103/2018 & 104/2018 Page 1 of 3 upon a judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Aravalli Construction Company 259 ITR 30. On the other hand, the ITAT held that for the past years in 1996-97 and 1997-98 relief had been given to the assessee. During that period, the rationale followed was that in the field of computer softwares new devices and user friendly concepts were developed and introduced which needed to be upgraded. This Court sees no infirmity in the…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Kasturi & Sons Limited, Chennai

In the result, all the Revenue’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2252/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Jeyakumar, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 148

…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 "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1617, 1618, 1619/Mds/2014 & 2106/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 to 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s Kasturi and Sons Ltd., C/o M/s Subbaraya Aiyar The Deputy Commissioner of Padmanabhan & Ramamani v. Income Tax, Company Circle II(4) / Advocates, Corporate Circle 4(24), New No.75A (Old No.105A), Chenna…

Kasturi and Sons Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, all the Revenue’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2106/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Jeyakumar, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 148

…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 "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1617, 1618, 1619/Mds/2014 & 2106/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 to 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s Kasturi and Sons Ltd., C/o M/s Subbaraya Aiyar The Deputy Commissioner of Padmanabhan & Ramamani v. Income Tax, Company Circle II(4) / Advocates, Corporate Circle 4(24), New No.75A (Old No.105A), Chenna…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Kasturi and Sons Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the Revenue’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2015/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Jeyakumar, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 148

…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 "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1617, 1618, 1619/Mds/2014 & 2106/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 to 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s Kasturi and Sons Ltd., C/o M/s Subbaraya Aiyar The Deputy Commissioner of Padmanabhan & Ramamani v. Income Tax, Company Circle II(4) / Advocates, Corporate Circle 4(24), New No.75A (Old No.105A), Chenna…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Kasturi and Sons Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the Revenue’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2014/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Jeyakumar, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 148

…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 "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1617, 1618, 1619/Mds/2014 & 2106/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 to 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s Kasturi and Sons Ltd., C/o M/s Subbaraya Aiyar The Deputy Commissioner of Padmanabhan & Ramamani v. Income Tax, Company Circle II(4) / Advocates, Corporate Circle 4(24), New No.75A (Old No.105A), Chenna…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Kasturi and Sons Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the Revenue’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2013/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Jeyakumar, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 148

…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 "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1617, 1618, 1619/Mds/2014 & 2106/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 to 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s Kasturi and Sons Ltd., C/o M/s Subbaraya Aiyar The Deputy Commissioner of Padmanabhan & Ramamani v. Income Tax, Company Circle II(4) / Advocates, Corporate Circle 4(24), New No.75A (Old No.105A), Chenna…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Kasturi and Sons Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the Revenue’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2012/CHNY/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Jeyakumar, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 148

…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 "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1617, 1618, 1619/Mds/2014 & 2106/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 to 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s Kasturi and Sons Ltd., C/o M/s Subbaraya Aiyar The Deputy Commissioner of Padmanabhan & Ramamani v. Income Tax, Company Circle II(4) / Advocates, Corporate Circle 4(24), New No.75A (Old No.105A), Chenna…

Kasturi and Sons Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, all the Revenue’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1619/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Jeyakumar, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 148

…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 "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1617, 1618, 1619/Mds/2014 & 2106/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 to 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s Kasturi and Sons Ltd., C/o M/s Subbaraya Aiyar The Deputy Commissioner of Padmanabhan & Ramamani v. Income Tax, Company Circle II(4) / Advocates, Corporate Circle 4(24), New No.75A (Old No.105A), Chenna…

Kasturi and Sons Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, all the Revenue’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1618/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Jeyakumar, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 148

…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 "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1617, 1618, 1619/Mds/2014 & 2106/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 to 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s Kasturi and Sons Ltd., C/o M/s Subbaraya Aiyar The Deputy Commissioner of Padmanabhan & Ramamani v. Income Tax, Company Circle II(4) / Advocates, Corporate Circle 4(24), New No.75A (Old No.105A), Chenna…

Kasturi and Sons Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, all the Revenue’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1617/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Jeyakumar, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 148

…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 "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1617, 1618, 1619/Mds/2014 & 2106/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 to 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s Kasturi and Sons Ltd., C/o M/s Subbaraya Aiyar The Deputy Commissioner of Padmanabhan & Ramamani v. Income Tax, Company Circle II(4) / Advocates, Corporate Circle 4(24), New No.75A (Old No.105A), Chenna…

Kasturi and Sons Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, all the Revenue’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1616/CHNY/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Jeyakumar, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 148

…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 "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1617, 1618, 1619/Mds/2014 & 2106/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 to 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s Kasturi and Sons Ltd., C/o M/s Subbaraya Aiyar The Deputy Commissioner of Padmanabhan & Ramamani v. Income Tax, Company Circle II(4) / Advocates, Corporate Circle 4(24), New No.75A (Old No.105A), Chenna…

Kasturi and Sons Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, all the Revenue’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1615/CHNY/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Jeyakumar, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 148

…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 "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1617, 1618, 1619/Mds/2014 & 2106/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 to 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s Kasturi and Sons Ltd., C/o M/s Subbaraya Aiyar The Deputy Commissioner of Padmanabhan & Ramamani v. Income Tax, Company Circle II(4) / Advocates, Corporate Circle 4(24), New No.75A (Old No.105A), Chenna…

Kasturi and Sons Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, all the Revenue’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1614/CHNY/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Jeyakumar, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 148

…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 "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1617, 1618, 1619/Mds/2014 & 2106/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 to 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s Kasturi and Sons Ltd., C/o M/s Subbaraya Aiyar The Deputy Commissioner of Padmanabhan & Ramamani v. Income Tax, Company Circle II(4) / Advocates, Corporate Circle 4(24), New No.75A (Old No.105A), Chenna…

Kasturi and Sons Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, all the Revenue’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1613/CHNY/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Jeyakumar, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 148

…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 "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1617, 1618, 1619/Mds/2014 & 2106/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 to 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s Kasturi and Sons Ltd., C/o M/s Subbaraya Aiyar The Deputy Commissioner of Padmanabhan & Ramamani v. Income Tax, Company Circle II(4) / Advocates, Corporate Circle 4(24), New No.75A (Old No.105A), Chenna…

Kasturi and Sons Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, all the Revenue’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1612/CHNY/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Jeyakumar, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 148

…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 "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1617, 1618, 1619/Mds/2014 & 2106/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 to 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s Kasturi and Sons Ltd., C/o M/s Subbaraya Aiyar The Deputy Commissioner of Padmanabhan & Ramamani v. Income Tax, Company Circle II(4) / Advocates, Corporate Circle 4(24), New No.75A (Old No.105A), Chenna…

Kasturi and Sons Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, all the Revenue’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1611/CHNY/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Jeyakumar, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 148

…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 "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616, 1617, 1618, 1619/Mds/2014 & 2106/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 to 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s Kasturi and Sons Ltd., C/o M/s Subbaraya Aiyar The Deputy Commissioner of Padmanabhan & Ramamani v. Income Tax, Company Circle II(4) / Advocates, Corporate Circle 4(24), New No.75A (Old No.105A), Chenna…

Differential Technologies Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5714/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 35DSection 37(1)

…incurred on the software development in the form of developer salary, expenses attributable to the project etc. were capitalized. • These expenses are amortized considering various factors as stated in our earlier submission. • You had quoted us some case law 259 ITR 30 (Aravali construction) and 92 ITR 119 (Maruti Udyog) where these expenses were disallowed. Page 3 of 12 • In this regard we have to state that facts of the above cases were completely different from ours. Whereas in first case payments were made for outright purchase of software in second case disallowed refers to section 43B. • Our claim of expe…