CIT v. Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd.

346 ITR 329High Court2012#799 most cited

What is CIT v. Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. authority for?

Expenses incurred for software license purchase, development of miscellaneous software, and maintenance of websites are considered revenue in nature. Such expenses are deductible in the year they are incurred.

129

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. · 346 ITR 329 · CIT v Asahi · Section 37(1) · revenue expenditure · capital expenditure · software license purchase · software development · website maintenance · business deduction · deductibility of software expenses · computer software expenditure

Also reported as

15 Taxmann.com 382203 Taxmann 277245 CTR 529

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)Section 14ASection 36(2)Section 80HHCSection 2(47)Section 28(iiid)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 35denduring benefitgoing concernsection 80hhccommercial rightssection 80hhcomputer softwarebenchmarking analysiscup methodsection 35section 92ca(3)intangible assets

Judgments citing CIT v. Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd.

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Hughes Communication India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of

ITA 2270/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri F.R. Meena, Sr. DR
Section 41(1)

…High Court in CIT vs. Amway India Enterprises (2012) 346 ITR 341 (Del), has held that expenditure incurred on purchase of application software is allowable as revenue expenditure. Similar view has been taken in CIT vs. Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 329 (Del) by holding that the expenditure incurred by the assessee on software is allowable as revenue expenditure, more so, when it is towards purchase of an application software. When we consider the detail of software expenses incurred by the assessee, it becomes manifest that the same is liable to be treated as a revenue expenditure and not a c…

M/S. Rachitech Engineering P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1661/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Smt. Beena A. Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11 Rachitech Engineering P. Ltd., Vs. Acit, C/O M/S Rra Tax India, Circle-Ii, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, Faridabad. New Delhi. Pan : Aaacr7762F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Somil Agarwal & Shri Deepesh Garg, Advocates Respondent By: Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.08.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.08.2018 Order Per R.S. Syal, Vp: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A) On 27.02.2015 In Relation To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The First Ground Is Against The Confirmation Of Addition Of Rs.6,36,211/- Made Under Proviso To Section 36(1)(Iii) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr.DR
Section 3Section 36(1)(iii)

…hased by the assessee for designing a few specific gear boxes in the crane which were manufactured 5 during the year itself and such software became useless thereafter. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs. Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd., (2012) 346 ITR 329 (Del), has held that an expenditure incurred by the assessee on application software cannot be treated as capital expenditure. As the software purchased by the assessee, for which disallowance has been made, is, admittedly, an application software and not a system software, respectfully following the precedent, we hold that the same should ha…

Oriental Bank of Commerce vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/129/2018HC Delhi17 Apr 2018

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

…ficiency of the bank. Learned counsel relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court reported as Alembic Chemicals Works Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1989) 177 ITR 377 (SC). He also relied upon a Division Bench judgment in CIT v. Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 329. 4. The learned counsel for the revenue urged that the question of law has to be answered in favour of the revenue, firstly because of the concurrent nature of the findings rendered by all the authorities, which were consistently adverse to the assessee. It was secondly urged that the CIT(A) conducted a detailed enquiry as to the nature…

Hdfc Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated hereinabove whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 738/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm M/S. Hdfc Securities Ltd., Vs. Dcit – 4(1) Office Floor 8 Mumbai I-Think Techno Campus Alpha Building, B Kanjurmarg (E) Mumbai – 400 042 Pan/Gir No.Aaach8215R Appellant) Respondent) .. Dcit – 4(1) (1) Vs. M/S. Hdfc Securities Ltd., Mumbai Office Floor 8 I-Think Techno Campus Alpha Building, B Kanjurmarg (E) Mumbai – 400 042 Pan/Gir No. Aaach8215R Appellant) Respondent) .. Assessee By Ms. Krupa R. Gandhi / Shri Vidhi Doshi Revenue By Shri Rajat Mittal

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 194JSection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H ”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM M/s. HDFC Securities Ltd., Vs. DCIT – 4(1) Office Floor 8 Mumbai I-Think Techno Campus Alpha Building, B Kanjurmarg (E) Mumbai – 400 042 PAN/GIR No.AAACH8215R Appellant) Respondent) .. DCIT – 4(1) (1) Vs. M/s. HDFC Securities Ltd., Mumbai Office Floor 8 I-Think Techno Campus Alpha Building, B Kanjurmarg (E) Mumbai – 400 042 PAN/GIR No. AAACH8215R Appellant) Respondent) .. Assessee by Ms. Krupa R. Gandhi / Shri Vidhi Doshi Revenue by Shri Rajat Mittal Date of Hearing 11/04/2018 Date of Pronouncement 16/…

Larsen & Toubro Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 6257/MUM/2011[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2018AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 1999-00 Larsen & Toubro Ltd. Dcit-2(2) Taxation Department L&T Room No. 577, 5Th Vs. House, N.M. Ballard Estate, Floor, Aayakar Mumbai-400001 Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacl0140P Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 1999-00 Dcit-2(2) Larsen & Toubro Ltd. Room No. 577, 5Th Floor, Taxation Department Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. L&T House, N.M. Road Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400001 Pan No. Aaacl0140P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. J.D. Mistry & Mr. Madhur Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Anadi Varma, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 14/02/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2018

For Appellant: Mr. J.D. Mistry &For Respondent: Mr. Anadi Varma, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 145A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 1999-00 Larsen & Toubro Ltd. DCIT-2(2) Taxation Department L&T Room No. 577, 5th Vs. House, N.M. Ballard Estate, floor, Aayakar Mumbai-400001 Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAACL0140P Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 1999-00 DCIT-2(2) Larsen & Toubro Ltd. Room No. 577, 5th floor, Taxation Department Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. L&T House, N.M. Road Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400001 PAN No. AAACL0140P Appellant Respondent Asse…

M/S. Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd ( Erstwhile Known As Goodlass Nerolac Paints Ltd), Mumbai vs. The DCIT RG 6(3)

In the result, the appeal for the AY 2005-06 is partly allowed

ITA 212/MUM/2008[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2018AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2004-05 Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd. Dcit, Range 6(3) (Erstwhile Known As Room No. 576, Vs. Goodlass Nerolac Paints Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Nerolac House, G.K. Marg, Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacg1376N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 & Assessment Year: 2006-07 Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd. Addl. Cit, Range 6(2) (Erstwhile Known As Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Vs. Goodlass Nerolac Paints Ltd.) Marg, Nerolac House, G.K. Marg, Mumbai-400020. Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacg1376N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Mrs. Arati Vissanji, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Pooja Swaroop, Dr Date Of Hearing : 02/02/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/03/2018

For Appellant: Mrs. Arati Vissanji, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, DR
Section 143(3)

…-in- office for the AY 2003-04 and upheld the above disallowance made by the AO. 3.3 Before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee relies on the decision in CIT v. Amway India Enterprises (2012) 346 ITR 341 (Delhi) and CIT v. Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 329(Delhi). 3.4 On the other hand, the Ld. DR relies on the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 3.5 We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. In Amway India Enterprises (supra), it has been held that the purchase of software is a revenue expenditure. Kansai Nerolac In Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. (supra) it is held that…

Ilink Multitech Solutions Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai

ITA 1546/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1544, 1545 & 1546/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 37

…expenditure. The Ld. representative has also placed reliance on the judgment of Karnataka High Court in CIT v. IBM India Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 88 3 I.T.A. Nos.1544 to 1546/Mds/17 and judgment of Delhi High Court in CIT v. Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 329. The Ld. representative has also placed his reliance on the judgment of Bombay High Court in CIT v. Kotak Securities Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 349. 4. On the contrary, Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the assessee purchased MS Office software which gave enduring benefit in the business of the assessee. Therefo…

Ilink Multitech Solutions Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai

ITA 1545/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1544, 1545 & 1546/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 37

…expenditure. The Ld. representative has also placed reliance on the judgment of Karnataka High Court in CIT v. IBM India Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 88 3 I.T.A. Nos.1544 to 1546/Mds/17 and judgment of Delhi High Court in CIT v. Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 329. The Ld. representative has also placed his reliance on the judgment of Bombay High Court in CIT v. Kotak Securities Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 349. 4. On the contrary, Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the assessee purchased MS Office software which gave enduring benefit in the business of the assessee. Therefo…

Ilink Multitech Solutions Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai

ITA 1544/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1544, 1545 & 1546/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 37

…expenditure. The Ld. representative has also placed reliance on the judgment of Karnataka High Court in CIT v. IBM India Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 88 3 I.T.A. Nos.1544 to 1546/Mds/17 and judgment of Delhi High Court in CIT v. Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 329. The Ld. representative has also placed his reliance on the judgment of Bombay High Court in CIT v. Kotak Securities Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 349. 4. On the contrary, Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the assessee purchased MS Office software which gave enduring benefit in the business of the assessee. Therefo…

DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Alliance Broad Band Services Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1318/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1318/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Alliance Broad Band Services Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aaeca 3151 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri David Z. Chowngthu, Addl. CIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Datta, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] I.T.A No. 1318/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 DCIT, Circle-11(1), Kolkata -vs- M/s Alliance Broad Band Services Pvt. Ltd. [PAN: AAECA 3151 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri David Z. Chowngthu, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR For the Respondent : Shri S.P. Datta, Advocate Date of Hearing : 21.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 06.12.2017 ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM 1. This appeal by the Revenue arises out of the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -I, Ko…

Empire Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 6(2), Mumbai

Appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 4065/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4065/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Empire Industries Limited Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax Empire House बनाम/ 414, Senapati Bapat Marg Range 6(2) Lower Parel Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Mumbai – 400 013 M.K.Road Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaace-2757-R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: K.K.Ved & N.A.Patade, Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Naveen Gupta, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 69ASection 69C

…nsure smooth / efficient running of assessee’s business:- (i) CIT Vs. Geoffrey Manners & Co. Ltd. [2014 49 taxmann.com 320 Bombay High Court] (ii) CIT Vs. Raychem RPG Ltd. [2011 346 ITR 138 Bombay High Court] (iii) CIT Vs. Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. [2011 245 CTR 529 Delhi High Court] The Ld. DR contended that as the assessee acquired benefit of enduring nature, the same was capital in nature and rightly been allowed depreciation against the same as these expenses were intangible rights in nature. 9. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the cited case laws. We note the following observation of jur…

Bayer Cropscience Ltd, Thane vs. Asst CIT 15(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 2248/MUM/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2017AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.2248/Mum/2015 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) Bayer Cropscience Limited बनाम/ Asst. Commissioner Of Bayer House, Income Tax 15(1)(2) Vs. Central Avenue, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Hiranandani Estate, Mumbai - 400020 Thane(W) - 400607 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacb9651K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) .. (""थ" /Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mayur KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri M. C. Omi Ningshen
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…it is revenue expenditure and the case of the assessee is fairly covered by the law settled in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Raychem RPG Ltd. [2012] 346 ITR 138 Hon’ble Bombay High Court and Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. [2012] 346 ITR 329 Hon’ble Delhi High Court. In view of the said circumstances, we set aside the finding of the CIT(A) on this issue and also the expenditure to the tune of Rs.27,86,230/- is being ITA No.2248.M.15 A.Y. 2002-03 treated as revenue is nature. Accordingly, this issue is decided in favour of the assessee against the revenue. ISSUE NO.1.1:- 5. Under th…

DCIT Cir 7(1) vs. M/S Novartis India Ltd

ITA 5258/MUM/2003[1997 - 98]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2017
For Appellant: S/Shri J.D. Mistry & Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: S/Shri P.R. Ghosh & K.V. Vispute- DR

…आयकर अपीलीय आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई मुंबई “आई आई” खंडपीठ खंडपीठ आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई आई आई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“I”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं सी. एन. "साद, "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and C. N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./5238/Mum/2003 ,िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:1997-1998 आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./6224/Mum/2004 ,िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:1998-1999 आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./6225/Mum/2004 ,िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:1999-2000 Novartis India Ltd. ACIT-Circle-7(1) (Formerly known as Hindustan Ciba Gieg…

Sundaram Fasteners Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1166/CHNY/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Adv

…aim. As per the ld. Authorised Representative, the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the treatment without properly appreciating the facts relying on the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Asahi India Safety Glass (346 ITR 329). The ld. Authorised Representative submitted that the expenditure incurred for acquiring software which did not give enduring benefit could only be considered as Revenue expenditure. Per contra, the ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the 5. authorities below. 6. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the aut…

Sundaram Fasteners Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1165/CHNY/2013[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2016AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Adv

…aim. As per the ld. Authorised Representative, the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the treatment without properly appreciating the facts relying on the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Asahi India Safety Glass (346 ITR 329). The ld. Authorised Representative submitted that the expenditure incurred for acquiring software which did not give enduring benefit could only be considered as Revenue expenditure. Per contra, the ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the 5. authorities below. 6. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the aut…

ACIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Sundaram Fasterners Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 675/CHNY/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Adv

…aim. As per the ld. Authorised Representative, the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the treatment without properly appreciating the facts relying on the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Asahi India Safety Glass (346 ITR 329). The ld. Authorised Representative submitted that the expenditure incurred for acquiring software which did not give enduring benefit could only be considered as Revenue expenditure. Per contra, the ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the 5. authorities below. 6. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the aut…

Sundram Fasteners Limited, Chennai vs. Addl.CIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 591/CHNY/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Adv

…aim. As per the ld. Authorised Representative, the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the treatment without properly appreciating the facts relying on the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Asahi India Safety Glass (346 ITR 329). The ld. Authorised Representative submitted that the expenditure incurred for acquiring software which did not give enduring benefit could only be considered as Revenue expenditure. Per contra, the ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the 5. authorities below. 6. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the aut…

Price Waterhouse Coppers Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Addl C.I.T RG - 2, Kolkata

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

ITA 2033/KOL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jul 2016AY 2003-04

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-…

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

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

ITA 1523/KOL/2013[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jul 2016AY 2005-2006

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-…

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-…