CIT v. Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Co. Ltd.

DCIT 7(3), MUMBAI vs. WYETH LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS WYETH LEDERLE LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blepfizer Limited V. Acit- Special Range 23 (Earlier Known As Wyeth Lederle Limited) [Now The Dcit-Circle 7(3)] The Capital, G-Block Aayakar Bhavan Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai- 400020 Bandra (E), Mumbai -400012 Pan: Aaacp3334M (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit- Ltu V. M/S. Wyeth Limited 28Th Floor, Centre - 1 (Formerly Known As Wyeth Lederle Ltd) Rbc Mahindra Towers World Trade Centre 4Th Floor, A- Wing Cuffe Parade, Mumbai Dr G.M. Bhosale Road Worli, Mumbai- 400055 Pan: Aaacw2641Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vishal Kalra Department Represented By : Smt. Sujatha Iyangar

…esaid amalgamation be allowed as a revenue deduction 34. In support of the above contentions, Ld. AR relied on the following case laws: - “Cases wherein legal and professional fees are allowable as revenue expenditure i. CIT vs Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd: 219 ITR 521 (SC) ii. CIT Vs. Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. (135ITR 306) (Mad) iii. Madras Race Club Vs. CIT (151 ITR 675) (Mad) iv. Akme Electronics & Control (P) Ltd. (36 ITD 102) (Ahmedabad) 35. On the other hand, Ld.DR relied on the order of the lower authorities. 36. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe that the as…

SOLARFIELD ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-2(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.755/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Solarfield Energy Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Acit, Circle-2(3)(2) 21, 3Rd Floor, Sethi Mansion Aayakar Bhavan, Maharashi Vs. Kumtha Street, Ballard Karve Marg, Mumbai- Estate, Mumbai-400038. 400020. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaocs4380A (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Vijay Mehta Revenue By: Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 16/07/2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/07/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 18.12.2017 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -6, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2014- 15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

…of the assessee has placed reliance upon the law settled by the Supreme Court titled as Sugar Factory and oil Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (125 ITR 293) and Lakshmiji Sugar Mills Co. P. Ltd. Vs. CIT (82 ITR 376) and CIT Vs. Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (219 ITR 521) and CIT Vs. Coats Viyella India Ltd. (253 ITR 667) and CIT Vs. Excel Industries Ltd. (122 ITR 995). However, on the other hand, the Ld. Representative of the Department has refuted the said contention. The factual position is not in dispute in which the assessee obtained the land on lease and licence from the Gujarat Power Corporation Ltd. and h…

TATA MOTORS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Pradhan

…been considered by the Assessing Officer. Further, he submitted, the deduction claimed by the assessee is allowable as revenue expenditure. In this context, he relied upon the following decisions:– i) CIT v/s Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Co. Ltd., [1996] 219 ITR 521 (SC); and 12 Tata Motors Ltd. ii) NYK Line (India) Ltd. v/s ACIT, ITA no.8549/Mum./2011, dated 23.09.2015; 25. We have considered rival submissions and perused material on record. In our view, the departmental authorities were not justified in rejecting assessee’s claim purely on the technical ground of having not raised such claim in the return…

CREDIT AGRICOLE CORPORATE AND INVESTMENT BANK (FORMERLY CALYON BANK, ERSTWHILE CREDIT AGRICOLE INDOSUEZ,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT (IT) RG 1, MUMBAI

The appeal of the AO is dismissed

…assessee, that the expenditure incurred by it had been debited under various heads in the profit and loss account and was claimed as deduction in view of the judgment of the honorable Supreme Court in the case of Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Company Ltd. (219 ITR 521).The AO held that the expenses were deductible in accordance with the provisions of section 35DD of the Act. Accordingly,he allowed the deduction only 50% of the prorated expenses , as the documentary evidences or not furnished in support of the claim.Vide its application dated 29/12/2010, the assessee filed additional evidence before the FAA, wh…

MAANRAJ TRADING P. LTD ( UNDERLIQUIDATION),MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 6(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed, appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadita No. 3414/Mum/2009 : (A.Y : 2005-06) M/S Maanraj Trading Pvt. Ltd Vs. Acit Cir 6(3) Poonam Chambers, 101E, 1St Floor Aayakar Bhavan Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli M.K.Road Mumbai – 400 018 New Marine Lines Pan : Aaacm0150 Mumbai – 400 020

…expenses should be allowed as deduction u/s 35DD of the Act or in the alternative, if not u/s 35DD, they should be allowed as revenue expenditure, in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bombay Dyeing Manufacturing Company Ltd.[219 ITR 521], wherein, it was held that expenditure incurred towards provisional charges of the solicitors firm for the services rendered in connection with the amalgamation was in the course of carrying on all Assessee’s business, therefore, deductible as revenue expenditure. 15. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities be…