CIT v. Ciba of India Ltd.

69 ITR 69Reported decision1968#25486 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2016.

Judgments citing CIT v. Ciba of India Ltd.

D.C.I.T.RG.8(3), Mumbai vs. Sanofi Synthelabo (I) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7592/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Ashwani Taneja, Am

Section 143(3)

…e financial outlay under the agreement was for the better conduct and improvement of the existing business and should, therefore Be held to the revenue expenditure Reference may also be made to the observations of this court in CIT Vs Ciba of India Ltd [1968] 69 ITR 69. There is also no single definitive criterion which by itself, is determinative as to whether a particular outlay is capital or revenue The ‘once for all’ payment test is also inconclusive What is relevant is the purpose of the outlay and its intended object and effect, considered in a common sense way having regard to the business realities In a g…

D.C.I.T. 8(3), Mumbai vs. Sanofi Syntheabo (India) Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6755/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Ashwani Taneja, Am

Section 143(3)

…e financial outlay under the agreement was for the better conduct and improvement of the existing business and should, therefore Be held to the revenue expenditure Reference may also be made to the observations of this court in CIT Vs Ciba of India Ltd [1968] 69 ITR 69. There is also no single definitive criterion which by itself, is determinative as to whether a particular outlay is capital or revenue The ‘once for all’ payment test is also inconclusive What is relevant is the purpose of the outlay and its intended object and effect, considered in a common sense way having regard to the business realities In a g…

ACIT RG 8(3), Mumbai vs. Sanofi Synthellabo (I) Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6720/MUM/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Ashwani Taneja, Am

Section 143(3)

…e financial outlay under the agreement was for the better conduct and improvement of the existing business and should, therefore Be held to the revenue expenditure Reference may also be made to the observations of this court in CIT Vs Ciba of India Ltd [1968] 69 ITR 69. There is also no single definitive criterion which by itself, is determinative as to whether a particular outlay is capital or revenue The ‘once for all’ payment test is also inconclusive What is relevant is the purpose of the outlay and its intended object and effect, considered in a common sense way having regard to the business realities In a g…

CIT v. Ciba of India Ltd. (69 ITR 69) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax