CIT v. Citi Financial Consumer Fin. Limited

330 ITR 29Reported decision#20539 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2021.

Judgments citing CIT v. Citi Financial Consumer Fin. Limited

M/S Oref Securities Private Ltd., Mandsaur vs. Income Tax Officer, Indore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 70/IND/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms.Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.70/Ind/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-14 Vs. Ito, Mandsaur. M/S.Oref Securities P.Ltd. 69, Agrasen Nagar B/H. Mid India Mandsaur.

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Solanki, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajib Jain, CIT-DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ, - इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE, INDORE BENCH BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS.MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.70/Ind/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-14 Vs. ITO, Mandsaur. M/s.OREF Securities P.Ltd. 69, Agrasen Nagar B/h. MID India Mandsaur. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri Rajib Jain, CIT-DR Assessee by : Shri S. S. Solanki, CA सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 19/08/2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 17/11/2021 आदेश/O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMEBR:…

M/S.. Synthes Medical Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals for assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6006/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. O.P. Kant

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32(1)Section 37(1)

…ted in 374 ITR 30 (Del) to submit that expenditure incurred on sales promotion is revenue expenditure. It was contended that there is no concept of deferred revenue expenditure under the Act as held in the case of CIT Vs. Citi Financial Consumer Fin. Limited, 330 ITR 29. 5.2 On the contrary, the Ld. Senior DR submitted that the assessee has not furnished the details of expenditure incurred and failed to establish the nexus of expenditure incurred with the business of the assessee and therefore, in such circumstances the Ld. CIT-A was justified in restricting the claim of expenditure to the extent of 50%. 5.3 Havi…

M/S.. Synthes Medical Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals for assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6005/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. O.P. Kant

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32(1)Section 37(1)

…ted in 374 ITR 30 (Del) to submit that expenditure incurred on sales promotion is revenue expenditure. It was contended that there is no concept of deferred revenue expenditure under the Act as held in the case of CIT Vs. Citi Financial Consumer Fin. Limited, 330 ITR 29. 5.2 On the contrary, the Ld. Senior DR submitted that the assessee has not furnished the details of expenditure incurred and failed to establish the nexus of expenditure incurred with the business of the assessee and therefore, in such circumstances the Ld. CIT-A was justified in restricting the claim of expenditure to the extent of 50%. 5.3 Havi…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Synthes Medical Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals for assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5807/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. O.P. Kant

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32(1)Section 37(1)

…ted in 374 ITR 30 (Del) to submit that expenditure incurred on sales promotion is revenue expenditure. It was contended that there is no concept of deferred revenue expenditure under the Act as held in the case of CIT Vs. Citi Financial Consumer Fin. Limited, 330 ITR 29. 5.2 On the contrary, the Ld. Senior DR submitted that the assessee has not furnished the details of expenditure incurred and failed to establish the nexus of expenditure incurred with the business of the assessee and therefore, in such circumstances the Ld. CIT-A was justified in restricting the claim of expenditure to the extent of 50%. 5.3 Havi…

CIT v. Citi Financial Consumer Fin. Limited (330 ITR 29) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax