What is CIT v. Cosmo Films Ltd. authority for?

A transaction involving the sale and lease-back of assets is not considered a colourable device if the assessee derives substantial benefit and manages its tax affairs to attract a lesser tax as permitted by law.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Cosmo Films Ltd.?

35 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Cosmo Films Ltd. (12 Taxmann.com 217), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Cosmo Films Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 10(15), Section 10(23G), Section 10(34), Section 10(35), Section 115JB, Section 14A.

CIT v. Cosmo Films Ltd. (12 Taxmann.com 217)

DCIT-5(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Vodafone Idea Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2987/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…ction. The ld.AR for the assessee had relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT vs. George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. [2004] 265 ITR 626 (Gauhati High Court) and in the case of Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Cosmo Films Ltd. [2011] 338 ITR 266 (Delhi High Court), wherein it was held that the assessee can manage its tax affairs to attract a lesser tax as permitted by law and where the assets have been sold and leased back the same cannot be categorized as a colourable device, where the assessee has got substantial benefit by selling and leasing. The relevant extract of the said decision…

Vodafone Idea Limited (Formerly Idea Cellular Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2150/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…ction. The ld.AR for the assessee had relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT vs. George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. [2004] 265 ITR 626 (Gauhati High Court) and in the case of Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Cosmo Films Ltd. [2011] 338 ITR 266 (Delhi High Court), wherein it was held that the assessee can manage its tax affairs to attract a lesser tax as permitted by law and where the assets have been sold and leased back the same cannot be categorized as a colourable device, where the assessee has got substantial benefit by selling and leasing. The relevant extract of the said decision…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Idea Cellular Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2179/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…ction. The ld.AR for the assessee had relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT vs. George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. [2004] 265 ITR 626 (Gauhati High Court) and in the case of Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Cosmo Films Ltd. [2011] 338 ITR 266 (Delhi High Court), wherein it was held that the assessee can manage its tax affairs to attract a lesser tax as permitted by law and where the assets have been sold and leased back the same cannot be categorized as a colourable device, where the assessee has got substantial benefit by selling and leasing. The relevant extract of the said decision…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Idea Cellular Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2178/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…ction. The ld.AR for the assessee had relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT vs. George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. [2004] 265 ITR 626 (Gauhati High Court) and in the case of Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Cosmo Films Ltd. [2011] 338 ITR 266 (Delhi High Court), wherein it was held that the assessee can manage its tax affairs to attract a lesser tax as permitted by law and where the assets have been sold and leased back the same cannot be categorized as a colourable device, where the assessee has got substantial benefit by selling and leasing. The relevant extract of the said decision…

Idea Cellular Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 1777/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…ction. The ld.AR for the assessee had relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT vs. George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. [2004] 265 ITR 626 (Gauhati High Court) and in the case of Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Cosmo Films Ltd. [2011] 338 ITR 266 (Delhi High Court), wherein it was held that the assessee can manage its tax affairs to attract a lesser tax as permitted by law and where the assets have been sold and leased back the same cannot be categorized as a colourable device, where the assessee has got substantial benefit by selling and leasing. The relevant extract of the said decision…

Idea Cellular Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 1775/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…ction. The ld.AR for the assessee had relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT vs. George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. [2004] 265 ITR 626 (Gauhati High Court) and in the case of Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Cosmo Films Ltd. [2011] 338 ITR 266 (Delhi High Court), wherein it was held that the assessee can manage its tax affairs to attract a lesser tax as permitted by law and where the assets have been sold and leased back the same cannot be categorized as a colourable device, where the assessee has got substantial benefit by selling and leasing. The relevant extract of the said decision…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Idea Cellular Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 5945/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…ction. The ld.AR for the assessee had relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT vs. George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. [2004] 265 ITR 626 (Gauhati High Court) and in the case of Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Cosmo Films Ltd. [2011] 338 ITR 266 (Delhi High Court), wherein it was held that the assessee can manage its tax affairs to attract a lesser tax as permitted by law and where the assets have been sold and leased back the same cannot be categorized as a colourable device, where the assessee has got substantial benefit by selling and leasing. The relevant extract of the said decision…

Idea Cellular Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Hq (Judl.) to CIT-14, Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 5765/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am

Section 194Section 250Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

…ction. The ld.AR for the assessee had relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT vs. George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. [2004] 265 ITR 626 (Gauhati High Court) and in the case of Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Cosmo Films Ltd. [2011] 338 ITR 266 (Delhi High Court), wherein it was held that the assessee can manage its tax affairs to attract a lesser tax as permitted by law and where the assets have been sold and leased back the same cannot be categorized as a colourable device, where the assessee has got substantial benefit by selling and leasing. The relevant extract of the said decision…

D.C.I.T., Circle 3(1), Mumbai vs. Icici Bank Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue in I

ITA 5792/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Arati Vissanji, A/RFor Respondent: Mr. P.C. Chhotoray, Spl. Counsel, [D/R]

Section 10Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…und that the Tribunal in assessee’s own case has allowed the claim of depreciation for AY 1995-96 in 115 ITD 25 for A.Y. 1995-96. Following the precedents and also drawing support from the decisions of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cosmos Films (338 ITR 266) and further following the order of his I.T.A. No. 5792/Mum/2013 I.T.A. No. 5396/Mum/2013 12 predecessor for AY 2005-06, directed the AO to allow the depreciation on leased assets. 17. Before us, the ld. D/R strongly supported the findings of the AO but could not bring any distinguishing decisions in favour of the revenue. Per contra, the ld. C…

Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue in I

ITA 5396/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Arati Vissanji, A/RFor Respondent: Mr. P.C. Chhotoray, Spl. Counsel, [D/R]

Section 10Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…und that the Tribunal in assessee’s own case has allowed the claim of depreciation for AY 1995-96 in 115 ITD 25 for A.Y. 1995-96. Following the precedents and also drawing support from the decisions of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cosmos Films (338 ITR 266) and further following the order of his I.T.A. No. 5792/Mum/2013 I.T.A. No. 5396/Mum/2013 12 predecessor for AY 2005-06, directed the AO to allow the depreciation on leased assets. 17. Before us, the ld. D/R strongly supported the findings of the AO but could not bring any distinguishing decisions in favour of the revenue. Per contra, the ld. C…

Sbi Capital Markets Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result the, all the appeals of the assesse are partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1511/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2023AY 2005-06