CIT v. Dharampal Satyapal Sons (P.) Ltd.

50 DTR 287Reported decision2011#9825 most cited

What is CIT v. Dharampal Satyapal Sons (P.) Ltd. authority for?

Amounts paid by an assessee under protest against a statutory duty demand are allowable as a deduction under Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as they represent a statutory liability deductible on a payment basis.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Dharampal Satyapal Sons (P.) Ltd. · Section 43B · statutory liability · excise duty · customs duty · sales tax · deduction on payment basis · paid under protest

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 133(6) of Income Tax ActSection 135 of Companies ActSection 143(3) of Income Tax ActSection 1908Section 1963Section 2013Section 263 of Income Tax Act

Issues it is cited on

proximate nexussection 10(35)dependent agent peservice pesection 135csr expenditureweighted deductionsection 35(2ab)section 145asection 10(34)transactional net margin methodsection 40(a)(i)

Judgments citing CIT v. Dharampal Satyapal Sons (P.) Ltd.

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 901/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Spl. Counsel for the Department
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 32Section 35Section 43B

…th regard to Ground Nos.3.10 & 3.11 in AYs 2012-13 & 2013-14 regarding Customs Duty/ Sales Tax/ Excise Duty paid under protest, we observe that this issue is covered by order of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Dharampal Satyapal Sons (P.) Ltd : 50 DTR 287. We further observe that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the order of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in assessee’s own case for AY 1999-00 in ITA No.250/2005 since the Hon’ble Court had allowed deduction for the duty amount which has been paid directly to the custom authorities. Further this issue is also decided by the ITAT in favour…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1024/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Spl. Counsel for the Department
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 32Section 35Section 43B

…th regard to Ground Nos.3.10 & 3.11 in AYs 2012-13 & 2013-14 regarding Customs Duty/ Sales Tax/ Excise Duty paid under protest, we observe that this issue is covered by order of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Dharampal Satyapal Sons (P.) Ltd : 50 DTR 287. We further observe that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the order of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in assessee’s own case for AY 1999-00 in ITA No.250/2005 since the Hon’ble Court had allowed deduction for the duty amount which has been paid directly to the custom authorities. Further this issue is also decided by the ITAT in favour…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 4 Delhi vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/323/2025HC Delhi21 Aug 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 154Section 260A

…ITA 321/2025 and ITA 323/2025 Page 1 of 21 $~107 and 108 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 21.08.2025 + ITA 321/2025 + ITA 323/2025 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4 DELHI .....Appellant Through: Mr Abhishek Maratha, SSC, Mr Apoorv Aggarwal, JSC, Ms Nupur Sharma, Mr Gaurav Singh, Mr Bhanukaran Singh Jodha, Ms Muskan Goel, Mr Himanshu Gaur and…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 4 Delhi vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/321/2025HC Delhi21 Aug 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 154Section 260A

…ITA 321/2025 and ITA 323/2025 Page 1 of 21 $~107 and 108 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 21.08.2025 + ITA 321/2025 + ITA 323/2025 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4 DELHI .....Appellant Through: Mr Abhishek Maratha, SSC, Mr Apoorv Aggarwal, JSC, Ms Nupur Sharma, Mr Gaurav Singh, Mr Bhanukaran Singh Jodha, Ms Muskan Goel, Mr Himanshu Gaur and…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Thane, Ashar It Part, Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane West vs. Mahyco Monsanto Biotech (India) Private Limited, Sandozbaugh So Thane

ITA 3325/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 143(3)Section 43B

…the Tribunal has held in assessee's own case that, since the duty has been paid, deduction claimed under section 43B of the Act has to be allowed. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Dharampal Satyapal Sons (P.) Ltd. 50 DTR 287 wherein 528 49 by the assessee against excise duty demand raised by excise authorities was allowable deduction as it was statutory liability which was allowable on payment basis under section 43B of the Act. Similarly, the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Euro RSCG Advertising (P) Ltd v. ACIT [2013] 154 TTJ 389 (Mum) held that service t…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4081/DEL/2010[2003-04]Status: PendingITAT Delhi12 Mar 2024AY 2003-04

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR

…the Tribunal has held in assessee’s own case that, since the duty has been paid, deduction claimed under section 43B of the Act has to be allowed. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Dharampal Satyapal Sons (P.) Ltd. 50 DTR 287 wherein 528 49 ITA No. 467/Del/2014 the High Court has held that amount paid by the assessee against excise duty demand raised by excise authorities was allowable deduction as it was statutory liability which was allowable on payment basis under section 43B of the Act. Similarly, the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Euro RSCG Advertisin…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 961/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri G.C.Srivastava, Adv., Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Date Of Hearing 11.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2023

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

…contesting the validity and levy of such duties. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue is squarely decided in favour of the assessee by the judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Dharampal Satyapal & Sons (P.) Ltd. [2011] 50 DTR 287 and the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Euro RSCG Advertising (P) Ltd. v. ACIT: [2013] 154 TTJ 389 (Mum). He contended that the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AYs 1999-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002- 03, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 has decided in favour of the assessee. F…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1507/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri G.C.Srivastava, Adv., Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Date Of Hearing 11.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2023

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

…contesting the validity and levy of such duties. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue is squarely decided in favour of the assessee by the judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Dharampal Satyapal & Sons (P.) Ltd. [2011] 50 DTR 287 and the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Euro RSCG Advertising (P) Ltd. v. ACIT: [2013] 154 TTJ 389 (Mum). He contended that the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AYs 1999-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002- 03, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 has decided in favour of the assessee. F…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 467/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 467/Del/2014 (A.Y 2009-10)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

…the Tribunal has held in assessee’s own case that, since the duty has been paid, deduction claimed under section 43B of the Act has to be allowed. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Dharampal Satyapal Sons (P.) Ltd. 50 DTR 287 wherein 49 the High Court has held that amount paid by the assessee against excise duty demand raised by excise authorities was allowable deduction as it was statutory liability which was allowable on payment basis under section 43B of the Act. Similarly, the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Euro RSCG Advertising (P) Ltd v. ACIT [2013…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purposes

ITA 6021/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri K.N. Charry

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35DSection 43BSection 92C

…made irrespective of the fact that such demand was paid under protest and the matter was subjudice before the authorities. He further submitted that in similar circumstances the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Dharampal Satyapal Sons (P.) Ltd.: 50 DTR 287, held that the amount paid by the assessee against excise duty demand raised by excise authorities was allowable deduction as it was statutory liability which was allowable on payment basis under section 43B of the Act, and also submitted that in assessee’s own case for A.Y’s 1999-00, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08, coordi…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5720/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs. Additional Cit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Range-6, Vasant Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacm0829Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Neeraj Jain, Rohit Jain, Adv. Romit Katyal & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Cas Department By:Shri Amrendra Kumar, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. NeerajFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT(DR)

…ed to the P&L A/c. The Tribunal has held that, since the duty is paid, deduction claimed u/s 43B of the Act has to be allowed. Your Honour’s kind attention is invited to the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Dharampal Satyapal Sons (P.) Ltd.: 50 DTR 287, wherein the High Court has held that amount paid by the assessee against excise duty demand raised by excise authorities was allowable deduction as it was statutory liability which was allowable on payment basis under section 43B of the Act. 58 Similarly, the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Euro RSCG Advertising (P) Ltd v. ACIT : [20…

CIT v. Dharampal Satyapal Sons (P.) Ltd. (50 DTR 287) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax