CIT v. East India Hotels

250 ITR 84High Court#11978 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(35)Section 143(3)Section 143(4)(b)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

Issues it is cited on

section 35denduring benefitput to userevenue expenditurecapital expendituresection 37(1)section 37section 14asection 80previous yeartransfercompany

Judgments citing CIT v. East India Hotels

ADDL CIT LTU, MUMBAI vs. BAJAJ HOLDING & INVESTMENT LTD ( FOREMERLY KNOWN AS BAJAJ AUTO LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 5510/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Renu Jauhri ()

Section 14ASection 80

…tating that the said expenditure should not be allowed as revenue expenditure. During the proceedings before us, Ld AR for assessee relied on various judgments including the jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of Maharashtra Ugine and Steel Co Ltd (250 ITR 84) (Bom). After going through the said judgments, we find that the said jurisdictional High Court judgment relates to allowability of expenditure incurred on payment of Stamp duty for debenture issue and, therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the apex court judgments cited above are relevant and expenses are not allowable as revenue expen…

DCIT RG. - 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4372/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Bajaj Auto Limited V. Dcit – Range – 3(1) Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai – 400021 M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan : Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit – Range – 3(1) V. M/S. Bajaj Auto Limited Room No. 623, 6Th Floor Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point Mumbai – 400021 Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan : Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Ms. Vasanti Patel& Shri Kirit Kamdar Department Represented By : Shri Ankush Kapoor

Section 143(4)(b)Section 234Section 35Section 35DSection 37(1)Section 40

…tating that the said expenditure should not be allowed as revenue expenditure. During the proceedings before us, Ld AR for assessee relied on various judgments including the jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of Maharashtra Ugine and Steel Co Ltd (250 ITR 84)(Bom). After going through the said judgments, we find that the said jurisdictional High Court Page No.| 25 ITA NO.4236 & 4372/MUM/2005 (A.Y: 2001-02) M/s. Bajaj Auto Limited judgment relates to allowability of expenditure incurred on payment of Stamp duty for debenture issue and, therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the apex court j…

M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG. - 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4236/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Bajaj Auto Limited V. Dcit – Range – 3(1) Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai – 400021 M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan : Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit – Range – 3(1) V. M/S. Bajaj Auto Limited Room No. 623, 6Th Floor Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point Mumbai – 400021 Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan : Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Ms. Vasanti Patel& Shri Kirit Kamdar Department Represented By : Shri Ankush Kapoor

Section 143(4)(b)Section 234Section 35Section 35DSection 37(1)Section 40

…tating that the said expenditure should not be allowed as revenue expenditure. During the proceedings before us, Ld AR for assessee relied on various judgments including the jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of Maharashtra Ugine and Steel Co Ltd (250 ITR 84)(Bom). After going through the said judgments, we find that the said jurisdictional High Court Page No.| 25 ITA NO.4236 & 4372/MUM/2005 (A.Y: 2001-02) M/s. Bajaj Auto Limited judgment relates to allowability of expenditure incurred on payment of Stamp duty for debenture issue and, therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the apex court j…

ACIT (LTU-1), MUMBAI vs. BAJAJ HOLDINGS & INVESTMENT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5030/MUM/2001[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Apr 2023AY 1997-98

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleacit (Ltu-1) V. Bajaj Holdings Investment Ltd 29Th, Floor, Centre-1 226, Bajaj Bhavan, 2Nd Floor World Trade Centre Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Nariman Point Mumbai- 400021 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400075 Pan: Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No. 96/Mum/2002 [Arising Out Of Ita No.5030/Mum/2001 (A.Y: 1997-98)] Bhajaj Auto Limited V. Acit (Ltu-1) Bhajaj Bhavan 29Th, Floor, Centre-1 Nariman Point World Trade Centre Mumbai - 400020 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400075 Pan: Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Percy Pardiwala& Ms. Vasanti Patel Department Represented By : Shri Rahul Kumar & Shri Vranda U Matkarri

Section 2(24)Section 35DSection 37(2)Section 80H

…tating that the said expenditure should not be allowed as revenue expenditure. During the proceedings before us, Ld AR for assessee relied on various judgments including the jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of Maharashtra Ugine and Steel Co Ltd (250 ITR 84)(Bom). After going through the said judgments, we find that the said jurisdictional High Court judgment relates to allowability of expenditure incurred on payment of Stamp duty for debenture issue and, therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the apex court judgments cited above are relevant and expenses are not allowable as revenue expend…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CITI FINANCIAL COSUMER FINANCE INDIA LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3118/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

…0 ITR 52 and circular no. 56 dated 19.3.1971 issued by the CBDT, it was contended that expenditure is revenue in nature. Inter alia, the assessee relied upon decisions in CIT Vs. East India Hotels, 252 ITR 860 (Cal); CIT Vs. Mahindra Ugine and Steel Co. Ltd., 250 ITR 84 (Bom),Premier Automobiles Ltd. Vs. CIT 80 ITR 415 (Bom); CIT Vs. OL: 218 CTR 165 (Guj); CIT Vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd., 290 ITR 217 (Mad) and CIT Vs. First Leasing Co. of India Ltd., 304 ITR 67 (Mad).It was further pointed out that deferment of issue expenses in the books would not lead to the conclusion that the expenditure is not rev…

TECH PROCESS SOLUTIONS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of assessee in ITA

ITA 5395/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: Ms Krupa Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari, DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “E” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य एविं श्री एन. के. प्रधान लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI NK PRADHAN, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 8547/Mum/2011 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2008-09) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 5395/Mum/2013 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Techprocess Payment The Dy. Commissioner of Services Ltd. Income Tax-10(1), Aayakar (formerly known as Bhavan, Mumbai Techprocess solutions ltd.) Vs. Bldg Nno. 1,2nd floor, Mehra Industrial Estate, Next to Jaswant Lan…

ACIT 10(1), MUMBAI vs. TECHNOPROCESS SOLUTIONS LTD ( FORMERLY BILL JUNCTION PAYMENT LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of assessee in ITA

ITA 8576/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: Ms Krupa Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari, DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “E” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य एविं श्री एन. के. प्रधान लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI NK PRADHAN, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 8547/Mum/2011 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2008-09) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 5395/Mum/2013 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Techprocess Payment The Dy. Commissioner of Services Ltd. Income Tax-10(1), Aayakar (formerly known as Bhavan, Mumbai Techprocess solutions ltd.) Vs. Bldg Nno. 1,2nd floor, Mehra Industrial Estate, Next to Jaswant Lan…

TECHNPROCESS SOLUTIONS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of assessee in ITA

ITA 8547/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: Ms Krupa Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari, DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “E” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य एविं श्री एन. के. प्रधान लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI NK PRADHAN, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 8547/Mum/2011 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2008-09) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 5395/Mum/2013 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Techprocess Payment The Dy. Commissioner of Services Ltd. Income Tax-10(1), Aayakar (formerly known as Bhavan, Mumbai Techprocess solutions ltd.) Vs. Bldg Nno. 1,2nd floor, Mehra Industrial Estate, Next to Jaswant Lan…

ACIT, CIR-31, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. WEST BENGAL HOUSING BOARD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 284/KOL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Mar 2017AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80I

…pendent of business made out of surplus funds in long term deposits, there is no possibility of assessing the same as otherwise - Tirupati Woolen Mills Ltd. 193 ITR 252 (Cal.), CIT vs. AP Industrial Corporation 175 ITR 361 (AP); CIT vs. East India Hotels Ltd. 207 ITR 881 (Cal); and the fact that the purpose of the assessee in investing in fixed deposits is to make available funds for its housing projects and therefore the interests on such deposits should be treated as the business income of the assessee. Not only that there is no gainsaying the fact that the investment was made out of the business fund available…

CIT v. East India Hotels (250 ITR 84) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax