CIT v. ESPN Software India P. Ltd.

301 ITR 368High Court2008#3019 most cited

What is CIT v. ESPN Software India P. Ltd. authority for?

A business commences with the first purchase of stock-in-trade, and the date of the first sale is immaterial. For manufacturing, business commences with the first activity undertaken to produce finished products.

40

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. ESPN Software India P. Ltd. · commencement of business · first purchase of stock-in-trade · date of first sale · manufacturing · first activity

Also reported as

184 Taxmann 452

Issues it is cited on

section 2(11)section 10(2)section 57(iii)section 57revenue expendituresection 44absection 10income from other sourcesprevious yearassistant commissionerappeal before the tribunalcompany

Judgments citing CIT v. ESPN Software India P. Ltd.

M/S. COASTAL ENERGEN PRIVATE LIMITED,EGMORE, CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 507/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 505, 506 & 507/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years:2012-2013, 2013-2014 & 2014-2015. M/S. Coastal Energen Private The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax No. 5, Buhari Building, Central Circe 1(1) Moores Road, Egmore, Chennai Chennai 600 006. ( Previously The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(2) Pan: Aadcc 0886G Chennai.) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri N. Balakrishnan, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14.03.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri N. Balakrishnan, IRS, CIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 44A

…TR 545 (Delhi), it has been observed that the date of setting up of business and date of commencement of business may be two separate dates. This decision in the case of L.G. Electronics (supra) has been followed in CIT Vs. ESPN Software India P. Ltd., [2008] 301 ITR 368 (Delhi) wherein it has been held that a business will “commence” with the first purchase of stock-in-trade and the date on which the first sale is made is immaterial. Similarly, for manufacturing, several activities in order to bring or produce finished products have to be undertaken, but business commences when the first of such activities is ta…

M/S. COASTAL ENERGEN PRIVATE LIMITED,EGMORE, CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 506/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 505, 506 & 507/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years:2012-2013, 2013-2014 & 2014-2015. M/S. Coastal Energen Private The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax No. 5, Buhari Building, Central Circe 1(1) Moores Road, Egmore, Chennai Chennai 600 006. ( Previously The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(2) Pan: Aadcc 0886G Chennai.) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri N. Balakrishnan, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14.03.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri N. Balakrishnan, IRS, CIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 44A

…TR 545 (Delhi), it has been observed that the date of setting up of business and date of commencement of business may be two separate dates. This decision in the case of L.G. Electronics (supra) has been followed in CIT Vs. ESPN Software India P. Ltd., [2008] 301 ITR 368 (Delhi) wherein it has been held that a business will “commence” with the first purchase of stock-in-trade and the date on which the first sale is made is immaterial. Similarly, for manufacturing, several activities in order to bring or produce finished products have to be undertaken, but business commences when the first of such activities is ta…

M/S. COASTAL ENERGEN PRIVATE LIMITED,EGMORE, CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 505/CHNY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 505, 506 & 507/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years:2012-2013, 2013-2014 & 2014-2015. M/S. Coastal Energen Private The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax No. 5, Buhari Building, Central Circe 1(1) Moores Road, Egmore, Chennai Chennai 600 006. ( Previously The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(2) Pan: Aadcc 0886G Chennai.) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri N. Balakrishnan, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14.03.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri N. Balakrishnan, IRS, CIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 44A

…TR 545 (Delhi), it has been observed that the date of setting up of business and date of commencement of business may be two separate dates. This decision in the case of L.G. Electronics (supra) has been followed in CIT Vs. ESPN Software India P. Ltd., [2008] 301 ITR 368 (Delhi) wherein it has been held that a business will “commence” with the first purchase of stock-in-trade and the date on which the first sale is made is immaterial. Similarly, for manufacturing, several activities in order to bring or produce finished products have to be undertaken, but business commences when the first of such activities is ta…

HONDA ACCESS INDIA PVT. LTD.,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, NOIDA

ITA 3368/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh.Anubhav Sharma

Section 143(3)

…11. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Samsung India Electronics Ltd. [2013]356 ITR 354 (Delhi) in para no. 7 has observed as follows :- 7 Honda Access India P. Ltd. “7 ....Relying on the decision of CIT v. ESPN Software India (P.) Ltd. [2008] 301 ITR 368 [2009] 184 Taxman 452 (Delhi) wherein it has been held that a business will "commence" with the first purchase of stock-in-trade and the date on which the first sale is made is immaterial. Similarly, for manufacturing, several activities in order to bring or produce finished products have to be undertaken, but business commences when the first of…

ECI ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 968/HYD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07 The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Eci Engineering & Income Tax, Construction Co., Ltd., Circle 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita 968/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 M/S. Eci Engineering & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Construction Co., Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy. Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.05.2023 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Respectively, Are Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5, Hyderabad Dated 30.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Abridged Grounds Raised By The Assessee In Ita No.968/Hyd/2016 Read As Under : “1. The Order Of Ld.Cit(A) - 5 Is Erroneous In Law In Facts & In Law. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Decision Of The Ld.Ao In Treating Sale Of Partly Paid Up Shares As Fully Paid & Confirming The Addition Of Rs.50,14,625/- As Long Term Capital Gain. 3. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.27,69,422/- Towards Difference In Interest. 4. Further, The Ld.Cit(A) Failed To Observe That The Notes To Financial Statements Clearly Mentioned The Interest Income Which Pertained To The Previous Year & Accordingly Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld.Ao In Assessing The Difference In Interest Of Rs.27,69,422/-. 5. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Difference Of Prior Period Income Of Rs.1,26,71,371/-.”

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

….L.S.Cable(P) Ltd. 88 taxmann.com 616 (Del.HC) ii.Reliance Gems & Jewels Ltd. vs. DCIT3(3), Mumbai (ITA No.3855/Mum/2013) dated 28.10.2015(ITAT,Mumbai) iii.CIT vs. E-Funds International India(2007) 162 Taxman 01(del.) iv. CIT vs. ESPN Software India Pvt.Ltd. (301 ITR 368) (Del.HC) v. CITvs. Aspentech India(P.) [2010] 187 taxman 25(Delhi) vi. Bombay Steam Navigaiton co.Pvt Ltd. (56 ITR 52) (SC) vii. Empire Jute Co.Ltd. vs. CIT (124 ITR 1) (SC) 17. The ld. DR on the other hand heavily relied on the orders of the AO and CIT(A). So far as the validity of reassessment is concerned, he submitted that the AO in the orig…

DCIT, CIRCLE-17(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. ECI ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 930/HYD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07 The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Eci Engineering & Income Tax, Construction Co., Ltd., Circle 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita 968/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 M/S. Eci Engineering & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Construction Co., Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy. Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.05.2023 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Respectively, Are Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5, Hyderabad Dated 30.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Abridged Grounds Raised By The Assessee In Ita No.968/Hyd/2016 Read As Under : “1. The Order Of Ld.Cit(A) - 5 Is Erroneous In Law In Facts & In Law. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Decision Of The Ld.Ao In Treating Sale Of Partly Paid Up Shares As Fully Paid & Confirming The Addition Of Rs.50,14,625/- As Long Term Capital Gain. 3. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.27,69,422/- Towards Difference In Interest. 4. Further, The Ld.Cit(A) Failed To Observe That The Notes To Financial Statements Clearly Mentioned The Interest Income Which Pertained To The Previous Year & Accordingly Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld.Ao In Assessing The Difference In Interest Of Rs.27,69,422/-. 5. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Difference Of Prior Period Income Of Rs.1,26,71,371/-.”

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

….L.S.Cable(P) Ltd. 88 taxmann.com 616 (Del.HC) ii.Reliance Gems & Jewels Ltd. vs. DCIT3(3), Mumbai (ITA No.3855/Mum/2013) dated 28.10.2015(ITAT,Mumbai) iii.CIT vs. E-Funds International India(2007) 162 Taxman 01(del.) iv. CIT vs. ESPN Software India Pvt.Ltd. (301 ITR 368) (Del.HC) v. CITvs. Aspentech India(P.) [2010] 187 taxman 25(Delhi) vi. Bombay Steam Navigaiton co.Pvt Ltd. (56 ITR 52) (SC) vii. Empire Jute Co.Ltd. vs. CIT (124 ITR 1) (SC) 17. The ld. DR on the other hand heavily relied on the orders of the AO and CIT(A). So far as the validity of reassessment is concerned, he submitted that the AO in the orig…

DCIT 8(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. VODAFONE INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 5598/MUM/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 5598/मुं/2017 ("न.व. 2005-06) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax – 8(3)(2), Room No.615, 6Th Floor, Aaykarbhavan, M.K.Road, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Mumbai – 400 020 बनाम Vs. M/S. Vodafone India Ltd. (Formerly Vodafone Essar Ltd.) Peninsula Corporate Park, Ganpat Rao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai 400 013. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Pan: Aaach-5332-B आअसं. 5078/मुं/2017 ("न.व. 2005-06) M/S. Vodafone India Ltd. (Formerly Vodafone Essar Ltd.) Peninsula Corporate Park, Ganpat Rao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai 400 013. ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aaach-5332-B बनाम Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax – 8(3)(2), Room No.615, 6Th Floor, Aaykarbhavan, M.K.Road, ...... ""तवाद"/Respondent Mumbai – 400 020 Revenue By : S/Shrianand Mohan&Ajay K.R.Kesari Assessee By :S/Shri Salil Kapoor, Ketanved & Ms. Soumya Singh

For Appellant: S/Shri Salil Kapoor, KetanVed and Ms. Soumya SinghFor Respondent: S/ShriAnand Mohan&Ajay K.R.Kesari
Section 114Section 143(3)Section 263Section 801ASection 80I

…ivities clearly indicate that the business of assessee commenced in period relevant to Assessment Year 1995-96. The ld. Departmental Representative placed reliance on the following decisions to support his argument: (i) CIT vs. ESPN Software India Pvt. Ltd. 301 ITR 368 (Delhi); (ii) CIT vs. Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Inds. Ltd., 91 ITR 170 (Guj); (iii) CIT vs. E Funds International India, 162 Taxaman 1 (Delhi); and (iv) Jcdecaux Advertising India (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT, 49 taxmann.com 149 (Del-Trib.) 4.8 The ld.Departmental Representative without prejudice to his primary submissions made alternate submission, th…

VODAFONE INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 8(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 5078/MUM/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 5598/मुं/2017 ("न.व. 2005-06) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax – 8(3)(2), Room No.615, 6Th Floor, Aaykarbhavan, M.K.Road, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Mumbai – 400 020 बनाम Vs. M/S. Vodafone India Ltd. (Formerly Vodafone Essar Ltd.) Peninsula Corporate Park, Ganpat Rao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai 400 013. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Pan: Aaach-5332-B आअसं. 5078/मुं/2017 ("न.व. 2005-06) M/S. Vodafone India Ltd. (Formerly Vodafone Essar Ltd.) Peninsula Corporate Park, Ganpat Rao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai 400 013. ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aaach-5332-B बनाम Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax – 8(3)(2), Room No.615, 6Th Floor, Aaykarbhavan, M.K.Road, ...... ""तवाद"/Respondent Mumbai – 400 020 Revenue By : S/Shrianand Mohan&Ajay K.R.Kesari Assessee By :S/Shri Salil Kapoor, Ketanved & Ms. Soumya Singh

For Appellant: S/Shri Salil Kapoor, KetanVed and Ms. Soumya SinghFor Respondent: S/ShriAnand Mohan&Ajay K.R.Kesari
Section 114Section 143(3)Section 263Section 801ASection 80I

…ivities clearly indicate that the business of assessee commenced in period relevant to Assessment Year 1995-96. The ld. Departmental Representative placed reliance on the following decisions to support his argument: (i) CIT vs. ESPN Software India Pvt. Ltd. 301 ITR 368 (Delhi); (ii) CIT vs. Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Inds. Ltd., 91 ITR 170 (Guj); (iii) CIT vs. E Funds International India, 162 Taxaman 1 (Delhi); and (iv) Jcdecaux Advertising India (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT, 49 taxmann.com 149 (Del-Trib.) 4.8 The ld.Departmental Representative without prejudice to his primary submissions made alternate submission, th…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD vs. NSL MINING RESOURCES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

ITA 1411/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 The Dy.Commissioner Of Vs M/S. Nsl Mining Income Tax, Resources India Private Circle 16(1), Hyderabad. Limited, Hyderabad. Pan : Aadcn0483C. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Sri Kprr Murthy Date Of Hearing: 19.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.09.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sri KPRR Murthy
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…see, copies of which were also enclosed. From the series of the above activities, it can be seen that the company has set up its activities. 4.4 To strengthen the issue further, the case law of CIT vs. ESPN Software India (P) Ltd (2009) 184 taxmann 452/(2008) 301 ITR 368 (Delhi) may be examined, wherein it was held that ... the assessee acquired licence from its parent company on 15.08.95 to sub-licence ESPN services for distribution of programmes in India. BY virtue of license, the assessee entered into an agreement on 01.10.95 with a company and appointed it as the sale distributor for ESPN programmes in India.…

GMR AIR CARGO & AEROSPACE ENGINEERING LTD(SUCCESSOR TO GMR HYDERABAD AIR CARGO & LOGISTICS PVT LTD),SHAMSHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3) , HYDERABAD

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

ITA 183/HYD/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09 Gmr Air Cargo & Vs. Ito,Ward-2(3) Aerospace Engineering Signature Towers Ltd.(Successor To Gmr Kondapur, Kothaguda Hyderabad Air Cargo & Opp. Botanical Gardens Logistics Pvt Ltd.) R.R.District Rajiv Gandhi International Hyderabad-500 084 Airport, Samshabad Hyderabad-500 409

For Appellant: Shri K.C.DevdasFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, Sr.AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37

….L.S.Cable(P) Ltd. 88 taxmann.com 616 (Del.HC) ii.Reliance Gems & Jewels Ltd. vs. DCIT3(3), Mumbai (ITA No.3855/Mum/2013) dated 28.10.2015(ITAT,Mumbai) iii.CIT vs. E-Funds International India(2007) 162 Taxman 01(del.) iv. CIT vs. ESPN Software India Pvt.Ltd. (301 ITR 368) (Del.HC) v. CITvs. Aspentech India(P.) [2010] 187 taxman 25(Delhi) vi. Bombay Steam Navigaiton co.Pvt Ltd. (56 ITR 52) (SC) vii. Empire Jute Co.Ltd. vs. CIT (124 ITR 1) (SC) 17. The ld. DR on the other hand heavily relied on the orders of the AO and CIT(A). So far as the validity of reassessment is concerned, he submitted that the AO in the ori…

M/S. NDTV STUDIOS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1622/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: ShriFor Respondent: Shri Amit Shukla
Section 143(1)

…which can suggest the potentiality and capability of the assessee to deliver the facilities available in a studio, in the period under consideration. 15. Further the decisions Hotel Alankar Vs. CIT, 133 ITR 866, CIT Vs. ESPN Software (India) (P) Ltd. (2008) 301 ITR 368, CIT Vs. Whirlpool of Inia Ltd, 318 ITR 347 (Del) and CIT Vs. Dhoomketu Builders & Development (P) Ltd. [2013] 34 taxmann.com 18 (Delhi) and other decisions, relied on by the Counsel for the Assessee are misplaced and distinguishable on facts and the same are not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. In the case of Hotel Alankar…

ITO CORPORATE WARD 1(3), CHENNAI vs. C.S.HOUSING PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

Accordingly, the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is confirmed and the appeal of the Revenue in I.T.A No.2427/Chny/2018 is dismissed

ITA 2427/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Mr. R. Sivaraman, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 35D

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी मंजूनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम' BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.2427/Chny/2018 (Assessment Year: 2012 - 2013) The Income Tax Officer, M/s. C.S. Housing Property Corporate Ward – 1(3), Vs. Development Private Limited., Room No.612, New No.4, Old No.33, Wanaparthy Road, 6th Floor, Krishna Street, T. Nagar 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai – 600 017. Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. PAN :AADCC 8013 B (()थ*/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/App…

ACIT, CIRCLE-30(1), NEW DELHI vs. MSK (JV), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7232/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, C. A.; &For Respondent: Shri M. N. Shete, Sr. D.R
Section 3

…s to be corresponding income. There is distinction between set up and commencement of business. This distinction and principle has been laid down by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the following cases:- (i) CIT Vs. ESPN SOFTWARE INDIA P. LTD. (2008) 301 ITR 368 (Del.); (ii) CIT Vs. Samsung India Electronics Ltd. (2013) 356 ITR 354 (Del.); (iii) Carefour Wc & C India P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2014) 368 ITR 692 (Del.); (iv) CIT Vs. Dhoomketu Builder And Development P Ltd. (2014) 368 ITR 680 (Del.); (v) CIT Vs. Axis Pvt. Equity Limited (Bombay High Court) 391 ITR 370; (vi) Maruti Insurance Broking Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DC…

ACIT, CIRCLE- 2(2), NEW DELHI vs. ANTHEM INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5676/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year : 2014-15 Vs Anthem Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd., Acit, Circle-2(2), 501, Sachdeva Tower, New Delhi. Karkardooma, New Delhi-110092. Pan-Aaica7355D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Sh. Satpal Gulati, Cit Dr Respondent By Sh. Amit Goel, Ca & Sh.Nipun Mittal, Ca Date Of Hearing 14.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 29.10.2021

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…d 09.07.2013 has held that business will commence with the first purchase and the expenses incurred thereafter were duly allowable and it was immaterial when the first sales was booked. The Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs ESPN Software Ltd. [301 ITR 368 (Del)) has held as under: Assessment Year : 2014-15 "Section 28(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business - Commencement of/carrying on of - Assessment year 1997-98 - Whether a business is commenced as soon as an essential activity of that business is started - Held, yes - Assessee-company was incorporated on 1-8-1995 - On 15-8-1995, it had acqu…

ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), , KOLKATA vs. TCG URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE HOLDINGS PVT LTD.,, KOLKATA

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

ITA 2584/KOL/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. M.L.Meenaआयकर अपील सं.य/

Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH “B” KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Dr. M.L.Meena, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं.य/ ITA Nos.2584 to 2588/Kol/2019 Assessment Years:2004-05, ’05- 06, ’06-07,’07-08 & ’09-10 बनाम / ACIT,Cir-2(1), Kolkata M/s. TCG Urban Circle-2(1), Aaykar Bhawan, Infrastructure Holdings Pvt. V/s. P-7 Chowringhee Square, Ltd. (Earlier known as TCG Kolkata-700 069. Infrastructure Holdings Ltd.) Ground Fl., Bldg Beta, Bengal Intelligent Park, Salt Lake Electronics Complex, Block EP & GP, Sector V, Salt Lake, Kolkata. PAN: AADCS8821M अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent…

STATKRAFT MARKETS PRIVATE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 24(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4536/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 4536/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Statkraft Markets Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, 403, 4Th Floor, Salcon Rasvilas Circle-24(2), Building, Saket District Centre, New Delhi New Delhi-110017 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqcs6900E Assessee By : Sh. R. M. Mehta, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Richa Khoda, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.04.2021

For Appellant: Sh. R. M. Mehta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Khoda, CIT DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member (Through Video Conferencing) ITA No. 4536/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Statkraft Markets Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, 403, 4th Floor, Salcon Rasvilas Circle-24(2), Building, Saket District Centre, New Delhi New Delhi-110017 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAQCS6900E Assessee by : Sh. R. M. Mehta, Adv. Revenue by : Ms. Richa Khoda, CIT DR Date of Hearing: 08.03.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 26.04.2021 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has…

M/S CROWN HOME ENGINEERS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1572/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Bharat.L, CAFor Respondent: Smt. R.Premi, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 28Section 29Section 3

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year: 2012-13 Crown Home Engineers Pvt. Ltd, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner No. 413, 4th Floor, 84 Barton Centre, of Income Tax, M.G. Road, Bangalore – 560 001. Circle-2(1)(1), PAN: AACCC 9758Q Bangalore. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Bharat.L, CA Respondent by : Smt. R.Premi, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 09.09.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 10.09.2020 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member This appeal by the assessee i…

M/S MARUTI INSSURANCE BROKING PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6442/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2012-13 Maruti Insurance Broking Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aagcm8887L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate, Ms Tejasvi Jain, Ca, Ms Somya Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms Rakhi Bimal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 11.11.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.02.2020 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18Th October, 2016 Of The Cit(A)-6, Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company & Is Engaged In The Business Of Soliciting Motor Insurance Business. It Was Incorporated On 24.11.2010 & Applied For Grant Of Direct Broker Licence To Irda, Vide Application Dated 01.12.2010 & Was Awarded Licence As A Direct Broker Of Irda In February, 2012. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 29Th September, 2012 Declaring An Income Of Rs.23,750/- & Claiming Current Year Loss Of Rs.2,78,22,376/-.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Bimal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…tment were kept on pay roll, the assessee paid for Provident Fund, ESI, etc., indicates that business of the assessee was set up. Accordingly, the deduction claimed was held to be allowable. He also relied on the following decisions:- 1. CIT v. ESPN Software: 301 ITR 368 (Del.) 2. CIT vs. Hughes Escort Communications: 311 ITR 253 (Del.) 3. Western India Vegetable Products Ltd. v. CIT: 26 ITR 151 (Bom.) 4. Daimler India Commercial Vehicles (P.) Ltd vs. DCIT: 416 ITR 343 (Mad) 5. CIT vs. Franco Tosi Ingegneria: 241 ITR 268 (Mad.) 6. Religare Macquarie Wealth Management Ltd v. ACIT: 2396/Del/2013 (Del. Trib.) 7. DCI…

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1 (2), CHENNAI vs. M/S BHARATIYA NABHIKIYA VIDYUT NIGAM LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed

ITA 1304/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1304/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-2014. The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Bharatiya Nabhikiya Income Tax, Vidyut Nigam Ltd, No.51, 1St Floor, Corporate Circle 1(2) Chennai 600 034. Montieth Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008. [Pan Aaccb 3460C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. V.M. Mahidar, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. Y. Sridhar, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 35D

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘ B’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी इंटूर" रामा राव, लेखा सद"य के सम" [BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1304/CHNY/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2013-2014. The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Bharatiya Nabhikiya Income Tax, Vidyut Nigam Ltd, No.51, 1st floor, Corporate Circle 1(2) Chennai 600 034. Montieth Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008. [PAN AACCB 3460C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by :…

M/S SAMBHAV INSTITUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-12(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1760/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 1758 to 1760/Bang/2018 Assessment Years : 2008-09 to 2010-11 M/s. Sambhav Institutions (INDIA) Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax # 306, 3rd Floor, Montreal Manor Officer, Shopping Street, Serpentine Vs. Ward – 12 (2), Road, Kumara Park (West), Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 020. PAN: AAKCS3106L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Siddesh Gaddi, CA Revenue by : Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR) Date of hearing : 09.07.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 31.07.201…

Showing 1–20 of 40 · Page 1 of 2