CIT v. Groz Beckert Asia Ltd.

31 Taxmann.com 155High Court2013#2751 most cited

What is CIT v. Groz Beckert Asia Ltd. authority for?

Corporate club membership fees paid by an assessee-company for a limited period, when intended for running the business and producing benefits for the company, are deductible as a business expense and not considered personal expenses.

43

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Groz Beckert Asia Ltd. · Groz Beckert Asia Ltd. · club membership fees deduction · corporate club fees · business expense deductibility · personal expenses disallowance · revenue expenditure club fees · Section 37(1) · Section 40A(2)(b) · business benefit expenses

Also reported as

351 ITR 196

Sections most often in play

Section 115JBSection 154Section 40(a)(ia)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 115USection 143(3)Section 14ASection 244A

Issues it is cited on

section 50(1)section 80absection 54esection 70(2)section 10(15)section 80msection 10(33)section 14a(1)section 54eclong-term capital assetsection 36(1)(viii)section 111a

Judgments citing CIT v. Groz Beckert Asia Ltd.

Hdfc Bank Limited (As Successor to Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd), Mumbai vs. The Addl CIT RG 1(1), Mumbai

ITA 4315/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate and

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.4315 and 4316/MUM/2007 Assessment Years: 2002-03 and 2003-04 ITA Nos.3861 and 3862/Mum/2009 Assessment Years: 2004-05 and 2005-06 ITA Nos.5033/Mum/2010, 5442/Mum/2011, 2868/Mum/2012 Assessment Years: 2006-07 to 2008-09 ITA Nos.2093, 5885, 2609, 2610 and 4983/Mum/2017 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2013-14 ITA Nos.2665 and 2666/Mum/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 and 2015-16 ITA Nos.1890, 1891, 1892, 1893 and 3717/Mum/2023 and Assessment Years: 201…

DCIT Cir 1(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Housing Developement Finance Corporation Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of both, assessee and revenue are decided

ITA 4161/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate and
Section 1

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.4315 and 4316/MUM/2007 Assessment Years: 2002-03 and 2003-04 ITA Nos.3861 and 3862/Mum/2009 Assessment Years: 2004-05 and 2005-06 ITA Nos.5033/Mum/2010, 5442/Mum/2011, 2868/Mum/2012 Assessment Years: 2006-07 to 2008-09 ITA Nos.2093, 5885, 2609, 2610 and 4983/Mum/2017 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2013-14 ITA Nos.2665 and 2666/Mum/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 and 2015-16 ITA Nos.1890, 1891, 1892, 1893 and 3717/Mum/2023 and Assessment Years: 201…

DCIT, CC -1(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Hindalco Industries Ltd., Mumbai

Accordingly, there is no substance raised by the department and the same is dismissed

ITA 619/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2024AY 2003-04
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

…Income tax IT ref. no. 497 of 1977, Sayaji Iron & Engg. Co. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (2002) 253 ITR 749 (Guj). Further, full Bench decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Groz Beckert Asia Limited (2013) 351 ITR 196 (P&H) (FB) before the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, a similar claim of membership fees of a club paid by the assessee-company was declined by the AO on the ground that they were personal expenses of the MD and other employees. The Hon'ble High Court however held that such expenses were for running the business with a view to produce b…

M/S. Hindalco Industries Ltd.(Earlier Known As Indian Aluminium Company Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC -1(4) (Earlier Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-8, Kolkatta), Mumbai

ITA 612/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2024AY 2003-04
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

…Income tax IT ref. no. 497 of 1977, Sayaji Iron & Engg. Co. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (2002) 253 ITR 749 (Guj). Further, full Bench decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Groz Beckert Asia Limited (2013) 351 ITR 196 (P&H) (FB) before the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, a similar claim of membership fees of a club paid by the assessee-company was declined by the AO on the ground that they were personal expenses of the MD and other employees. The Hon'ble High Court however held that such expenses were for running the business with a view to produce…

New Globe Logistik Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO - WD2(3) (3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1757/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2023AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Anil Gupta
Section 143(1)

…al asset or obtaining benefit in capital field. Therefore such expenses will be of revenue nature. In this regard we find support & guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Groz Beckert Asia Limited reported in 351 ITR 196 wherein it was held as under : “The corporate membership was obtained for running the business with a view to produce profit. Such membership does not bring into existence an asset or an advantage for the enduring benefit of the business. It is an expenditure incurred for the period of membership and is not long lasting. By subscribing to the mem…

Il & Fs Transportation Networks Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl.CIT-14(2) (Earlier Addl.CIT, RG. 10(1)), Mumbai

ITA 2927/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Soodita Nos.2927 & 2928/Mum/2018 (Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12) Il & Fs Transportation Networks Addl. Commissioner Of Limited, The Il & Fs Financial Income-Tax, Range -14(2), Center, Plot No.C-22, Room No. [Earlier Addl. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Vs. Range-10(1), Mumbai] 460, 4Th Floor, G Block, Bandra- Aaykar Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Road, Marine Lines, Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan – Aabcc5460A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Bhalla, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra, D.R
Section 14A

…ved at by ITA Nos.2927 & 2928, 3145 & 3146/Mum/2018, A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2011-12 IL & FS Transportation Networks Limited Vs. Addl. CIT, Range 14(2) 19 the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of CIT Vs. Patyala Vs Groz Beckert Asia Limited (2013) 351 ITR 196 (P&H) and by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in CIT vs. Infosys Technologies (No.1)(2012) 349 ITR 582 (Kar). Accordingly, on the basis of our aforesaid observations, we are of the considered view that the CIT(A) had rightly allowed the assessee‟s claim for deduction of the club membership fees of Rs.4,79,225/- as a revenue expenditure. Also,…

DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. Indian Railway Finance Corporation Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, appeal of the Assessing Officer and Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 6082/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit (Ltu) Indian Railway Finance Circle-1 Vs Corporation Ltd. Nbcc Plaza Pushasp Vihar Ug Floor, East Tower, New Delhi-110017 Nbcc Place, Bhisham Pitamah Marg, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. Pan : Aaaci0681C (Appellant) (Respondent) A N D Assessment Year: 2011-12 Indian Railway Finance Dcit (Ltu) Corporation Ltd. Vs Pushp Vihar, Ug Floor, East Tower, Nbcc Saket Place, Bhisham Pitamah New Delhi Marg, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. Pan : Aaaci0681C (Appellant) (Respondent) A N D Assessment Year: 2012-13 Indian Railway Finance Dcit (Ltu) Corporation Ltd. Vs Pushp Vihar, Ug Floor, East Tower, Nbcc Saket

Section 115JSection 14ASection 37(1)

…f the executives are not incurred. The identical issue arose before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in 239 ITR 237 wherein it has been held that such expenditure did not bring into existence any benefit of enduring nature. Further the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana in 351 ITR 196 and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in 106 taxmann.com 395 has also taken a similar view. In view of this ground Nos. 2 and 3 of the appeal of the assessee are dismissed. 15. In the result, appeal for assessment year 2011-12 filed by the assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the Assessing Officer is dismissed. 16. Now we come to appeal for…

M/S. Indian Railway Finance Corporation Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, appeal of the Assessing Officer and Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5942/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit (Ltu) Indian Railway Finance Circle-1 Vs Corporation Ltd. Nbcc Plaza Pushasp Vihar Ug Floor, East Tower, New Delhi-110017 Nbcc Place, Bhisham Pitamah Marg, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. Pan : Aaaci0681C (Appellant) (Respondent) A N D Assessment Year: 2011-12 Indian Railway Finance Dcit (Ltu) Corporation Ltd. Vs Pushp Vihar, Ug Floor, East Tower, Nbcc Saket Place, Bhisham Pitamah New Delhi Marg, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. Pan : Aaaci0681C (Appellant) (Respondent) A N D Assessment Year: 2012-13 Indian Railway Finance Dcit (Ltu) Corporation Ltd. Vs Pushp Vihar, Ug Floor, East Tower, Nbcc Saket

Section 115JSection 14ASection 37(1)

…f the executives are not incurred. The identical issue arose before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in 239 ITR 237 wherein it has been held that such expenditure did not bring into existence any benefit of enduring nature. Further the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana in 351 ITR 196 and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in 106 taxmann.com 395 has also taken a similar view. In view of this ground Nos. 2 and 3 of the appeal of the assessee are dismissed. 15. In the result, appeal for assessment year 2011-12 filed by the assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the Assessing Officer is dismissed. 16. Now we come to appeal for…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Indian Railway Finance Corporation Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, appeal of the Assessing Officer and Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 515/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit (Ltu) Indian Railway Finance Circle-1 Vs Corporation Ltd. Nbcc Plaza Pushasp Vihar Ug Floor, East Tower, New Delhi-110017 Nbcc Place, Bhisham Pitamah Marg, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. Pan : Aaaci0681C (Appellant) (Respondent) A N D Assessment Year: 2011-12 Indian Railway Finance Dcit (Ltu) Corporation Ltd. Vs Pushp Vihar, Ug Floor, East Tower, Nbcc Saket Place, Bhisham Pitamah New Delhi Marg, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. Pan : Aaaci0681C (Appellant) (Respondent) A N D Assessment Year: 2012-13 Indian Railway Finance Dcit (Ltu) Corporation Ltd. Vs Pushp Vihar, Ug Floor, East Tower, Nbcc Saket

Section 115JSection 14ASection 37(1)

…f the executives are not incurred. The identical issue arose before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in 239 ITR 237 wherein it has been held that such expenditure did not bring into existence any benefit of enduring nature. Further the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana in 351 ITR 196 and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in 106 taxmann.com 395 has also taken a similar view. In view of this ground Nos. 2 and 3 of the appeal of the assessee are dismissed. 15. In the result, appeal for assessment year 2011-12 filed by the assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the Assessing Officer is dismissed. 16. Now we come to appeal for…

M/S Indian Railway Finance Corporation Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, appeal of the Assessing Officer and Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 380/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit (Ltu) Indian Railway Finance Circle-1 Vs Corporation Ltd. Nbcc Plaza Pushasp Vihar Ug Floor, East Tower, New Delhi-110017 Nbcc Place, Bhisham Pitamah Marg, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. Pan : Aaaci0681C (Appellant) (Respondent) A N D Assessment Year: 2011-12 Indian Railway Finance Dcit (Ltu) Corporation Ltd. Vs Pushp Vihar, Ug Floor, East Tower, Nbcc Saket Place, Bhisham Pitamah New Delhi Marg, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. Pan : Aaaci0681C (Appellant) (Respondent) A N D Assessment Year: 2012-13 Indian Railway Finance Dcit (Ltu) Corporation Ltd. Vs Pushp Vihar, Ug Floor, East Tower, Nbcc Saket

Section 115JSection 14ASection 37(1)

…f the executives are not incurred. The identical issue arose before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in 239 ITR 237 wherein it has been held that such expenditure did not bring into existence any benefit of enduring nature. Further the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana in 351 ITR 196 and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in 106 taxmann.com 395 has also taken a similar view. In view of this ground Nos. 2 and 3 of the appeal of the assessee are dismissed. 15. In the result, appeal for assessment year 2011-12 filed by the assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the Assessing Officer is dismissed. 16. Now we come to appeal for…

M/S Nicholas Piramal India Ltd vs. Addlcit RG - 7(1)

ITA 6141/MUM/2003[2000 01]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jan 2020

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ravish Soodm/S Nicholas Piramal India Ltd. Addl. Commissioner Of Piramal Healthcare Ltd. Income - Tax Range-7(1), (Earlier Known As Nicholas Piramal India Ltd), Mumbai 4Th Floor, Piramal Tower Annexe, Vs. Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai – 400013 Pan – Aaacn4538P (Appellant) (Respondent) D.C.I.T, Circle-7 (1), M/S Nicholas Piramal India Ltd. 452, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Piramal Healthcare Ltd. Mumbai. 4Th Floor, Piramal Tower Annexe, Vs. Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai – 400013

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry, Senior advocateFor Respondent: Shri Ronak Doshi, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 14ASection 44A

…by the Tribunal that the payment of club membership fees is allowable as a revenue expenditure. Also, we find that a similar view had been arrived at by the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of CIT, Patiala vs. Groz Beckert Asia Ltd. (2013) 351 ITR 196 (P&H) and that of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in CIT vs. Infosys Technologies (No.1) (2012) 349 ITR 582. On the basis of our aforesaid observations, we find no infirmity in the view taken by the CIT(A) that the club membership fees of Rs.3,03,500/- paid by the assessee during the year under consideration was allowable as a revenue expendi…

Shailender Mayank Hemchand, Mumbai vs. ACIT 19(3), Mumbai

ITA 5352/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5352/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Dr. P. Daniel, ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar
Section 30Section 37Section 37(1)

…ng the assessment year 2015-16 & 2016-17 and the turnover of the assessee increased substantially after taking the membership. In this regard, he relied on the following decisions which are in favour of the assessee:- i) CIT vrs. Groz Beckert Asia Ltd [2013] 351 ITR 196 (P & H) ii) Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd. vrs. CIT (1992) 195 ITR 682 (Bom) 6 I.T.A. No. 5352/Mum/2018 Shailender Mayank Hemchand, 7. On the other hand, Ld. DR opposed the submission of Ld. AR and supported the orders of lower authorities and submitted that the life time membership is having enduring benefit and it can only be treated as capi…

Alstom India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6960/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri G. Manjnatha

For Appellant: Shri Mrunal Parekh a/wFor Respondent: Shri Anadi Verma
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 35D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBERAND SHRI G. MANJNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.6960/Mum./2014 (Assessment Year :2008–09) G.E. Power India Ltd. (Formerly known as M/s. Alstom India Ltd.), The International, 5th Floor 16, Marine Lines, Cross Road no.1 ……………. Appellant Off Maharshi Karve Marg Churchgate, Mumbai 400 020 PAN – AABCA8679F v/s Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Range–1(1), Mumbai ITA no.6501/Mum./2008 (Assessment Year :2002–03) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Range–1(1), Mumbai v/s G.E. Power India Ltd.…

ACIT, CC-1(2), Kolkata vs. R T Fashion Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2180/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2180/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR)For Respondent: Shri D.S.Damle, FCA
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…note that various courts have held that membership fees paid to clubs or organizations is revenue in nature and should be allowed as business expense in computing business income. Some of the relevant decisions are as below: CIT vs. GrozBeckert Asia Limited (351 ITR 196) (P&H HC) CIT vs. Lubrizol India Ltd. (37 taxmann.com 294) (Bom HC) Gujrat State Export Corpn. (209 ITR 649) (Guj HC) Attention was further invited to the decision of the Hon`ble Madras High court in the case of CIT vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (240 ITR 335). In that case the assessee company had paid subscription amounts to Rotary Club, Gymkhan…

Daimler Chrysler India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Pune

In the result, the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1381/PUN/2003[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Aug 2018AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1381/Pun/2003 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 1998-09 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Pramod AchuthanFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 15ASection 35A

…A Nos. 36 & 37/PN/2012, ITA Nos. 2114 & 2115/PN/2013, ITA No. 2083/PN/2013) (Pune ITA T) (Refer pages 1039 to 1055 of the Paper Book)  CIT vs. Upper India Steel Manufacturing & Engg. Co. Ltd (2014) 227 taxmann 173 (P&H)  CIT vs. Groz Beckert Asia Ltd (2013) 351 ITR 196 (P&H - FB) 86. Further, in case of a company which is an inanimate person, there could be no justification for disallowance on the ground of personal or non-business component. In support of this, the Appellant would like to place reliance on the following decisions:  Sayaji Iron & Engg Co. Vs. CIT (2002) (253 ITR 749) (Guj) (Refer pages 1063 t…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Daimler Chrysler India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1325/PUN/2003[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Aug 2018AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1381/Pun/2003 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 1998-09 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Pramod AchuthanFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 15ASection 35A

…A Nos. 36 & 37/PN/2012, ITA Nos. 2114 & 2115/PN/2013, ITA No. 2083/PN/2013) (Pune ITA T) (Refer pages 1039 to 1055 of the Paper Book)  CIT vs. Upper India Steel Manufacturing & Engg. Co. Ltd (2014) 227 taxmann 173 (P&H)  CIT vs. Groz Beckert Asia Ltd (2013) 351 ITR 196 (P&H - FB) 86. Further, in case of a company which is an inanimate person, there could be no justification for disallowance on the ground of personal or non-business component. In support of this, the Appellant would like to place reliance on the following decisions:  Sayaji Iron & Engg Co. Vs. CIT (2002) (253 ITR 749) (Guj) (Refer pages 1063 t…

ACIT 3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. General Insurance Corporation of India, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is treated as partly allowed

ITA 5008/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran (Am) & Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 10Section 10(38)Section 14ASection 199Section 28Section 44

…tated the smooth and efficient running of a business enterprise and did not add to the profit earning apparatus of a business enterprise. Similar view has been taken by the Full Bench of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs Groz Beckert Asia Ltd (351 ITR 196). In this case it was held that the Corporate Membership to Golf club that was obtained for running the business with a view to produce profit therefore the Corporate Membership fee paid to Golf club is a revenue expenditure. In view of the above decisions, we uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) deleting the disallowance. 11. Consistent with the…

M/S. Marubeni India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1444/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhu & Sh. R. K Pandaassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Marubeni India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit 5Th Floor, Lotus Tower Vs Circle – 16 (1) Community Centre, New Delhi New Friends Colony, New Delhi – 110017 (Pan Aaacm6413A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Rajesh Malhotra, Advocate Respondent By Sh. Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 05/06/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 06/06/2018 Order

Section 143Section 144Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I-2’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H. S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. R. K PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Marubeni India Pvt. Ltd. DCIT 5th Floor, Lotus Tower Vs Circle – 16 (1) Community Centre, New Delhi New Friends Colony, New Delhi – 110017 (PAN AAACM6413A) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Rajesh Malhotra, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 05/06/2018 Date of Pronouncement: 06/06/2018 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: This appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order passed order u/s.…

M/S Mkj Tradex Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-4(2), Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 1044/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2008-09

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…tal asset or obtaining benefit in capital field. Therefore such expenses will be of revenue nature. In this regard we find support & guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Groz Beckert Asia Limited reported in 351 ITR 196 wherein it was held as under : “The corporate membership was obtained for running the business with a view to produce profit. Such membership does not bring into existence an asset or an advantage for the enduring benefit of the business. It is an expenditure incurred for the period of membership and is not long lasting. By subscribing to the mem…

ITO, WD-5(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Elbee Securities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 456/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jul 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम. बालगनेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

…1 Elbee Securities Pvt. Ltd.. AY 2008-09 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम")Before "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/and "ी एम. बालगनेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Shri M. Balaganesh, AM] आयकर अपील सं"या / I.T.A No. 456/Kol/2014 "नधॉरण वषॅ/Assessment Year: 2008-09 Income-tax Officer, Wd-5(3), Kolkata Vs. M/s. Elbee Securities Pvt. Ltd. (PAN: AAACE5633N) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Date of Hearing 22.05.2017 Date of Pronouncement 14.07.2017 Shri Tanuj Neogi, JCIT, Sr. DR For the Appellant/ अपीलाथ" Shri D. S. Damle, AR…