CIT v. Industrial Engineering Projects (P) Ltd.

202 ITR 1014High Court1993#1199 most cited

What is CIT v. Industrial Engineering Projects (P) Ltd. authority for?

Reimbursement of expenses, where there is no profit element included, does not constitute taxable income. Recoveries made by an assessee that merely reduce its cost, without netting off any income from expenses, are not income.

94

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,402 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Industrial Engineering Projects (P) Ltd. · 202 ITR 1014 · reimbursement of expenses · not taxable income · no profit element · cost recovery · taxability of reimbursements · Section 194R · Section 57(1) · Delhi High Court · gross receipts

Sections most often in play

Section 10ASection 10AASection 10BSection 115-OSection 143(3)Section 194RSection 234BSection 234C

Issues it is cited on

section 115wasection 10(4)section 2(43)section 115wsection 194a(1)section 2(28a)section 194a(3)section 40(a)(ii)far analysissection 135withholding taxprohibited by law

Judgments citing CIT v. Industrial Engineering Projects (P) Ltd.

DCIT, Delhi vs. Mkf Logistics Pvt Ltd, Delhi

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

ITA 3056/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit, Vs. Mkf Logistics Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. E/63B, South Extension Part 1, New Delhi – 110 049. (Pan : Aaacm5865E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Advocate Shri Saksham Garg, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.09.2025 Date Of Order : 10.12.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 04.02.2025 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs.31,32,270/- On 10.09.2016. The Case Was Selected For Limited Scrutiny Under Cass, Accordingly Notices Under Section 143(2)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194C

…6AS and the books of account of the assessee. 3.2. It has been consistently held by various courts that reimbursements are not taxable as no profit element included therein: 11  Commissioner of Income-Tax Versus Industrial Engineering Projects Pvt. Limited, 202 ITR 1014, Delhi High Court  COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus SIEMENS AKTIONGESELLSCHAFT 310 ITR 320, Bombay High Court  Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) Scindia House, Versus Krupp Udhe GMBH. 354 ITR I73, Bombay High Court. 4. GROUND RAISED BY DEPARTMENT IS INCORRECT AND APPEAL DESERVED TO BE DISMISSED In the grounds of appeal, the Depa…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Genpact India, Gurgaon

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the

ITA 4251/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 10ASection 143(3)

…nate payment from the other party. Since a reduction of cost by way of reimbursement of expense, recovery in the facts of the case is not income. The appellant relies on Tejaji Farasram Kharawalla Ltd. 67 ITR 95 (SC), Industrial Engineering Projects Pvt. Ltd. 202 ITR 1014(Del) and Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd 142 ITR 493 (Cal). It has been submitted that by reducing its cost by recoveries made the appellant has claimed only the expenses relatable to its income and is not netting off any income from expenses 26:31 23.488 even receipts are taken as income from other sources, should be allowed as an expense against such in…

Ms. Genpact India, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the

ITA 4060/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 10ASection 143(3)

…nate payment from the other party. Since a reduction of cost by way of reimbursement of expense, recovery in the facts of the case is not income. The appellant relies on Tejaji Farasram Kharawalla Ltd. 67 ITR 95 (SC), Industrial Engineering Projects Pvt. Ltd. 202 ITR 1014(Del) and Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd 142 ITR 493 (Cal). It has been submitted that by reducing its cost by recoveries made the appellant has claimed only the expenses relatable to its income and is not netting off any income from expenses 26:31 23.488 even receipts are taken as income from other sources, should be allowed as an expense against such in…

Kraft Foods Group Brands Llc, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-3(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 2495/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Us Raising Following Grounds In Its Appeal: -

Section 143(2)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 234BSection 270ASection 9(1)(vii)

…assessee by relying on the following case law submitted that the reimbursement of expenditure is not taxable under the Income-tax Act. i. CIT v Siemens Aktiongesellschaft (220 CTR 425) Bombay High Court (Bom) ii. CIT v Industrial Engineering Products Pvt Ltd (202 ITR 1014) (Del-HC) iii. CIT v Dunlop Rubber Co Ltd (142 ITR 493) (Kol.) iv. Mahindra & Mahindra v DCIT (ITA No. 85 8597/Mum/2010) (Mum.) v. ADIT v Antwerp Diamond Bank Inv (ITA No. 7347/Mum/2007) (Mum.) vi. A.P.Moller Maersk v DCIT (ITA No. 8703, 8704/Mum/2010) (Mum.) vii. DECTA, In re (237 ITR 190) (AAR) Page No. | 9 Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC 14. Fu…

Au Small Finance Bank Limited, Jaipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 279/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Jhanwar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT
Section 263Section 36(1)(va)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

…ACIT & Ors [2019] 411 ITR 664 (Bom.) 12. Subrata Banik vs CIT, Central-III (2013) 144 ITD 676 (Kol. Trib) 13. Kannur Distt. Co-op Bank Ltd vs ACIT, Circle 2(1), Kannur[2012] 20 Taxmann.com 667 (Coch) 14. CIT vs Industrial Engineering Project Pvt. Ltd. (1993) 202 ITR 1014 9 AU SMALL FINANCE BANK LTD . JAIPUR VS PCIT -1 , JAIPUR 15. Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) Scindia House Ballard Estate vs Krupp Udhe GMBH, LBS Marg, Vikhroli (ITA No. 2626 of 2009) 16.CIT vs Dhaneswar Rath Institute of Engineering & Medical Sciences (ITA No. 90 of 2022) dated 14-02-2023. 17. Shri Manjunatheshwar Packing Produ…

Transporter Industry Internatinal Gmbh, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT International Taxation, Circle-4(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1240/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1240/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2016-17) Transporter Industry बिधम/ Dcit, Int Tax Circle- International Gmbh. 4(1)(2) Vs. Kalisrabe 57, 74076 Air India Building, Heilbronn, Germany, Pin- Nariman Point, Mumbai- 999999. 400021. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aafct0013Q (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Nikil Tiwari Revenue By: Shri Soumedu Kumar Dash (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30/03/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/05/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Company Against The Order Of The Ao/Dcit, Circle-4(1)(2), Mumbai R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) Dated 25.04.2021 Pursuant To The Direction Of The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) Dated 18.03.2021. 2. Ground No. 1 Is General In Nature, So Dismissed. 3. Ground No. 3 Is A Legal Issue Which Has Been Raised By The Assessee Challenging The Action Of The Transfer Pricing Officer (Tpo) To Have Passed The Transfer Pricing (Tp) Order, After The Due Date Prescribed In Section 92(3A) R.W.S 153 Of The Act. Therefore, The Assessee Is Challenging The Action Of The Tpo In Passing Transfer Pricing Order After Limitation Period By Citing The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Madras High Court (Db) In The Case Of M/S. Saint Gobain

For Appellant: Shri Nikil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Soumedu Kumar Dash (Sr. AR)
Section 153Section 3Section 92Section 92C

…re of reimbursement of the expenses, it cannot be income chargeable to tax.” 20 A.Y. 2016-17 Transporter Industry International 19. The Ld. AR for assessee also placed reliance on the following judicial precedents:  Industrial Engineering Projects (P) Ltd (202 ITR 1014) Delhi High Court (refer page 477 of the Paper book )  Spencer Stuart International B.V )146 taxmann.com 235( )Mumbai Tribunal( )refer page 480 of the Paper book(  ITP Publishing India Pvt Ltd )ITA No.4407/M/2019( dated 13 January 2023 )Mumbai Tribunal( )refer page 491 of the paper book(  National Health & Education Society (412 ITR 404) (…

Aptean India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 422/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 422/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Aptean India Pvt. Ltd., 1/2, 8Th Floor, Level 5, The Assistant Golden Heights, Commissioner Of 59Th C Cross Road, Income Tax, 4Th M Block, Circle – 1(1)(1), Rajajinagar, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 010. Pan: Aaacc5890M Appellant Respondent : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Assessee By Advocate : Shri Praveen Karanth, Cit- Revenue By Dr Date Of Hearing : 03-11-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20-01-2023 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 25/03/2022 Passed By Nfac, Delhi For A.Y. 2017-18 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Grounds Mentioned Herein By The Appellant Are Without Prejudice To One Another General Ground 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Final Assessment Order Passed By National Faceless

For Respondent: Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar
Section 143(3)Section 92D

…n the following: - DIT v. A.P. MollerMaersk A S (reported in (2017) 392 ITR 186 (SC) at paragraphs 10 and 11); - CIT v. Tejaji Farasram Kharawalla Ltd. (reported in (1968) 67 ITR 95 (SC)); - CIT v. Industrial Engineering Projects (P.) Ltd. (reported in (1993) 202 ITR 1014 (Delhi)); - CIT v. Dunlop Rubber Co. Ltd. (reported in (1983) 142 ITR 493 (Cal.)); and Page 18 IT(TP)A No. 422/Bang/2022 - CIT v. Siemens Aktiongesellschaft (reported in (2009) 310 ITR 320). 8.3 In any event, it is submitted that the payments are not in the nature of royalty/fees for technical services (“FTS”) under the relevant Double Taxation…

Morgan Stanley International Incorporated, Mumbai vs. D.D.I.T. (I.T.) 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5985/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalmorgan Stanley International Incorporated C/O Bsr & Co., Chartered Accountants, Lodha Excelus, 1St Floor, Apollo Mills Compound, N.M. Joshi Marg, Mumbai - 400011. Pan: Aaecm1492R ...... Appellant Vs. Ddit (International Taxation)-4(1), Room No. 133, 1St Floor, Scindia House, Ballard Estate, Mumbai - 400038. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Sunil Moti Lala Respondent By : Sh. Soumendu Kumar Dash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/01/2023

For Appellant: Sh. Sunil Moti lalaFor Respondent: Sh. Soumendu Kumar Dash, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 9(1)(vii)

…Court, earlier in the case of Siemens Aktiongesellschaft (supra) has held that reimbursement of expenses cannot be regarded as revenue receipt following the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V/s Industrial Engineering Projects (1993) 202 ITR 1014 (Delhi) and therefore no TDS is required to be deduced u/s 195. However, this decision is not relied upon as this issue was decided on a different context. We have to examine our case and the issue in hand in the light of Delhi High Court decision. 12 The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Centrica India Offshore (P.) Ltd.(supra) had the oc…

ITO Ward - 61(1), New Delhi vs. Anish Kumar Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeal of the revenue are dismissed on this score

ITA 1453/DEL/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Anish Kumar Gupta CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 68

…e was a direct nexus between what was received that which was expended. The observations to this effect are found in para 2,3 of the order of the CIT(A)." That Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT \/s. Industrial Engineering Products (P) Ltd. 202 ITR 1014 (Delhi) (Annexure) by following the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Tejaji Farasram Kharawalla Ltd. (1968) 67 ITR 95 (SC) in which it was held, " to the extent of the receipt representing reimbursement of the expenses the same are not taxable" ruled that reimbursement of expenses under no circumstances as revenue receipt. Th…

ITO Ward - 61(1), New Delhi vs. Anish Kumar Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeal of the revenue are dismissed on this score

ITA 1452/DEL/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Anish Kumar Gupta CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 68

…e was a direct nexus between what was received that which was expended. The observations to this effect are found in para 2,3 of the order of the CIT(A)." That Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT \/s. Industrial Engineering Products (P) Ltd. 202 ITR 1014 (Delhi) (Annexure) by following the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Tejaji Farasram Kharawalla Ltd. (1968) 67 ITR 95 (SC) in which it was held, " to the extent of the receipt representing reimbursement of the expenses the same are not taxable" ruled that reimbursement of expenses under no circumstances as revenue receipt. Th…

ITO Ward - 61(1), New Delhi vs. Ashish Kumar Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeal of the revenue are dismissed on this score

ITA 1451/DEL/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Anish Kumar Gupta CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 68

…e was a direct nexus between what was received that which was expended. The observations to this effect are found in para 2,3 of the order of the CIT(A)." That Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT \/s. Industrial Engineering Products (P) Ltd. 202 ITR 1014 (Delhi) (Annexure) by following the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Tejaji Farasram Kharawalla Ltd. (1968) 67 ITR 95 (SC) in which it was held, " to the extent of the receipt representing reimbursement of the expenses the same are not taxable" ruled that reimbursement of expenses under no circumstances as revenue receipt. Th…

ITO Ward - 61(1), New Delhi vs. Ashish Kumar Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeal of the revenue are dismissed on this score

ITA 1450/DEL/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Anish Kumar Gupta CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 68

…e was a direct nexus between what was received that which was expended. The observations to this effect are found in para 2,3 of the order of the CIT(A)." That Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT \/s. Industrial Engineering Products (P) Ltd. 202 ITR 1014 (Delhi) (Annexure) by following the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Tejaji Farasram Kharawalla Ltd. (1968) 67 ITR 95 (SC) in which it was held, " to the extent of the receipt representing reimbursement of the expenses the same are not taxable" ruled that reimbursement of expenses under no circumstances as revenue receipt. Th…

Ashish Kumar Gupta, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 37(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the appeal of the revenue are dismissed on this score

ITA 1237/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Anish Kumar Gupta CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 68

…e was a direct nexus between what was received that which was expended. The observations to this effect are found in para 2,3 of the order of the CIT(A)." That Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT \/s. Industrial Engineering Products (P) Ltd. 202 ITR 1014 (Delhi) (Annexure) by following the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Tejaji Farasram Kharawalla Ltd. (1968) 67 ITR 95 (SC) in which it was held, " to the extent of the receipt representing reimbursement of the expenses the same are not taxable" ruled that reimbursement of expenses under no circumstances as revenue receipt. Th…

Ashish Kumar Gupta, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 37(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the appeal of the revenue are dismissed on this score

ITA 1236/DEL/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Anish Kumar Gupta CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 68

…e was a direct nexus between what was received that which was expended. The observations to this effect are found in para 2,3 of the order of the CIT(A)." That Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT \/s. Industrial Engineering Products (P) Ltd. 202 ITR 1014 (Delhi) (Annexure) by following the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Tejaji Farasram Kharawalla Ltd. (1968) 67 ITR 95 (SC) in which it was held, " to the extent of the receipt representing reimbursement of the expenses the same are not taxable" ruled that reimbursement of expenses under no circumstances as revenue receipt. Th…

Ashish Kumar Gupta, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 37(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the appeal of the revenue are dismissed on this score

ITA 1235/DEL/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Anish Kumar Gupta CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 68

…e was a direct nexus between what was received that which was expended. The observations to this effect are found in para 2,3 of the order of the CIT(A)." That Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT \/s. Industrial Engineering Products (P) Ltd. 202 ITR 1014 (Delhi) (Annexure) by following the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Tejaji Farasram Kharawalla Ltd. (1968) 67 ITR 95 (SC) in which it was held, " to the extent of the receipt representing reimbursement of the expenses the same are not taxable" ruled that reimbursement of expenses under no circumstances as revenue receipt. Th…

Anish Kumar Gupta, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 37(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the appeal of the revenue are dismissed on this score

ITA 1234/DEL/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Anish Kumar Gupta CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 68

…e was a direct nexus between what was received that which was expended. The observations to this effect are found in para 2,3 of the order of the CIT(A)." That Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT \/s. Industrial Engineering Products (P) Ltd. 202 ITR 1014 (Delhi) (Annexure) by following the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Tejaji Farasram Kharawalla Ltd. (1968) 67 ITR 95 (SC) in which it was held, " to the extent of the receipt representing reimbursement of the expenses the same are not taxable" ruled that reimbursement of expenses under no circumstances as revenue receipt. Th…

Anish Kumar Gupta, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 37(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the appeal of the revenue are dismissed on this score

ITA 1233/DEL/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Anish Kumar Gupta CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 68

…e was a direct nexus between what was received that which was expended. The observations to this effect are found in para 2,3 of the order of the CIT(A)." That Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT \/s. Industrial Engineering Products (P) Ltd. 202 ITR 1014 (Delhi) (Annexure) by following the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Tejaji Farasram Kharawalla Ltd. (1968) 67 ITR 95 (SC) in which it was held, " to the extent of the receipt representing reimbursement of the expenses the same are not taxable" ruled that reimbursement of expenses under no circumstances as revenue receipt. Th…

M/S. Madura Coats Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax., (International Transaction), Circle- 1(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee for A

ITA 1345/BANG/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(It)A Nos. 1344 & 1345/Bang/2019 Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 M/S. Madura Coats Pvt. The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner Of 7Th Floor, Jupiter Income Tax Prestige Technology (International Park, Vs. Taxation), Outer Ring Road, Circle – 1(2), Bangalore – 560 103. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcm8297K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajay Rotti, Ca : Shri Shehnawaz Ul Rahaman, Revenue By Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 13-04-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-05-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeals Are Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 30.03.2019 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-12, Bangalore For A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017-18. It Is Submitted That The Issues Alleged By Assessee In Both These Years Are Identical & On Similar Facts. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Under: 2.1 Madura Coats Pvt Ltd (Mcpl) Is An Indian Company Carrying On The Business As Manufacturer & Merchant Of Sewing Threads & Other Goods, Possesses The Requisite Expertise & Experience By Virtue Of Having Several Qualified Personnel In Its Employment. During The Course Of Verification Conducted Us

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, CA
Section 195Section 201(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(IT)A Nos. 1344 & 1345/Bang/2019 Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 M/s. Madura Coats Pvt. The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner of 7th Floor, Jupiter Income Tax Prestige Technology (International Park, Vs. Taxation), Outer Ring Road, Circle – 1(2), Bangalore – 560 103. Bangalore. PAN: AABCM8297K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Ajay Rotti, CA : Shri Shehnawaz ul Rahaman, Revenue by Addl. CIT (DR) Date of Hearing : 13-04-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 31-05-2022 ORDER PER B…

M/S. Madura Coats Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax., (International Transaction), Circle- 1(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee for A

ITA 1344/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(It)A Nos. 1344 & 1345/Bang/2019 Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 M/S. Madura Coats Pvt. The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner Of 7Th Floor, Jupiter Income Tax Prestige Technology (International Park, Vs. Taxation), Outer Ring Road, Circle – 1(2), Bangalore – 560 103. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcm8297K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajay Rotti, Ca : Shri Shehnawaz Ul Rahaman, Revenue By Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 13-04-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-05-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeals Are Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 30.03.2019 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-12, Bangalore For A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017-18. It Is Submitted That The Issues Alleged By Assessee In Both These Years Are Identical & On Similar Facts. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Under: 2.1 Madura Coats Pvt Ltd (Mcpl) Is An Indian Company Carrying On The Business As Manufacturer & Merchant Of Sewing Threads & Other Goods, Possesses The Requisite Expertise & Experience By Virtue Of Having Several Qualified Personnel In Its Employment. During The Course Of Verification Conducted Us

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, CA
Section 195Section 201(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(IT)A Nos. 1344 & 1345/Bang/2019 Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 M/s. Madura Coats Pvt. The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner of 7th Floor, Jupiter Income Tax Prestige Technology (International Park, Vs. Taxation), Outer Ring Road, Circle – 1(2), Bangalore – 560 103. Bangalore. PAN: AABCM8297K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Ajay Rotti, CA : Shri Shehnawaz ul Rahaman, Revenue by Addl. CIT (DR) Date of Hearing : 13-04-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 31-05-2022 ORDER PER B…

Rheabari Tea Company Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle- 4(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 2127/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 194Section 194CSection 40

…) has held that reimbursement of expenses cannot be regarded as revenue in the hands of the payee. While deciding the issue, the Hon’ble High Court has followed the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Industrial Engg. Projects P. Ltd. (202 ITR 1014). It is a settled proposition of law from the various decisions of High Courts and particularly the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court (supra) that when there is no element of income and the payment is only as a reimbursement of expenses incurred by the payee, then no disallowance can be made u/s. 40(a)(ia). In the case in hand, the A…