CIT v. J.K. Synthetics Ltd.

309 ITR 371High Court2009#964 most cited

What is CIT v. J.K. Synthetics Ltd. authority for?

The Delhi High Court laid down broad guidelines for distinguishing between capital and revenue expenditure, which were implicitly approved by the Supreme Court when it dismissed the Special Leave Petition against this decision. These guidelines assist in classifying business expenses as revenue in nature, particularly when assessing the enduring benefit test.

111

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. J.K. Synthetics Ltd. · 309 ITR 371 · Delhi High Court 2009 · capital expenditure · revenue expenditure · enduring benefit test · expenditure classification guidelines · Section 143(3) assessment · software development expense · business deduction

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 143(3)Section 142(1) of Income Tax ActSection 143(1)Section 143(1) of Income Tax ActSection 143(3) of Income Tax ActSection 144CSection 144C of Income Tax Act

Issues it is cited on

section 57(i)section 2(d)section 35abbtest of enduring benefitsection 46section 46asection 35dsection 36(1)(viia)enduring benefitsection 35deduction under section 80iasection 10(34)

Judgments citing CIT v. J.K. Synthetics Ltd.

DCIT-2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. INDUSIND BANK LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 3675/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 35DSection 36(1)(via)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…nal requirements, in order to run the business more efficiently and\nprofitably. The hon'ble High Court of Delhi, after analysing plethora of case\nlaw on this subject, had laid down certain broad guidelines, in the case\nof CIT v. J.K. Synthetics Ltd. [2009] 309 ITR 371 (Delhi), to decide whether a\nparticular expenditure is capital or revenue in nature. Tested against these\nbroad legal principles, I am of the opinion that there is considerable force in\nthe arguments of the appellant-company that the expenditure claimed by it\nclearly falls in the revenue field. These guidelines were impliedly approved by\nthe…

INDUSIND BANK LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT-2(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the Income Tax Appeal is\ndismissed

ITA 1842/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2019-20
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 35DSection 36(1)(via)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…nal requirements, in order to run the business more efficiently and\nprofitably. The hon'ble High Court of Delhi, after analysing plethora of case\nlaw on this subject, had laid down certain broad guidelines, in the case\nof CIT v. J.K. Synthetics Ltd. [2009] 309 ITR 371 (Delhi), to decide whether a\nparticular expenditure is capital or revenue in nature. Tested against these\nbroad legal principles, I am of the opinion that there is considerable force in\nthe arguments of the appellant-company that the expenditure claimed by it\nclearly falls in the revenue field. These guidelines were impliedly approved by\nthe…

ACIT CIRCLE-17(1), NEW DELHI vs. METRONATION CHENNAI TELEVISION LTD., NEW DELHI

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

ITA 7181/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 32(1)Section 37(1)Section 92B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2280/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14) The DCIT M/s. Metronation Chennai Circle 16(2) Televesion Ltd. New Delhi Vs. Daily Thanthi, M-118 Greater Kailash Part-1, New Delhi-110048 PAN:AAFCM2626Q (Appellant) (Respondent) The ACIT M/s. Metronation Chennai Circle 17(1) Televesion Ltd. New Delhi Vs. Daily Thanthi, M-118 Greater Kailash Part-1, New Delhi-110048 PAN:AAFCM2626Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Arjun Raj, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Su…

DCIT, CIRCLE-16(2), NEW DELHI vs. METRONATION CHENNAI TELEVISION LTD., NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2536/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 32(1)Section 37(1)Section 92B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2280/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14) The DCIT M/s. Metronation Chennai Circle 16(2) Televesion Ltd. New Delhi Vs. Daily Thanthi, M-118 Greater Kailash Part-1, New Delhi-110048 PAN:AAFCM2626Q (Appellant) (Respondent) The ACIT M/s. Metronation Chennai Circle 17(1) Televesion Ltd. New Delhi Vs. Daily Thanthi, M-118 Greater Kailash Part-1, New Delhi-110048 PAN:AAFCM2626Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Arjun Raj, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Su…

DCIT, CIRCLE-16(2), NEW DELHI vs. METRONATION CHENNAI TELEVISION LTD., NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2280/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 32(1)Section 37(1)Section 92B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2280/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14) The DCIT M/s. Metronation Chennai Circle 16(2) Televesion Ltd. New Delhi Vs. Daily Thanthi, M-118 Greater Kailash Part-1, New Delhi-110048 PAN:AAFCM2626Q (Appellant) (Respondent) The ACIT M/s. Metronation Chennai Circle 17(1) Televesion Ltd. New Delhi Vs. Daily Thanthi, M-118 Greater Kailash Part-1, New Delhi-110048 PAN:AAFCM2626Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Arjun Raj, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Su…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. METRONATION CHENNAI TELEVISION LTD., NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3358/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 32(1)Section 37(1)Section 92B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2280/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14) The DCIT M/s. Metronation Chennai Circle 16(2) Televesion Ltd. New Delhi Vs. Daily Thanthi, M-118 Greater Kailash Part-1, New Delhi-110048 PAN:AAFCM2626Q (Appellant) (Respondent) The ACIT M/s. Metronation Chennai Circle 17(1) Televesion Ltd. New Delhi Vs. Daily Thanthi, M-118 Greater Kailash Part-1, New Delhi-110048 PAN:AAFCM2626Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Arjun Raj, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Su…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. MALAR PUBLICATIONS LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2915/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2915/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Malar Publications Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of V. No. 86, Periyar Evr High Road, Income-Tax, Vepery, Chennai – 600 007. Corporate Circle -4(1), [Pan: Aaacm-2573-P] Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07.05.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Respondent: Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 143(3)

…able to the facts of this case. On the contrary, the following judgments supports the case of the assessee: :-7-: ITA. No: 2915/Chny/2016 (a) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Alembic Chemical Co. [1989] 177 ITR 377 (SC) (b) CIT vs J.K. Synthetics [2009] 309 ITR 371 (Del) (c) CIT vs Southern Roadways Ltd. [2008] 24(I) ITCL 118 (Mad-HC) The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, prayed for upholding the order of the ld. CIT(A). 8. We have heard both the parties, perused materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. It is admitted fact that company has spent an expenditure for develo…

ACIT, CIRCLE 22(2), NEW DELHI vs. SNAPDEAL LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 184/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir Singh, CIT-DR

…54 (SC) (iv) Avery India Ltd. vs. CIT 199 ITR 745 (Cal) (v) M.K. Bros Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 86 ITR 38 (SC) & Travancore Sugar and Chemical Ltd. vs. CIT 62 ITR 566 (SC) (vi) D.F. Woodrofe and Company Ltd. vs. CIT 102 ITR 665 (Mad) (vii) CIT vs. J.K. Synthetic Ltd. 309 ITR 371 (Del) 8. The Ld. AO considered 50% of the expenditure claimed as capital in nature. This resulted in disallowance of Rs. 322,39,50,102/-. The total loss 4 was thus determined at Rs. 1786,21,57,510/- vide order dated 30.12.2019 under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”). 9. On appeal filed by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) delete…

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -7 vs. ST MICROELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.

ITA/715/2023HC Delhi07 Dec 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

…cases which deal with technology and software application, which do not in any manner supplant the source of income or added to the fixed capital of the assessee. (See Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. vs CIT [1989] 177 ITR 377; CIT vs J.K. Synthetics [2009] 309 ITR 371 at page 412 and CIT Vs. Indian Visit.com (supra)]). xxx xxx xxx 11. Software is nothing but another word for computer programmes, i.e., instructions, that make the hardware work. Software is broadly of two types, i.e., the systems software, which is also known as the operating system which controls the working of the computer; while the o…

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -7 vs. ST MICROELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.

ITA - 715 / 2023HC Delhi07 Dec 2023

…cases which deal with technology and software application, which do not in any manner supplant the source of income or added to the fixed capital of the assessee. (See Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. vs CIT [1989] 177 ITR 377; CIT vs J.K. Synthetics [2009] 309 ITR 371 at page 412 and CIT Vs. Indian Visit.com (supra)]). xxx xxx xxx 11. Software is nothing but another word for computer programmes, i.e., instructions, that make the hardware work. Software is broadly of two types, i.e., the systems software, which is also known as the operating system which controls the working of the computer; while the o…

YES BANK LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue and assessee he appeals of the Revenue and assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes

ITA 3501/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit-2(2)(2), M/S Yes Bank Ltd., Room No. 545, 5Th Floor, 9Th Floor, Nehru Centre, Discovery Of Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, India, Dr. Ab Road, Worli, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400018. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacy 2068 D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Yes Bank Ltd., Dcit-2(2)(2), 9Th Floor, Nehru Centre, Room No. 545, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Discovery Of India, Dr. Ab Vs. Bhavan, Road, Worli, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400018. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacy 2068 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/Ms. Ayushi ModaniFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, DR
Section 14ASection 251

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2014-15 DCIT-2(2)(2), M/s Yes Bank Ltd., Room No. 545, 5th floor, 9th Floor, Nehru Centre, Discovery of Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, India, Dr. AB Road, Worli, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400018. Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAACY 2068 D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s Yes Bank Ltd., DCIT-2(2)(2), 9th Floor, Nehru Centre, Room No. 545, 5th floor, Aayakar Discovery of India, Dr. AB Vs. Bhavan, Road, Worli, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-40001…

DCIT-2(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. YES BANK LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue and assessee he appeals of the Revenue and assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes

ITA 3239/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit-2(2)(2), M/S Yes Bank Ltd., Room No. 545, 5Th Floor, 9Th Floor, Nehru Centre, Discovery Of Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, India, Dr. Ab Road, Worli, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400018. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacy 2068 D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Yes Bank Ltd., Dcit-2(2)(2), 9Th Floor, Nehru Centre, Room No. 545, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Discovery Of India, Dr. Ab Vs. Bhavan, Road, Worli, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400018. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacy 2068 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/Ms. Ayushi ModaniFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, DR
Section 14ASection 251

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2014-15 DCIT-2(2)(2), M/s Yes Bank Ltd., Room No. 545, 5th floor, 9th Floor, Nehru Centre, Discovery of Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, India, Dr. AB Road, Worli, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400018. Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAACY 2068 D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s Yes Bank Ltd., DCIT-2(2)(2), 9th Floor, Nehru Centre, Room No. 545, 5th floor, Aayakar Discovery of India, Dr. AB Vs. Bhavan, Road, Worli, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-40001…

DCIT CIRCLE-9(1), NEW DELHI vs. FEDERAL MOGUL GOETZE (INDIA) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by Revenue are

ITA 8286/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Or During The Hearing Of This Appeal.”

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

…of CIT vs. M/s Federal Mogul TPR India Ltd. vide order dated 24/07/2012 in ITA No.398/2012 reported at 2012-TIOL-563-HC-DEL-IT. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee also placed further reliance on the following decisions: • CIT vs J.K. Synthetics Limited [2009] 309 ITR 371 (Delhi) • CIT vs Sharda Motor Industrial Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 109 (Delhi) • Climate Systems India Ltd. vs CIT [2009] 319 ITR 113 (Delhi) • J.J. Enterprises vs CIT: [2002] 254 ITR 216 (SC) • Roger Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs IAC: [1995] 52 TTJ 198 (Del) • CIT vs Aero Club: [2011] 336 ITR 400 (Del) Page 9 of 15 ITA No.8285 & 8286/Del/2019 DCIT vs.…

DCIT CIRCLE-9(1), NEW DELHI vs. FEDERAL MOGUL GOETZE (INDIA) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by Revenue are

ITA 8285/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Or During The Hearing Of This Appeal.”

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

…of CIT vs. M/s Federal Mogul TPR India Ltd. vide order dated 24/07/2012 in ITA No.398/2012 reported at 2012-TIOL-563-HC-DEL-IT. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee also placed further reliance on the following decisions: • CIT vs J.K. Synthetics Limited [2009] 309 ITR 371 (Delhi) • CIT vs Sharda Motor Industrial Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 109 (Delhi) • Climate Systems India Ltd. vs CIT [2009] 319 ITR 113 (Delhi) • J.J. Enterprises vs CIT: [2002] 254 ITR 216 (SC) • Roger Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs IAC: [1995] 52 TTJ 198 (Del) • CIT vs Aero Club: [2011] 336 ITR 400 (Del) Page 9 of 15 ITA No.8285 & 8286/Del/2019 DCIT vs.…

TITAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED,HOSUR vs. JCIT, CHENNAI

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1913/CHNY/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Sept 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana (Sr. Advocate) for Shri Manasa Ananthan (Advocate) - Ld. AFor Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar (CIT) –Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 801C

…technology and software application, which do not in any manner supplant the source of income or added to the fixed capital of the assessee. [See Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1989] 177 ITR 377 / 43 Taxman 312 (SC); CIT v. J.K. SyntheticsLtd. [2009] 309 ITR 371 / 176 Taxman 355 (Delhi) and Indian Visit.com (P.) Ltd. (supra)]. 9.1 This is the approach which the Supreme Court has applied even in cases where there is a once for all or a lump sum payment. What is to be seen in the facts of this case, as already noticed by us hereinabove, that the Assessing Officer as a matter of fact has returned a finding…

BIGFOOT RETAIL SOLUTION PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 5(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3161/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri R.M. Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajinder Jha, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 56Section 56(2)(viib)

…isions were cited:- (1) Assam Bengal Cement Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1965) 27 ITR 34 (SC) (2) Bombay Steam Navigation Co. (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (1965) 56 ITR 52 (SC) (3) Hilton Roulunds Ltd. vs. CIT (2018) 92 taxmann.com 368 (Delhi) (4) CIT vs. J K Synthetics Ltd. (2009) 309 ITR 371 (Delhi) (5) ACIT vs. M/s. GE Capital Business Process Management Services 64 taxmann.com 156 (Delhi ITAT) 6.2 The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance observing that since the software was an integral and essential part of computer, the expenditure on software services was rightly treated as capital expenditure. He mentioned the decision of Delh…

YES BANK LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2 (2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer in ITA number 3238/M/2018 for assessment year 2013 –

ITA 3500/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shekhar L. Gajbhiye, CIT
Section 14ASection 35DSection 40

…tional requirements, in order to run the business more efficiently and profitably. The hon'ble High Court of Delhi, after analysing plethora of case law on this subject, had laid down certain broad guidelines, in the case of CIT v. J.K. Synthetics Ltd. [2009] 309 ITR 371 (Delhi), to decide whether a particular expenditure is capital or revenue in nature. Tested against these broad legal principles, I am of the opinion that there is considerable force in the arguments of the appellant-company that the expenditure claimed by it clearly falls in the revenue field. These guidelines were impliedly approved by the hon'…

YES BANK LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer in ITA number 3238/M/2018 for assessment year 2013 –

ITA 3499/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shekhar L. Gajbhiye, CIT
Section 14ASection 35DSection 40

…tional requirements, in order to run the business more efficiently and profitably. The hon'ble High Court of Delhi, after analysing plethora of case law on this subject, had laid down certain broad guidelines, in the case of CIT v. J.K. Synthetics Ltd. [2009] 309 ITR 371 (Delhi), to decide whether a particular expenditure is capital or revenue in nature. Tested against these broad legal principles, I am of the opinion that there is considerable force in the arguments of the appellant-company that the expenditure claimed by it clearly falls in the revenue field. These guidelines were impliedly approved by the hon'…

YES BANK LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer in ITA number 3238/M/2018 for assessment year 2013 –

ITA 3498/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shekhar L. Gajbhiye, CIT
Section 14ASection 35DSection 40

…tional requirements, in order to run the business more efficiently and profitably. The hon'ble High Court of Delhi, after analysing plethora of case law on this subject, had laid down certain broad guidelines, in the case of CIT v. J.K. Synthetics Ltd. [2009] 309 ITR 371 (Delhi), to decide whether a particular expenditure is capital or revenue in nature. Tested against these broad legal principles, I am of the opinion that there is considerable force in the arguments of the appellant-company that the expenditure claimed by it clearly falls in the revenue field. These guidelines were impliedly approved by the hon'…

DCIT- 2(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. YES BANK LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer in ITA number 3238/M/2018 for assessment year 2013 –

ITA 3238/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shekhar L. Gajbhiye, CIT
Section 14ASection 35DSection 40

…tional requirements, in order to run the business more efficiently and profitably. The hon'ble High Court of Delhi, after analysing plethora of case law on this subject, had laid down certain broad guidelines, in the case of CIT v. J.K. Synthetics Ltd. [2009] 309 ITR 371 (Delhi), to decide whether a particular expenditure is capital or revenue in nature. Tested against these broad legal principles, I am of the opinion that there is considerable force in the arguments of the appellant-company that the expenditure claimed by it clearly falls in the revenue field. These guidelines were impliedly approved by the hon'…

Showing 1–20 of 111 · Page 1 of 6

CIT v. J.K. Synthetics Ltd. (309 ITR 371) — Cited in 111 Judgments | BharatTax