CIT v. Kanpur Cigarettes P. Ltd.

287 ITR 485High Court2005#24237 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Judgments citing CIT v. Kanpur Cigarettes P. Ltd.

M/S. Cisco Systems Services B.V. India Branch, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle- 1(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2572/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A No. 2572/Bang/2019 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Cisco Systems Services B.V. – India The Deputy Branch, Commissioner Of Brigade South Parade, Income Tax, No. 10, Mahatma Gandhi International Taxation, Road, Circle – 1(1), Vs. Bangalore – 560 001. Bangalore. Pan: Aaccc4836D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Rajan Vora, Ca Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 04-01-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 12-01-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaithis Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld.Ao Dated 31.12.2015 Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [The Act] On The Following Grounds: “Based On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Cisco Systems Services B.V. —India Branch (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Appellant'), Respectfully Craves Leave To Prefer An Appeal Against The Order Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The 'Learned Ao') Dated October 15, 2019 Under Section 147 Read With Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (`The Act') Pursuant To The Directions Dated September 23, 2019 Issued By The Drp U/S 144C(5) Of The Act ('The Impugned Order') Inter-Alia On The Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 156Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 92C(2)

…al ground of appeal to challenge the validity of reopening of assessment based on the Mechanical/ Casual approval provided by the CIT/ JCIT without providing detailed reasons in view of the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of German Remedies Ltd (287 ITR 485). Further, it is to be noted that draft reassessment order dated 28 December 2018, has been passed within four weeks of order disposing of the objections (dated 13 December 2018). filed by the Appellant in response to the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment under section 147 of the Act. Since, the reassessment order has been passed with…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 467/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 467/Del/2014 (A.Y 2009-10)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

…B. N Elias & Co. Ltd.: 168 ITR 190 (Guj) SRP Tools Ltd. v. CIT: 237 ITR 684 (Mad.) • • Mysore Kirloskar Ltd.: 114 ITR 443 (Kar) • CIT v. Power Build Ltd.: 244 ITR 19 (Guj.) • CIT v. Gujarat Carbon Ltd.: 254 ITR 294 (Guj.) • CIT v. Kanpur Cigarettes (P) Ltd.: 287 ITR 485 (All.) The Ld. AR further submitted that the mode of payment is irrelevant. Under the agreement, in consideration of use of know-how for manufacturing the vehicles/parts, the assessee is obliged to make payment by way of (a) lumpsum royalty; and (b) running royalty. The Ld. AR submitted that the aforesaid payment of lump sum royalty is made under…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Essel Shyam Technologies Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes and the

ITA 3492/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.L.P.Sahu

Section 260A

…ime. 3. There is no basis given by the AO to disallow 25% of such royalty payment. 4. AO has not explained as to how the appellant will be benefitted for life time. Therefore, in view of above facts and the decisions of CIT vs Kanpur Cigarettes P. Ltd. (2005) 287 ITR 485 and Shriram Refrigeration vs CIT (1981) 127 ITR 746, I am convinced that such payment of royalty is revenue expenditure fully allowable. Therefore this ground of appeal is allowed.” 6. Accordingly in the absence of any discussion on the specific agreement, the prayer of the parties was found to be justified. In view thereof, the issue is restore…

CIT v. Kanpur Cigarettes P. Ltd. (287 ITR 485) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax