CIT v. Lake Place Hotels and Motel Pvt. Ltd.

258 ITR 562High Court#17425 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2020.

Judgments citing CIT v. Lake Place Hotels and Motel Pvt. Ltd.

M/S.Kovilakam Hotel P Ltd, Thrissur vs. The ACIT, Thrissur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 715/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin18 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K.

Section 143(2)Section 37(1)

…enditure incurred was not of an enduring nature and was allowable as revenue expenditure under section 37 of the Act. 15 I.T.A. No.715/Coch/2019 iv) The Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Lake Palace Hotels and Motels P. Ltd. reported in 258 ITR 562 had held that the expenditure incurred on refurnishing/modernizing a hotel is not a capital expenditure. It was held by the Hon’ble High Court as follows: “We have scanned through the cases referred to by learned Counsel for the Department as well as for the assessee. Section 37 of the Income-tax Act provides for deduction of any expenditure no…

The Indian Hotels Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (Osdz0 Cir 2(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 9087/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhthe Indian Hotels Company Ltd, Vs Dy.Cit (Osd), Circle 2(2), Mandlik House, Mandlik Road, Mumbai Colaba, Mumbai-400 001 Pan : Aaact3957G Appellant Respondednt Appellant By Shri Kanchun Kaushal & Aliasgar Rampurawala Ar’S Respondent By Shri Anand Mohan Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 17-06-2019 Date Of Pronouncement 06-09-2019

Section 143(3)Section 253Section 254(1)

…4, 1986 - 87, 1988 - 89 to 1990 - 91 and 1994-95. Apart from the decision of the coordinate bench the learned counsel for the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court rendered in CIT versus Lake Palace Hotel and Motels Private Limited 258 ITR 562 (Raj). Since, this issue has already been decided in favour of assessee, we respectfully following the decision of coordinate bench uphold the filing of learned CIT(A) and dismissed this ground of appeal of the revenue. 27. Considering the decision of the Tribunal, which is consistently followed in all years, thus, respectfully following the sam…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Gujarat Guardian Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue against the direction of the Ld

ITA 1106/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.K.Yadav & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Guajarat Guardian Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 4-7/C, Dda Shopping Centre, Circle-12(1), (Now Circle- New Friends Colony, 10(2), New Delhi Cr Building, Ip Estate, Pan: Aaacg1622K New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. M/S. Guajarat Guardian Ltd, Circle-12(1), (Now Circle-10(2), 4-7/C, Dda Shopping Cr Building, Ip Estate, Centre, New Delhi New Friends Colony, New Delhi Pan: Aaacg1622K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Meeta Singh CIT DR
Section 144Section 144CSection 14A

…v. Bharat Cinema : 121 ITR 165 (HC) (P&H)  CIT & Anr. vs. Sagar Talkies : 217 CTR 74 (HC) (Kar)  Tuticorin Spinning Mills Ltd. vs. CIT : 261 ITR 291 (HC) (Mad)  CIT vs. Ooty Dasaprakash: 237 ITR 902 (HC) (Mad)  CIT vs Lake Palace Hotel and Motels P. Ltd.: 258 ITR 562 (HC) (Raj)  CIT v. Wolkem (P.) Ltd. Co. : 258 ITR 350 (Raj) (HC) Gujarat Guradian Limited V DCIT DCIT V Gujarat Guradian Limited A Y 2010-11 ITA No 1106 & 973/Del/2015  CIT vs. Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Ltd. [224 Taxman 188 (Kar – Mag)] [2014]  CIT vs. Nizam Sugar Factory 116 ITR 706 (AP)  ACIT vs. Dyer‟s Stone Lime Co 136 IT…

Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai vs. The Inidan Hotels Company Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 841/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2005-06 The Indian Hotels Company Ltd., The Additional Commissioner Of Mandlik House, Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Mandlik Road, Colaba, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai - 400001 Vs. Mumbai Pan: Aaact3957G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 The Additional Commissioner Of The Indian Hotels Company Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Mandlik House, 3Rd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mandlik Road, Colaba, Room No. 545, 5Th Floor, Vs. Mumbai - 400001 M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaact3957G (Appellant) (Respondent) & Co No. 169/Mum/2010 Assessment Year: 2005-06 The Indian Hotels Company Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Mandlik House, Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Mandlik Road, Apollo Bunder, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400001 Vs. Mumbai Pan: Aaact3957G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pratik Shah(Ar) Revenue By : Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 10/11/2017 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/01/2018 Assessment Year: 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Pratik Shah(AR)For Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen (DR)
Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 244ASection 43BSection 92C

…1995-96, 1993-94, 1986-87, 1988-89 to 1990-91 and 1994-95. Apart from the decision of the coordinate Bench the Ld. counsel for the assessee relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court rendered in CIT vs. Lake Place Hotels and Motel Pvt. Ltd. 258 ITR 562 (Raj.). Since, this issue has already been decided in favour of the assessee, we respectfully following the decision of the coordinate Bench uphold the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) and dismiss this ground of appeal of the revenue. 13. Ground No. 5 pertains to expenditure on replacement of linen the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) submitted t…

The Indian Hotels Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 371/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2005-06 The Indian Hotels Company Ltd., The Additional Commissioner Of Mandlik House, Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Mandlik Road, Colaba, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai - 400001 Vs. Mumbai Pan: Aaact3957G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 The Additional Commissioner Of The Indian Hotels Company Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Mandlik House, 3Rd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mandlik Road, Colaba, Room No. 545, 5Th Floor, Vs. Mumbai - 400001 M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaact3957G (Appellant) (Respondent) & Co No. 169/Mum/2010 Assessment Year: 2005-06 The Indian Hotels Company Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Mandlik House, Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Mandlik Road, Apollo Bunder, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400001 Vs. Mumbai Pan: Aaact3957G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pratik Shah(Ar) Revenue By : Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 10/11/2017 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/01/2018 Assessment Year: 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Pratik Shah(AR)For Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen (DR)
Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 244ASection 43BSection 92C

…1995-96, 1993-94, 1986-87, 1988-89 to 1990-91 and 1994-95. Apart from the decision of the coordinate Bench the Ld. counsel for the assessee relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court rendered in CIT vs. Lake Place Hotels and Motel Pvt. Ltd. 258 ITR 562 (Raj.). Since, this issue has already been decided in favour of the assessee, we respectfully following the decision of the coordinate Bench uphold the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) and dismiss this ground of appeal of the revenue. 13. Ground No. 5 pertains to expenditure on replacement of linen the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) submitted t…