What is CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. authority for?

Expenditure providing an enduring advantage, such as upfront lease rent for land, is revenue expenditure if no capital asset is acquired or generated, allowing for deduction under Section 37, even when capitalized in the books of account.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd.?

246 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (233 ITR 468), spanning 2008 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 14A, Section 254, Section 37(1), Section 115JB, Section 142(1).

CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (233 ITR 468)

Indiawin Sports P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 35, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 5290/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.5290&5291/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2009-2010 & 2010-2011) Indianwin Sports Private Vs. Acit, Cc-35, Room Limited, Court House, 3Rd No.104, Aayakar Bhavan, Floor, Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Mumbai-400020 Dhobi Talao, Mumbai- 400002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcr 8195 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Arvind Sonde राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri B.C.S.Naik सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 25/05/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 22/07/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2009-2010 & 2010-2011, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of The I.T.Act. 2. In Both These Appeals The Assessee Is Aggrieved For Decline Of Annual Payment Being Franchise Fees Paid To Bcci To Participate In The Indian Premier League (Ipl) By Holding The Same As Capital In Nature For Both The Assessment Years Under Consideration. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Owning, Managing & Operating 'Mumbai Indian' Team Of Indian Premier League (Ipl). The Assessee Has Been Granted Perpetual Franchisee For The 'Mumbai Indian' Team. The Assessee Is Franchise Holder Of Ipl I.E. Indian

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri B.C.S.Naik

Section 139Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ ‘आई’, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.5290&5291/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2009-2010 & 2010-2011) Indianwin Sports Private Vs. ACIT, CC-35, Room Limited, Court House, 3rd No.104, Aayakar Bhavan, Floor, Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Mumbai-400020 Dhobi Talao, Mumbai- 400002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AADCR 8195 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Arvind Sonde राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by : Shri B.C.S.Naik सुनवाई…

M/S Cyber Park Development & Construction Ltd vs. DCIT

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

ITA 1549/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.Cyber Park Develoment & Construction Ltd. Plot Nos.76 & 77, Electronic Phase I, Hosur Road, Bangalore-560 100. … Appellant Pa No.Aaccc1113H Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 11(2), Bangalore. … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal, JCIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)(ii)

…of commercial space given to STPI may be allowed as revenue expenditure and placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. HMT Ltd. (203 ITR 820) and Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in CIT vs. Madras Auto Services (233 ITR 468). The above contentions of the assessee were rejected by the AO by holding that the rights acquired are in the nature of land which is of capital asset and does not qualify for allowance of depreciation and it is also capital expenditure and therefore, cannot be allowed as revenue expenditure. As regards the disallowance of Rs.7,91,394/-, the a…

M/S. Ici India Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 852/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)

…contention of the assessee. So, Tribunal was not justified in disallowing this payment of Rs. 5,00,000.—CIT vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (2000) 158 CTR (Mad) 437 : (1999) 240 ITR 335 (Mad), CIT vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 148 CTR (SC) 398 : (1998) 233 ITR 468 (SC) and CIT vs. Engineers India Ltd. (1999) 155 CTR (Del) 394 : (1999) 239 ITR 237 (Del) applied. Respectfully following the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court we allow the assessee’s ground. ITA No.2613/Kol/05,488/Kol/06, 1019 & 852/Kol/07 AYs 02-03 & 03-04 ACIT Cir-10 Kol. v. AKZO Novel India Ltd. Page 31 61. Next issue raised by asse…

DCIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata vs. M/S. Ici India Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1019/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)

…contention of the assessee. So, Tribunal was not justified in disallowing this payment of Rs. 5,00,000.—CIT vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (2000) 158 CTR (Mad) 437 : (1999) 240 ITR 335 (Mad), CIT vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 148 CTR (SC) 398 : (1998) 233 ITR 468 (SC) and CIT vs. Engineers India Ltd. (1999) 155 CTR (Del) 394 : (1999) 239 ITR 237 (Del) applied. Respectfully following the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court we allow the assessee’s ground. ITA No.2613/Kol/05,488/Kol/06, 1019 & 852/Kol/07 AYs 02-03 & 03-04 ACIT Cir-10 Kol. v. AKZO Novel India Ltd. Page 31 61. Next issue raised by asse…

M/S. Ici India Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 488/KOL/2006[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)

…contention of the assessee. So, Tribunal was not justified in disallowing this payment of Rs. 5,00,000.—CIT vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (2000) 158 CTR (Mad) 437 : (1999) 240 ITR 335 (Mad), CIT vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 148 CTR (SC) 398 : (1998) 233 ITR 468 (SC) and CIT vs. Engineers India Ltd. (1999) 155 CTR (Del) 394 : (1999) 239 ITR 237 (Del) applied. Respectfully following the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court we allow the assessee’s ground. ITA No.2613/Kol/05,488/Kol/06, 1019 & 852/Kol/07 AYs 02-03 & 03-04 ACIT Cir-10 Kol. v. AKZO Novel India Ltd. Page 31 61. Next issue raised by asse…

ACIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata vs. M/S. Ici India Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2613/KOL/2005[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)

…contention of the assessee. So, Tribunal was not justified in disallowing this payment of Rs. 5,00,000.—CIT vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (2000) 158 CTR (Mad) 437 : (1999) 240 ITR 335 (Mad), CIT vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 148 CTR (SC) 398 : (1998) 233 ITR 468 (SC) and CIT vs. Engineers India Ltd. (1999) 155 CTR (Del) 394 : (1999) 239 ITR 237 (Del) applied. Respectfully following the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court we allow the assessee’s ground. ITA No.2613/Kol/05,488/Kol/06, 1019 & 852/Kol/07 AYs 02-03 & 03-04 ACIT Cir-10 Kol. v. AKZO Novel India Ltd. Page 31 61. Next issue raised by asse…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1431/CHNY/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Milind S. Kothari, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Madhukar Bhusari, CIT

Section 139Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…es only to make it fit for business of the assessee company and relied on the following decisions :- (i) Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd (2013) 31 taxmann.com 3 (Mad) (ii) Ayesha Hospitals (P) Ltd (2007) 291 ITR 266 (Mad) (iii) CIT vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd 233 ITR 468 (Mad). (iv) CIT vs. Amrutanjan Finance Ltd (2011) 15 taxmann.com 392 (Mad) and prayed for allowing the appeal. 4.6. Contra, the ld. Departmental Representative relied on the orders of the lower authorities and opposed the ground of the assessee. 4.7 We heard the rival submissions, perused the material on record and judicial decision cited. T…

Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1180/CHNY/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Milind S. Kothari, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Madhukar Bhusari, CIT

Section 139Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…es only to make it fit for business of the assessee company and relied on the following decisions :- (i) Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd (2013) 31 taxmann.com 3 (Mad) (ii) Ayesha Hospitals (P) Ltd (2007) 291 ITR 266 (Mad) (iii) CIT vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd 233 ITR 468 (Mad). (iv) CIT vs. Amrutanjan Finance Ltd (2011) 15 taxmann.com 392 (Mad) and prayed for allowing the appeal. 4.6. Contra, the ld. Departmental Representative relied on the orders of the lower authorities and opposed the ground of the assessee. 4.7 We heard the rival submissions, perused the material on record and judicial decision cited. T…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M.Venkata Krishna Mohan

ITTA/325/2005HC Telangana07 Apr 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

ACIT, Circle - 5, Kolkata vs. M/S. Suman Industries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1522/KOL/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2006-07

Section 143(3)Section 35D

…kata Police clarified the factual position regarding ownership of the booths being vested in Kolkata Police. 6. Now coming to the cases laws relied o by the A/R, I note that decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. [1998] 233 ITR 468 supports the case of the assessee. In this case, the assessee obtained lease of premise for a period of 39 year on a nominal rent. The assessee constructed a new building on the land taken on lease. The issue before the Apex Court was whether the expenditure incurred on construction of the building was capital or revenue. The Apex Court observed…

Daikin Airconditioning India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and the revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5293/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava:Asstt. Yr: 2003-04 Daikin Air Conditioning Vs. Dcit, Circle 10(1), India Pvt. 12Th Floor, New Delhi. Surya Kiran Building, 19, K.G. Marg, New Delhi-110001. Pan: Aabcd 0971 F & Asstt. Yr: 2003-04 Dcit, Circle 10(1), Vs. Daikin Air Conditioning India Pvt. 12Th Floor, New Delhi. Surya Kiran Building, 19, K.G. Marg, New Delhi-110001. ( Appellant ) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vishal Kalra Adv. Revenue By : Shri Ramesh Chandra Danday Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 11/01/2016. Date Of Order : 12/02/2016. O R D E R Per S.V. Mehrotra, A.M:

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ramesh Chandra Danday Sr. DR

…ribunal) 20. The AO concluded that expenditure was basically for launch of a new business product as well as benefit of enduring nature was there. Accordingly, relying o the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 233 ITR 468, he denied the assessee’s claim. 21. Before ld. CIT(A), the assessee pointed out that these expenses were incurred for the purpose of rental payments for putting hoardings of the assessee company, expenses incurred on posters/ banners for increasing the visibility of the product, designing of advertisement, advertisement agency commission, mega…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Daikin Air- Conditioning India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and the revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 2922/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava:Asstt. Yr: 2003-04 Daikin Air Conditioning Vs. Dcit, Circle 10(1), India Pvt. 12Th Floor, New Delhi. Surya Kiran Building, 19, K.G. Marg, New Delhi-110001. Pan: Aabcd 0971 F & Asstt. Yr: 2003-04 Dcit, Circle 10(1), Vs. Daikin Air Conditioning India Pvt. 12Th Floor, New Delhi. Surya Kiran Building, 19, K.G. Marg, New Delhi-110001. ( Appellant ) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vishal Kalra Adv. Revenue By : Shri Ramesh Chandra Danday Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 11/01/2016. Date Of Order : 12/02/2016. O R D E R Per S.V. Mehrotra, A.M:

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ramesh Chandra Danday Sr. DR

…ribunal) 20. The AO concluded that expenditure was basically for launch of a new business product as well as benefit of enduring nature was there. Accordingly, relying o the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 233 ITR 468, he denied the assessee’s claim. 21. Before ld. CIT(A), the assessee pointed out that these expenses were incurred for the purpose of rental payments for putting hoardings of the assessee company, expenses incurred on posters/ banners for increasing the visibility of the product, designing of advertisement, advertisement agency commission, mega…

Commissioner of Income Tax-TDS vs. The Indian News Paper Society

ITA/918/2015HC Delhi10 Dec 2015

Section 194ISection 260A

…ITA Nos. 918/2015 & 920/2015 Page 1 of 5 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 2. + ITA 918/2015 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-TDS ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rohit Madan, Senior Standing counsel. versus THE INDIAN NEWS PAPER SOCIETY ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sunil Fernandes with Mr. Deepak Pathak and Ms. Misthi Jain, Advocates. AND 3. + ITA 920/2015 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-TDS ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rohit Madan, Senior Standing counsel. versus…

The Continental Enterprise, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 700/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Sept 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.700/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2008-2009

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT

Section 32

…arture from the literal rule would really be amending the law in the garb of interpretation, which is not permissible and which would be destructive of judicial discipline. :- 15 -: 11. The Supreme Court of India in the case of Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd., 233 ITR 468 while dealing with a similar controversy has observed as under: “5 In order to decide whether this expenditure is revenue expenditure or capital expenditure, one has to look at the expenditure from a commercial point of view. What advantage did the assessee get by constructing a building which belonged to somebody else and spending money for suc…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-12(5), Bangalore vs. M/S W S Test Systems P Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1241/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P Boazdeputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 12(5), Bangalore. … Appellant Vs. M/S. W S Test Systems Pvt. Ltd. # 27Th Km, Bellary Road, Doddajala Post, Bangalore-562157. … Respondent Aabcm3218Q

For Appellant: Shri P.Dhivahar, JCIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri K.Seshadri, CA

Section 143(3)

…d was only to facilitate the business and that it did not result in any enduring advantage to the assessee. Further, we notice that the CIT(A) has also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Madras Auto Services Pvt.Ltd. (233 ITR 468) for holding as above. We find that the similar issue had arisen in the assessee’s own case for the earlier assessment year and the Tribunal has upheld the finding of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition on account of repairs and maintenance. Therefore, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) on this issue. This ground o…