CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd.

233 ITR 468Supreme Court of India1998#353 most cited

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.

246

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. · 233 ITR 468 · Section 37(1) · revenue expenditure · capital expenditure · test of enduring benefit · upfront lease rent · no capital asset generated · business deduction · expenditure classification · depreciation for income tax

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 254Section 37(1)Section 115JBSection 142(1)Section 37Section 10(15)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

test of enduring benefitsection 10(2)(xv)business transfer agreementnon-compete feeenduring benefitslump salededuction u/s 80iasection 40a(2)revenue expenditurecapital expenditurebook profitssection 80ia

Judgments citing CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd.

Vizag Seaport P.Ltd, Visakhapatnam vs. CIT(A) 14, Mumbai

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

ITA 2478/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

…ed by the assessee towards BOT Project should be treated as a revenue expenditure to be recovered over the License period of 30 years. This view is fortified by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Auto Services Limited reported in (233 ITR 468) (SC). Consequently, the assessee is eligible to amortize the expenditure relating to the BOT project over the period of the benefit derived by the assessee, i.e., for a period of 30 years. Reliance placed by the Ld.AR on Noida Toll Bridge Co Ltd (Supra) could not be accepted because it was rightly distinguished in North Karnataka Expressway Ltd…

DCIT 7(3), Mumbai vs. Vizag Seaport P.Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 2402/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

…ed by the assessee towards BOT Project should be treated as a revenue expenditure to be recovered over the License period of 30 years. This view is fortified by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Auto Services Limited reported in (233 ITR 468) (SC). Consequently, the assessee is eligible to amortize the expenditure relating to the BOT project over the period of the benefit derived by the assessee, i.e., for a period of 30 years. Reliance placed by the Ld.AR on Noida Toll Bridge Co Ltd (Supra) could not be accepted because it was rightly distinguished in North Karnataka Expressway Ltd…

DCIT 7(3), Mumbai vs. Vizag Seaport P.Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 2401/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

…ed by the assessee towards BOT Project should be treated as a revenue expenditure to be recovered over the License period of 30 years. This view is fortified by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Auto Services Limited reported in (233 ITR 468) (SC). Consequently, the assessee is eligible to amortize the expenditure relating to the BOT project over the period of the benefit derived by the assessee, i.e., for a period of 30 years. Reliance placed by the Ld.AR on Noida Toll Bridge Co Ltd (Supra) could not be accepted because it was rightly distinguished in North Karnataka Expressway Ltd…

DCIT 7(3), Mumbai vs. Vizag Seaport P.Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 2400/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

…ed by the assessee towards BOT Project should be treated as a revenue expenditure to be recovered over the License period of 30 years. This view is fortified by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Auto Services Limited reported in (233 ITR 468) (SC). Consequently, the assessee is eligible to amortize the expenditure relating to the BOT project over the period of the benefit derived by the assessee, i.e., for a period of 30 years. Reliance placed by the Ld.AR on Noida Toll Bridge Co Ltd (Supra) could not be accepted because it was rightly distinguished in North Karnataka Expressway Ltd…

Ske & C- Kct Joint Venture, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 23(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 4204/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5451/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 बनाम M/S Ske & C-Kct Joint Venture, Dcit 85A, 3Rd Floor, Vs. Circle 24(2) Rishyamook Building, New Delhi. Panchkuian Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aadas9266L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4202 To 4204/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 बनाम M/S Ske & C-Kct Joint Venture, Dcit Thapar House, Central Wing, Vs. Circle 23(2) 3Rd Floor, 124 Janpath, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C

…ion/termination of the contract. In fact, when such structures are put up on land not belonging to the person, the expenditure is of revenue nature in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 233 ITR 468. The same view has been taken by this Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Premlatha Vs. ITO 63 ITD 69 (sic ). We are of the considered opinion that the CIT has overlooked this issue of ownership of land.” 9 I.T.A.No.5451/Del/2018 & ITA Nos.4202 to 4204/Del/Del/2019 12. The Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT Vs. Mitsubishi Heavy I…

Ske & C- Kct Joint Venture, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 23(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 4203/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5451/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 बनाम M/S Ske & C-Kct Joint Venture, Dcit 85A, 3Rd Floor, Vs. Circle 24(2) Rishyamook Building, New Delhi. Panchkuian Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aadas9266L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4202 To 4204/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 बनाम M/S Ske & C-Kct Joint Venture, Dcit Thapar House, Central Wing, Vs. Circle 23(2) 3Rd Floor, 124 Janpath, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C

…ion/termination of the contract. In fact, when such structures are put up on land not belonging to the person, the expenditure is of revenue nature in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 233 ITR 468. The same view has been taken by this Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Premlatha Vs. ITO 63 ITD 69 (sic ). We are of the considered opinion that the CIT has overlooked this issue of ownership of land.” 9 I.T.A.No.5451/Del/2018 & ITA Nos.4202 to 4204/Del/Del/2019 12. The Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT Vs. Mitsubishi Heavy I…

Ske & C- Kct Joint Venture, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 23(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 4202/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5451/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 बनाम M/S Ske & C-Kct Joint Venture, Dcit 85A, 3Rd Floor, Vs. Circle 24(2) Rishyamook Building, New Delhi. Panchkuian Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aadas9266L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4202 To 4204/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 बनाम M/S Ske & C-Kct Joint Venture, Dcit Thapar House, Central Wing, Vs. Circle 23(2) 3Rd Floor, 124 Janpath, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C

…ion/termination of the contract. In fact, when such structures are put up on land not belonging to the person, the expenditure is of revenue nature in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 233 ITR 468. The same view has been taken by this Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Premlatha Vs. ITO 63 ITD 69 (sic ). We are of the considered opinion that the CIT has overlooked this issue of ownership of land.” 9 I.T.A.No.5451/Del/2018 & ITA Nos.4202 to 4204/Del/Del/2019 12. The Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT Vs. Mitsubishi Heavy I…

Ske & C- Kct Joint Venture, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 24(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 5451/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5451/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 बनाम M/S Ske & C-Kct Joint Venture, Dcit 85A, 3Rd Floor, Vs. Circle 24(2) Rishyamook Building, New Delhi. Panchkuian Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aadas9266L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4202 To 4204/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 बनाम M/S Ske & C-Kct Joint Venture, Dcit Thapar House, Central Wing, Vs. Circle 23(2) 3Rd Floor, 124 Janpath, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C

…ion/termination of the contract. In fact, when such structures are put up on land not belonging to the person, the expenditure is of revenue nature in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 233 ITR 468. The same view has been taken by this Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Premlatha Vs. ITO 63 ITD 69 (sic ). We are of the considered opinion that the CIT has overlooked this issue of ownership of land.” 9 I.T.A.No.5451/Del/2018 & ITA Nos.4202 to 4204/Del/Del/2019 12. The Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT Vs. Mitsubishi Heavy I…

PCIT Mumbai 1 vs. Elel Hotels and Investments Ltd

ITA/160/2022HC Delhi31 May 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

…see spent Rs.30.86 crores to facilitate its business and trading operations. Accordingly, the test of capital expenditure as stipulated in Empire Jute Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, (1980) 4 SCC 25, Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Madras Auto Service (P.) Ltd., (1998) 233 ITR 468, Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay City-I vs. Associated Cement Companies Ltd., (1988) 172 ITR 257, Hindustan Times Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi, (1980) 122 ITR 977, CIT Vs. Bharat Aluminium Company Ltd., 2010 SCC OnLine Del 2618 is not satisfied in the present case. 9. Consequently, this Court is of the view that the com…

PCIT Mumbai 1 vs. Elel Hotels and Investments Ltd

ITA-160/2022HC Delhi31 May 2022

…see spent Rs.30.86 crores to facilitate its business and trading operations. Accordingly, the test of capital expenditure as stipulated in Empire Jute Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, (1980) 4 SCC 25, Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Madras Auto Service (P.) Ltd., (1998) 233 ITR 468, Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay City-I vs. Associated Cement Companies Ltd., (1988) 172 ITR 257, Hindustan Times Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi, (1980) 122 ITR 977, CIT Vs. Bharat Aluminium Company Ltd., 2010 SCC OnLine Del 2618 is not satisfied in the present case. 9. Consequently, this Court is of the view that the com…

The ACIT RG 1(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Associated Cement Co., Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed while the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 5259/MUM/2007[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2022AY 2004-2005
For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, Shri ChaitanyaFor Respondent: Shri K.K. Mishra
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH, MUMBAI Shri Pramod Kumar, Vice President Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-(1)(1), Mumbai, Room No. 579, Aayakar Bhavan, ……………… Appellant Mumbai – 400020 Vs M/s Associated Cement Co. Ltd., Cement House, 121, M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 …………….… Respondent [PAN: AAACT1507C] ACC Limited, (Formerly known as The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.), Cement House, 121, M.K. Road, Mumbai ……………… Appellant [PAN: AAACT1507C] Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Range – 1(1), Mumbai …………….… Respondent Appearances For the App…

M/S. Acc Ltd ( Formely Known As the Associated Cememtn Companies Ltd), Mumbai vs. The Addl CIT RG 1(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed while the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 4895/MUM/2007[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2022AY 2004-2005
For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, Shri ChaitanyaFor Respondent: Shri K.K. Mishra
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH, MUMBAI Shri Pramod Kumar, Vice President Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-(1)(1), Mumbai, Room No. 579, Aayakar Bhavan, ……………… Appellant Mumbai – 400020 Vs M/s Associated Cement Co. Ltd., Cement House, 121, M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 …………….… Respondent [PAN: AAACT1507C] ACC Limited, (Formerly known as The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.), Cement House, 121, M.K. Road, Mumbai ……………… Appellant [PAN: AAACT1507C] Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Range – 1(1), Mumbai …………….… Respondent Appearances For the App…

M/S Jain Amar Clothing Private Limited, Ludhiana vs. DCIT-CC-3, Ludhiana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 220/CHANDI/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Apr 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.

For Appellant: Shri S.C. Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 30Section 37

…es deserve to be deleted since the facts of the case are not correct. 4. Your kind attention is also invited to the Judgement of Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Tamil Nadu, Madras vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. reported in 233 ITR 468. Your kind attention is invited to the second last para of the judgement which is reproduced as under: "All these cases have looked upon expenditure which did bring about some kind of an enduring benefit to the company as a revenue expenditure when the expenditure did not bring into existence any capital asset for the company. The asset which was…

ACIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi vs. Benetton India P.Ltd, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1091/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandraita No. 1091/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Acit, Vs M/S Benetton India Pvt. Ltd., Circle-4(2), B-25, Infocity, Sector-43, New Delhi-110002 Gurgaon, Haryana-122002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacd1013F Assessee By : Sh. Atul Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. M. K. Das, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.03.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Atul Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. M. K. Das, Sr. DR

…of deposits, we find force in the submission of Ms. Bansat, learned counsel for the Revenue. 17. We may point out that the assessee had relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. [233 ITR 468], However, that judgment would not be applicable to the facts of the present case. The expenditure incurred on the construction of building on a leased property was treated as revenue expenditure by the Supreme Court, as the assessee was getting business advantage and was acquiring the business asset in the context of specific Clause in the lease…

Torrent Power Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT., Range-8, Ahmedabad

In the result cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 776/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Dec 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 254

…(a) That in arriving at its decision in DCIT v. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (227 CTR 206), the jurisdictional Gujarat High had applied the decisions of the Supreme Court in Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT (124 ITR 1) and CIT v. Madras Auto Service P. Ltd. (233 ITR 468) wherein it had been held that unless the expenditure was in the capital field, it could not be regarded as expenditure for the acquisition of an enduring benefit; ITA nos.1577/AHD/2015 with 8 others Asstt. Years 2006-07 & others 4 (b) that the Gujarat High Court had applied the above decisions of the Supreme Court even as it very well knew tha…

DCIT Circle 1, Tirupur vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P) Limited, Tirupur

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2228/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.2227 & 2228/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S. Eastman Exports Global Tax, Clothing Pvt.Ltd. No.10, 12, 2Nd Street, Kumar Circle-I Tirupur. Nagar South, Tirupur-641 603. Pan: Aaccc 0952E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. T.Banusekar, C.A ""For Respondent: 07.07.2021
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,‘डी’’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "संह, उपा"य" एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद&य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.2227 & 2228/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) The Deputy Commissioner of Income Vs M/s. Eastman Exports Global Tax, Clothing Pvt.Ltd. No.10, 12, 2nd Street, Kumar Circle-I Tirupur. Nagar South, Tirupur-641 603. PAN: AACCC 0952E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Mr. Srinivasa Rao, CIT अपीलाथ" क" ओरसे/ Appellant by : Mr.…

DCIT Circle 1, Tirupur vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P) Limited, Tirupur

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2227/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.2227 & 2228/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S. Eastman Exports Global Tax, Clothing Pvt.Ltd. No.10, 12, 2Nd Street, Kumar Circle-I Tirupur. Nagar South, Tirupur-641 603. Pan: Aaccc 0952E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. T.Banusekar, C.A ""For Respondent: 07.07.2021
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,‘डी’’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "संह, उपा"य" एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद&य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.2227 & 2228/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) The Deputy Commissioner of Income Vs M/s. Eastman Exports Global Tax, Clothing Pvt.Ltd. No.10, 12, 2nd Street, Kumar Circle-I Tirupur. Nagar South, Tirupur-641 603. PAN: AACCC 0952E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Mr. Srinivasa Rao, CIT अपीलाथ" क" ओरसे/ Appellant by : Mr.…

Technologies Ltd) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

ITA/214/2020HC Delhi05 Jul 2021
For Appellant: -.................................................................... 8For Respondent: - .................................................................. 10
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 254Section 35D

…onsidering the decisions on the issue of when a particular expenditure has to be considered as capital expenditure, in the case of Empire Jute Co. Vs CIT 124 ITR 1 (SC); Lakshmiji Sugar Mills Co P Ltd Vs CIT 82 ITR 376 (SC) and Madras Auto Services (P) Ltd 233 ITR 468 (SC) allowed the claim of the assessee observing as under: “8.5.2 The appellant submitted that it had claimed deduction of Rs.77,98,042 on account of payment of commuted lease rentals to Greater Noida Authority for Plot No. 2A taken on lease situated in Greater Noida Industrial Development Area District, Gautam Budh Nagar. The appellant had…

Technologies Ltd) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

ITA/215/2020HC Delhi05 Jul 2021
For Appellant: -.................................................................... 8For Respondent: - .................................................................. 10
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 254Section 35D

…onsidering the decisions on the issue of when a particular expenditure has to be considered as capital expenditure, in the case of Empire Jute Co. Vs CIT 124 ITR 1 (SC); Lakshmiji Sugar Mills Co P Ltd Vs CIT 82 ITR 376 (SC) and Madras Auto Services (P) Ltd 233 ITR 468 (SC) allowed the claim of the assessee observing as under: “8.5.2 The appellant submitted that it had claimed deduction of Rs.77,98,042 on account of payment of commuted lease rentals to Greater Noida Authority for Plot No. 2A taken on lease situated in Greater Noida Industrial Development Area District, Gautam Budh Nagar. The appellant had…

Technologies Ltd) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

ITA/213/2020HC Delhi05 Jul 2021
For Appellant: -.................................................................... 8For Respondent: - .................................................................. 10
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 254Section 35D

…onsidering the decisions on the issue of when a particular expenditure has to be considered as capital expenditure, in the case of Empire Jute Co. Vs CIT 124 ITR 1 (SC); Lakshmiji Sugar Mills Co P Ltd Vs CIT 82 ITR 376 (SC) and Madras Auto Services (P) Ltd 233 ITR 468 (SC) allowed the claim of the assessee observing as under: “8.5.2 The appellant submitted that it had claimed deduction of Rs.77,98,042 on account of payment of commuted lease rentals to Greater Noida Authority for Plot No. 2A taken on lease situated in Greater Noida Industrial Development Area District, Gautam Budh Nagar. The appellant had…