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)

Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 5(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 111/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

…quire any asset but only facilitated carrying on the business more profitably by paying token rent. In arriving at such conclusion the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court had relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT VsMadras Auto Service (233 ITR 468). We note that although the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court was rendered on 23.03.2009, the coordinate bench of this Tribunal while deciding the Revenue’s appeal in the assessee’s case for AY 2008-09 had not taken note of the same and went on to hold the expenditure claimed to be capital in nature. We however find that in the decision…

DCIT Large Tax Payer Unit 1, Chennai vs. M/S Sundaram Asset Management Company Limited, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee(ITA no

ITA 468/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr.Raghavan RamabadranFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 40

…t is considered to be capital expenditure and depreciation will be allowed accordingly. The AO observed that this amendment was effective from ay: 1988-89 and thus decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Madras Auto Services Private Limited 233 ITR 468 relied upon by assessee shall not be relevant as the same deals with pre-amended law. The AO observed that above expenditure incurred by the assessee is not for purposes of current repairs but to get a new advantage by way of interior decoration, extension and renovation of office premises. Thus, as per AO the above expenditure is capital in…

DCIT Large Tax Payer Unit 1, Chennai vs. M/S Sundaram Asset Management Company Limited, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee(ITA no

ITA 467/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr.Raghavan RamabadranFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 40

…t is considered to be capital expenditure and depreciation will be allowed accordingly. The AO observed that this amendment was effective from ay: 1988-89 and thus decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Madras Auto Services Private Limited 233 ITR 468 relied upon by assessee shall not be relevant as the same deals with pre-amended law. The AO observed that above expenditure incurred by the assessee is not for purposes of current repairs but to get a new advantage by way of interior decoration, extension and renovation of office premises. Thus, as per AO the above expenditure is capital in…

DCIT Large Tax Payer Unit 1, Chennai vs. M/S Sundaram Asset Management Company Limited, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee(ITA no

ITA 466/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr.Raghavan RamabadranFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 40

…t is considered to be capital expenditure and depreciation will be allowed accordingly. The AO observed that this amendment was effective from ay: 1988-89 and thus decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Madras Auto Services Private Limited 233 ITR 468 relied upon by assessee shall not be relevant as the same deals with pre-amended law. The AO observed that above expenditure incurred by the assessee is not for purposes of current repairs but to get a new advantage by way of interior decoration, extension and renovation of office premises. Thus, as per AO the above expenditure is capital in…

DCIT Large Tax Payer Unit 1, Chennai vs. M/S Sundaram Asset Management Company Limited, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee(ITA no

ITA 465/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr.Raghavan RamabadranFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 40

…t is considered to be capital expenditure and depreciation will be allowed accordingly. The AO observed that this amendment was effective from ay: 1988-89 and thus decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Madras Auto Services Private Limited 233 ITR 468 relied upon by assessee shall not be relevant as the same deals with pre-amended law. The AO observed that above expenditure incurred by the assessee is not for purposes of current repairs but to get a new advantage by way of interior decoration, extension and renovation of office premises. Thus, as per AO the above expenditure is capital in…

M/S Sundaram Asset Management Company Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Large Tax Payer Unit 1, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee(ITA no

ITA 422/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr.Raghavan RamabadranFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 40

…t is considered to be capital expenditure and depreciation will be allowed accordingly. The AO observed that this amendment was effective from ay: 1988-89 and thus decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Madras Auto Services Private Limited 233 ITR 468 relied upon by assessee shall not be relevant as the same deals with pre-amended law. The AO observed that above expenditure incurred by the assessee is not for purposes of current repairs but to get a new advantage by way of interior decoration, extension and renovation of office premises. Thus, as per AO the above expenditure is capital in…

M/S Sundaram Asset Management Company Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Large Tax Payer Unit 1, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee(ITA no

ITA 421/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr.Raghavan RamabadranFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 40

…t is considered to be capital expenditure and depreciation will be allowed accordingly. The AO observed that this amendment was effective from ay: 1988-89 and thus decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Madras Auto Services Private Limited 233 ITR 468 relied upon by assessee shall not be relevant as the same deals with pre-amended law. The AO observed that above expenditure incurred by the assessee is not for purposes of current repairs but to get a new advantage by way of interior decoration, extension and renovation of office premises. Thus, as per AO the above expenditure is capital in…

M/S Sundaram Asset Management Company Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Large Tax Payer Unit 1, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee(ITA no

ITA 420/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr.Raghavan RamabadranFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 40

…t is considered to be capital expenditure and depreciation will be allowed accordingly. The AO observed that this amendment was effective from ay: 1988-89 and thus decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Madras Auto Services Private Limited 233 ITR 468 relied upon by assessee shall not be relevant as the same deals with pre-amended law. The AO observed that above expenditure incurred by the assessee is not for purposes of current repairs but to get a new advantage by way of interior decoration, extension and renovation of office premises. Thus, as per AO the above expenditure is capital in…

M/S Sundaram Asset Management Company Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Large Tax Payer Unit 1, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee(ITA no

ITA 419/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr.Raghavan RamabadranFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 40

…t is considered to be capital expenditure and depreciation will be allowed accordingly. The AO observed that this amendment was effective from ay: 1988-89 and thus decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Madras Auto Services Private Limited 233 ITR 468 relied upon by assessee shall not be relevant as the same deals with pre-amended law. The AO observed that above expenditure incurred by the assessee is not for purposes of current repairs but to get a new advantage by way of interior decoration, extension and renovation of office premises. Thus, as per AO the above expenditure is capital in…

DCIT 10(3), Mumbai vs. Chemtex Global Engineers P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1626/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm The Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Chemtex Global Income Tax 10(3), Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Room No.451, 4Th Floor Chemtex House, Aayakar Bhavan Main Street, Hiranandani Maharshi Karve Road Gardens, Powai, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 076 Pan/Gir No. Aaccc4458P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) M/S. Chemtex Global Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax 10(3), Room No.451, 4Th Floor Chemtex House, Main Street, Aayakar Bhavan Hiranandani Gardens, Maharshi Karve Road Powai, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 076 Pan/Gir No. Aaccc4458P (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…mounting to Rs. 2,41,084/- without appreciating that the Assessee Company did not offer any additional evidence before the DRP and the disallowance made by the AO are valid in view of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Auto Services P Ltd. (1998) 233 ITR 468 (SC), Bombay High Court judgment in the case of Patel International Films Ltd, 102 ITR 209, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Assam Bengal Cement Co. Ltd. 27 ITR 34 and Alembic Chemical Work, 177 ITR 377. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, vary, omit or substitute any of aforesaid grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time o…

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

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 1677/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Sept 2019AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1676 & 1677/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCITFor Respondent: Sh. T. Banusekar, CA

…, submitted that this is the second round of litigation before this Tribunal. In the first round of litigation, this Tribunal by an order dated 09.11.2017, (2007) 293 ITR 432 and the judgment of Supreme Court in CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P.) Ltd. (1998) 233 ITR 468. According to the Ld. D.R., the Assessing Officer, consequent to the order of this Tribunal remitting back for re-examination, found that the expenditure incurred by the assessee is capital in nature. According to the Ld. D.R., the judgment of Madras High Court and the Apex Court may not be applicable to the facts of the case. The Assessing Of…

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

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 1676/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1676 & 1677/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCITFor Respondent: Sh. T. Banusekar, CA

…, submitted that this is the second round of litigation before this Tribunal. In the first round of litigation, this Tribunal by an order dated 09.11.2017, (2007) 293 ITR 432 and the judgment of Supreme Court in CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P.) Ltd. (1998) 233 ITR 468. According to the Ld. D.R., the Assessing Officer, consequent to the order of this Tribunal remitting back for re-examination, found that the expenditure incurred by the assessee is capital in nature. According to the Ld. D.R., the judgment of Madras High Court and the Apex Court may not be applicable to the facts of the case. The Assessing Of…

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(1), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed in favour of assessee

ITA 4280/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G.S. Pannu & Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri. J.D. MistryFor Respondent: Shri. H.N. Singh

Section 143(3)

…the landlords in order to facilitate payment of nominal rent , can safely be characterized as a „revenue expenditure‟ in the light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of : Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 233 ITR 468 (SC), wherein it was held 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 such construction? The assesse…

ITO 3(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Thebroma Foods P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

ITA 765/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.765/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-13) बिाम/ Ito 3(3)(3) M/S. Theobroma Foods R.No. 672, Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 101, Jamuna Sagar, V. M.K. Road, 59/60, Shahid Bhagat New Marine Lines, Singh Road, Mumbai-400020 Colaba, Mumbai 400005 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aacct0588K (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri. D.G Pansari (Dr) Assessee By: Shri. Rohan Deshpande सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 28.01.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.04.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Revenue, Being Ita No. 765/Mum/2017, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 28.10.2016 In Appeal No. Cit(A)-8/It-344/15-16, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called ―The Cit(A)‖), For Assessment Year(Ay) 2012-13, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From The Assessment Order Dated 31.03.2015 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called ―The Ao‖) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ―The Act‖) For Ay 2012-13. I.T.A. No.765/Mum/2017

For Appellant: Shri. Rohan DeshpandeFor Respondent: Shri. D.G Pansari (DR)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 30

…in facilitating the trading operations of the assessee being apposite and squarely applicable to the case of the Appellant herein as well, a copy thereof is hereto annexed as Annexure F. j) Further, in the case of CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd., [{1998} 233 ITR 468 (SC) ], the Apex Court observed that an expenditure incurred on renovation of a leasehold building has to be treated as revenue in nature. The Apex Court further also noticed that right from the inception, when the ownership of the building is with the lessor and the assessee cannot be said to have acquired any capital asset. The only benefit, wh…

Torrent Energy Ltd., (New Merged With Torrent Power Ltd.), Ahmedabad vs. DCIT Circle 4(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2035/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2035/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri V.R. Chokshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Sr.DR

Section 115JSection 14ASection 35D

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ - अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD – BENCH ‘A’ BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.2035/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Torrent Energy Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Cir.4(1)(2) Ahmedabad. (Now Merged with Torrent Power Ltd.) Ahmedabad PAN : AACCT 8570 B अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri V.R. Chokshi, AR Revenue by : Shri S.K. Dev, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 14/02/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 26/03/2019 आदेश/O R D E R PER RAJP…

Torrent Energy Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 1562/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1562/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2011-12 ) बनाम/ Torrent Energy Ltd. The Ito Torrent House Ward-8(1) Vs. Nr.Dinesh Hall Ahmedabad Ashram Road, Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacct 8570 B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S.N. Soparkar & Shri Parikh Shah, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri G.C. Daxini, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing 28/01/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 19/03/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–8, Ahmedabad [Cit(A) In Short] Vide Appeal No.Cit(A)-Xiv/516/13-14 Dated 12.03.2015 Arising In The Assessment Order Passed Under S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Here-In-After Referred To As "The Act") Dated 21/02/2014 Relevant To Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-12. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. In Law & In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Appellant'S Case, The Learned Cit(A) Has Grossly Erred In Dismissing Ground No. 1 Of The Appellant'S Appeal Before Him Challenging The Very Validity Of The Assessment Order Torrent Energy Ltd. Vs. Ito Asst.Year - 2011-12 Impugned Before Him, On The Ground That It Was General In Nature & Did Not Require Adjudication By Him.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar &For Respondent: Shri G.C. Daxini, Sr.DR

Section 32(1)

…added force; (b) That in arriving at its decision in DCIT v. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (227 CTR 206), the 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 Torrent Energy Ltd. vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2011-12 expenditure was in the capital field, it could not be regarded as expenditure for the acquisition of an enduring benefit; (c) that the Gujarat High Court had applied the above decisions of the Supreme Court even as it very well knew that the lease in the c…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Vns Accessories Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1283/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambledcit Vs Vns Accessories Pvt. Ltd. Circle-26(1) A-11-12, Amrit Nagar C. R. Building Behind Ndse-1 I.P. Estate New Delhi New Delhi Aaccv9888N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…premises is also rented so intention of the assessee could not be to bring into existence of new asset. In this regard the Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble High Court has decided the issue in various decision as under:- CIT vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. 233 ITR 468 the Apex Court, while deciding Civil Appeal relevant for the assessment year 1968-69, observed that as revenue in nature. CIT v. Hi Line Pens 306 ITR 182(Del) Business expenditure — repairs — current repairs — distinction — assessee incurring expenses towards repairing rented premises for its business activity — no intention of assessee to brin…

M/S. T & T Motors Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6499/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shrik. Narasimha Chary & Shri O. P. Meena

Section 143

…A.Y. 2007-08 vide order dated 15.04.2010 in appeal No. 132/2009-10 (PB-69-70) and the Department has accepted the same. The learned counsel for the assessee also supported his view by placing reliance in the case of CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. [1998] 233 ITR 468 (SC) wherein the assessee acting under lease agreement demolished the old premises and constructed new premises which was belonging to lesser and not to lessee, the expenditure was held to be revenue in nature. The learned counsel for the assessee further submitted expenditure incurred on networking,firefighting cabling, tiling, sanitary and part…

M/S Karnataka Road Development Corporation Ltd., Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 284/BANG/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jan 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C.H. Sundar Rao, CIT(DR-I), ITAT, Bengaluru

…Assessee made a prayer for allowing the expenditure incurred on construction of roads should be allowed as revenue expenditure and in this regard placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. 233 ITR 468(SC) wherein it was held that a tenant incurring expenditure of capital nature to the building of which he is a tenant is entitled to claim such expenditure as capital expenditure. This argument in the present case cannot be allowed as neither the books of accounts of the Assessee are maintained as such by showing the grant received from the Gover…

Dr. Apurva Goswamy, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh

ITA 1344/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: This Bench Is To Contest The Confirmation Of Addition Of A Sum Of Rs.1,17,82,620/- Out Of The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer. This Ground Reads As Under:

For Appellant: Shri. Harish NayyarFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta

…nt is of capital nature as the assessee is going to draw enduring benefits from it in the years to come. The assessee cannot claim this expenditure as revenue expenditure as per decision of the IT AT in the case of CIT v. Madras Auto Services Pvt. Ltd. (1998) 233 ITR 468 (SO, the Hon'ble Apex Court summarized the general principal applicable in determining whether a particular expenditure is capital or revenue expenditure as follows. 1. The expenditure at serial number 1,4,6,8,10,11,12,14,21,24 and 26 is consultancy fees paid to Infosys Ltd. On which income tax at source has been duly deducted. On supply of any…

CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd.

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

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

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

Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 5(2), Kolkata

DCIT Large Tax Payer Unit 1, Chennai vs. M/S Sundaram Asset Management Company Limited, Chennai

DCIT Large Tax Payer Unit 1, Chennai vs. M/S Sundaram Asset Management Company Limited, Chennai

DCIT Large Tax Payer Unit 1, Chennai vs. M/S Sundaram Asset Management Company Limited, Chennai

DCIT Large Tax Payer Unit 1, Chennai vs. M/S Sundaram Asset Management Company Limited, Chennai

M/S Sundaram Asset Management Company Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Large Tax Payer Unit 1, Chennai

M/S Sundaram Asset Management Company Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Large Tax Payer Unit 1, Chennai

M/S Sundaram Asset Management Company Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Large Tax Payer Unit 1, Chennai

M/S Sundaram Asset Management Company Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Large Tax Payer Unit 1, Chennai

DCIT 10(3), Mumbai vs. Chemtex Global Engineers P.Ltd, Mumbai

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

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

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(1), Mumbai

ITO 3(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Thebroma Foods P.Ltd, Mumbai

Torrent Energy Ltd., (New Merged With Torrent Power Ltd.), Ahmedabad vs. DCIT Circle 4(1)(2), Ahmedabad

Torrent Energy Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(1), Ahmedabad

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Vns Accessories Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

M/S. T & T Motors Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

M/S Karnataka Road Development Corporation Ltd., Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

Dr. Apurva Goswamy, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh