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 367,154 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.

M/S Hilton Roulunds Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/325/2005HC Delhi20 Apr 2018

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

…d against the Revenue. The judgment under appeal is set aside.” Even a `once for all' or lumpsum payment was held to be inconclusive in deciding whether the expenditure was capital or revenue in nature. 19. In CIT v. Madras Auto Services (P.) Ltd. [1998] 233 ITR 468 (SC), while dealing the question as to whether money spent by the tenant for construction in lieu of benefit of reduced rent for the additional space was capital or revenue expenditure, the Supreme Court observed as under: “All these cases have looked upon expenditure which did bring about some kind of an enduring benefit to the company as…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 4202/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2007-08 Acit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No. 226/Del/2011 (Arising Ita No.2720/Del/2011) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.E. Dastur, Sr. Advocate and Shri Ankit Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…rent and allowable as revenue expenditure in the year in which it is claimed, the assessee relied upon the following decisions:- i. Decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute’s case (124 ITR 1). ii. CIT v Madras Auto Services P. Ltd. (1998) 233 ITR 468. iii. Assam Bengal Cement Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1955) 27 ITR 34. iv. CIT V HMT Ltd. 203 ITR 820. v. CIT v. Gemini Arts P Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 201 (Mad.) vi. CIT vs. Madras Auto Service P. Ltd. (1998) 233 ITR 468. vii. CIT vs. Ucal Fuel Systems Ltd. 296 ITR 702. viii. Amway India Enterprises v DCIT 111 ITD 112 (Del) (SB) 5. Regarding payment of sum of…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 2720/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2007-08 Acit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No. 226/Del/2011 (Arising Ita No.2720/Del/2011) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.E. Dastur, Sr. Advocate and Shri Ankit Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…rent and allowable as revenue expenditure in the year in which it is claimed, the assessee relied upon the following decisions:- i. Decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute’s case (124 ITR 1). ii. CIT v Madras Auto Services P. Ltd. (1998) 233 ITR 468. iii. Assam Bengal Cement Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1955) 27 ITR 34. iv. CIT V HMT Ltd. 203 ITR 820. v. CIT v. Gemini Arts P Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 201 (Mad.) vi. CIT vs. Madras Auto Service P. Ltd. (1998) 233 ITR 468. vii. CIT vs. Ucal Fuel Systems Ltd. 296 ITR 702. viii. Amway India Enterprises v DCIT 111 ITD 112 (Del) (SB) 5. Regarding payment of sum of…

DCIT, Tiruppur vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing P. Ltd., Tiruppur

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 300/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. T. Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sailendra Mamidi, Principal CIT
Section 2(24)Section 32(1)

…kar, the Ld. representative for the assessee, submitted that this Tribunal in the assessee's own case for assessment year 2011-12, found that in view of the (2007) (293 ITR 432) and also judgment of Apex Court in CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P.) Ltd. (1998) (233 ITR 468), the amount spent by the assessee in construction of the building has to be treated as revenue expenditure since the ownership of the building was with lessor. According to the Ld. representative, in fact, this Tribunal after referring to the judgment of Apex Court in Madras Auto Service (P.) (supra) and the judgment of Madras High Court in T…

Eastman Exports Global Clothing Pvt Ltd., Tiruppur vs. DCIT, Tiruppur

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 291/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Sh. T. Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sailendra Mamidi, Principal CIT
Section 2(24)Section 32(1)

…kar, the Ld. representative for the assessee, submitted that this Tribunal in the assessee's own case for assessment year 2011-12, found that in view of the (2007) (293 ITR 432) and also judgment of Apex Court in CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P.) Ltd. (1998) (233 ITR 468), the amount spent by the assessee in construction of the building has to be treated as revenue expenditure since the ownership of the building was with lessor. According to the Ld. representative, in fact, this Tribunal after referring to the judgment of Apex Court in Madras Auto Service (P.) (supra) and the judgment of Madras High Court in T…

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

In the result, ground of appeal

ITA 3636/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P.K Bansal, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri. J. D. MistriFor Respondent: Shri. Anand Mohan DR
Section 115JSection 11ASection 14ASection 253Section 32Section 32(2)Section 72

…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…

M/S Tcg Lifesciences Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-11, Kolkata

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 966/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am] I.T.A No. 1053/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2010-11 A.C.I.T., Circle-11(2) -Vs.- M/S. Tcg Lifesciences Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcc 0401 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A No. 966/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Tcg Lifesciences Pvt.Ltd. -Vs- C.I.T.(A)-22, (Formerly “Tcg Lifesciences Ltd.) Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcc 0401 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Department : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) For The Assessee : Shri S.P.Singh, Irs (Rtd.) & Shri Manoneet Dalal & Ms.Gunjan Khanna, Cas Date Of Hearing : 14.09.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 22.09.2017. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.P.Singh, IRS (Rtd.) & Shri ManoneetFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 92Section 92ASection 92B(1)Section 92CSection 92F

…s no doubting the business rationale of such IPO related expenses. 3. Now, coming to the issue of the expenses being capital or revenue in nature, in this regard, relying on the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Madras Auto Service (P.) Ltd. (1998) (233 ITR 468) and the Jurisdictional Hon'ble High Court in the cases of Binani Cement Ltd. (ITA No. 265 of 2009) and Graphite India (221 ITR 420) (1996), it emerges that an expenditure of capital nature ought to bring into existence any item of capital nature. In the instant case, the expenses for preparation of the offer documents for proposed issue of share…

ACIT, Circle-11(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Tcg Lifesciences Limited., Kolkata

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1053/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am] I.T.A No. 1053/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2010-11 A.C.I.T., Circle-11(2) -Vs.- M/S. Tcg Lifesciences Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcc 0401 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A No. 966/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Tcg Lifesciences Pvt.Ltd. -Vs- C.I.T.(A)-22, (Formerly “Tcg Lifesciences Ltd.) Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcc 0401 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Department : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) For The Assessee : Shri S.P.Singh, Irs (Rtd.) & Shri Manoneet Dalal & Ms.Gunjan Khanna, Cas Date Of Hearing : 14.09.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 22.09.2017. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.P.Singh, IRS (Rtd.) & Shri ManoneetFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 92Section 92ASection 92B(1)Section 92CSection 92F

…s no doubting the business rationale of such IPO related expenses. 3. Now, coming to the issue of the expenses being capital or revenue in nature, in this regard, relying on the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Madras Auto Service (P.) Ltd. (1998) (233 ITR 468) and the Jurisdictional Hon'ble High Court in the cases of Binani Cement Ltd. (ITA No. 265 of 2009) and Graphite India (221 ITR 420) (1996), it emerges that an expenditure of capital nature ought to bring into existence any item of capital nature. In the instant case, the expenses for preparation of the offer documents for proposed issue of share…

B & A Digi Tactical Solutions Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 304/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Aug 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. B. Sagadevan, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: 23-08-2017
Section 31Section 32Section 37

…for the words used and, hence, we are bound to consider the question by giving the literal meaning to the expressions and phraseologies by the legislature applied.” Further applying the ratio, amongst others, obtaining in the case of Madras Auto Service P Ltd 233 ITR 468 the Hon’ble High Court, the jurisdictional ITAT in its order dated 11.9.2015 in ITA No.700/Mds/2014 for the A.Y.2008-09 in the case of the Continental Enterprises v. ITO has dismissed the claim of 100% depreciation by the assessee. 10. For the detailed reasons discussed and illustrations made in the foregoing and applying the ratio as above, the…

B and A Digi Tactical Solutions Private Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

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

ITA 1503/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1503/Mds/2016 "नधा*रण वष* /Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: 17.04.2017
Section 31Section 32Section 37

…for the words used and, hence, we are bound to consider the question by giving the literal meaning to the expressions and phraseologies by the legislature applied.” Further applying the ratio, amongst others, obtaining in the case of Madras Auto Service P Ltd 233 ITR 468 the Hon’ble High Court, the jurisdictional ITAT in its order dated 11.9.2015 in ITA No.700/Mds/2014 for the A.Y.2008- 09 in the case of the Continental Enterprises v. ITO has dismissed the claim of 100% depreciation by the assessee. 10. For the detailed reasons discussed and illustrations made in the foregoing and applying the ratio as above, th…

Addl CIT 1(3), Mumbai vs. Standard Chartered Invetments & Loans (I) Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2908/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jun 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2792/Mum/2011 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Standard Chartered Investments & Additional Commissioner Of Loans (India) Limited Income Tax 1(3) बनाम/ (Cin U65990Mh2003Plc142829) Aaykar Bhavan Oriental Building Vs. M.K. Road 364, Dr. D.N. Road, Fort Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai – 400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aahcs-3462-N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2908/Mum/2011 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Joint Commissioner Of Income Standard Chartered Investments & Loans (India) Limited Tax 1(3) Osd बनाम/ Oriental Building Aaykar Bhavan Vs. 364, Dr. D.N. Road, Fort M.K. Road Mumbai – 400 001 Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aahcs-3462-N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Sanjiv M. Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Naveen Gupta, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)

…d that the assessee received benefit of enduring nature in view of the fact that the assessee did not owned the said premises and did not acquire any new capital asset. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Apex court in CIT Vs. Madras Auto Services P. Ltd. [233 ITR 468]. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused relevant material on record. It is undisputed fact that the assessee, being NBFC, was already engaged in corporate financing. It proposed to enter into retail finance segment and during the course, incurred the impugned expenditure. Therefore, as rightly noted by Ld. CIT(A), there was no new li…

Standard Chartered Investments & Loans (India) Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl. C.I.T. -1(3), Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2792/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jun 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2792/Mum/2011 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Standard Chartered Investments & Additional Commissioner Of Loans (India) Limited Income Tax 1(3) बनाम/ (Cin U65990Mh2003Plc142829) Aaykar Bhavan Oriental Building Vs. M.K. Road 364, Dr. D.N. Road, Fort Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai – 400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aahcs-3462-N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2908/Mum/2011 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Joint Commissioner Of Income Standard Chartered Investments & Loans (India) Limited Tax 1(3) Osd बनाम/ Oriental Building Aaykar Bhavan Vs. 364, Dr. D.N. Road, Fort M.K. Road Mumbai – 400 001 Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aahcs-3462-N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Sanjiv M. Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Naveen Gupta, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)

…d that the assessee received benefit of enduring nature in view of the fact that the assessee did not owned the said premises and did not acquire any new capital asset. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Apex court in CIT Vs. Madras Auto Services P. Ltd. [233 ITR 468]. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused relevant material on record. It is undisputed fact that the assessee, being NBFC, was already engaged in corporate financing. It proposed to enter into retail finance segment and during the course, incurred the impugned expenditure. Therefore, as rightly noted by Ld. CIT(A), there was no new li…

DCIT, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela vs. M/S. Altrade Minerals Pvt. Ltd., Rourkela

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 457/CTK/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

…ention of the revenue that the assessee had received al advantage of enduring nature by making such a lump sum payment has been negatived by the Tribunal and in our view rightly. 3. The Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P.) Ltd. [1998] 233 ITR 468, has held that to decide whether expenditure is reverse or capital one has to look at the expenditure from a commercial point of view. The Court observed at page 472 "Whatever substitutes for revenue expenditure should normally be considered as revenue expenditure". Had the assessee chosen to pay rent annually for each and every year of lease suc…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Vatika Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 2331/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, Vatika Hospitality Central Circle-20, Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Room No. 333, E- 621A, Devika Tower, 2, Ara Centre, 6, Nehru Tower, New Jhandewalan Extn, Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacv0695D (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vatika Hospitality Central Circle-20, Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Room No. 333, E- 621A, Devika Tower, 2, Ara Centre, 6, Nehru Tower, New Jhandewalan Extn, Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacv0695D (Appellant) (Respondent) Vatika Hospitality Dcit, Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-20, Vs. 621A, Devika Tower, Room No. 333, 6, Nehru Tower, New E-2, Ara Centre, Delhi Jhandewalan Pan:Aaacv0695D Extn, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. SS Rana, CIT DRFor Respondent: Sh. CS Agarwal, Sr. Adv
Section 271

…of Empire jute company Ltd versus CIT (supra). He further referred to the decision of the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in case of installments supply private Ltd versus CIT 149 ITR 5 and CIT versus Madras auto services private limited of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in 233 ITR 468. He stated that it is a settled law that the expenditure incurred in respect of premises taken only is on repairs and renovation, hence revenue expenditure and not capital expenditure. Therefore in the end his contention was that the expenditure incurred by the assessee is revenue expenditure in nature and therefore should have been allowed as de…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Amec Foster Wheeler India Private Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1762/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jan 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Sriram Seshadri, C.A Department by : Shri. A.V. Sreekanth, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. A.V. Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 147

…e-laying of damaged floors, and partitions etc in a leased premise for running of a hospital. The lease deed did not provide for such expenditure to be undertaken by the lessor. Drawing support from the Apex court decision in CIT .v. Madras Auto Service P Ltd 233 ITR 468 the expenditure was held to be revenue in nature and deductible as it was for the purpose of carrying on business. The minor repairs were but essential to use the leased premises as a hospital which require the damaged floor tiles to be replaced, painting of walls and minor partitions to be put in place. In the context of the assessee there, thes…

Amee Foster Wheeler India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1531/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jan 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Sriram Seshadri, C.A Department by : Shri. A.V. Sreekanth, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. A.V. Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 147

…e-laying of damaged floors, and partitions etc in a leased premise for running of a hospital. The lease deed did not provide for such expenditure to be undertaken by the lessor. Drawing support from the Apex court decision in CIT .v. Madras Auto Service P Ltd 233 ITR 468 the expenditure was held to be revenue in nature and deductible as it was for the purpose of carrying on business. The minor repairs were but essential to use the leased premises as a hospital which require the damaged floor tiles to be replaced, painting of walls and minor partitions to be put in place. In the context of the assessee there, thes…

M/S. Tata Motors Ltd., Mumbai vs. Jt. CIT Spl. RG. - 2, Mumbai

Appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 7148/MUM/2004[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2017AY 1998-1999
For Appellant: Shri Dinesh VyasFor Respondent: Shri-Anand Mohan-CIT-DR
Section 254(1)Section 37

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ “ “ “ ई” ” ” ” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, , , , सी एवं सी सी. एन सी एन एन. "साद एन "साद "साद,, "याियक "साद "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/ ITA/6214/M/2003: िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-1997-98 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष…

Tata Motors Ltd vs. DCIT RG - 2(1)

Appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 6214/MUM/2003[1997 - 98]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2017
For Appellant: Shri Dinesh VyasFor Respondent: Shri-Anand Mohan-CIT-DR
Section 254(1)Section 37

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ “ “ “ ई” ” ” ” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, , , , सी एवं सी सी. एन सी एन एन. "साद एन "साद "साद,, "याियक "साद "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/ ITA/6214/M/2003: िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-1997-98 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Amec Foster Wheeler India Private Limited, Chennai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes whereas that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1761/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. Sriram Seshadri, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A.V. Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 32(1)

…e-laying of damaged floors, and partitions etc in a leased premise for running of a hospital. The lease deed did not provide for such expenditure to be undertaken by the lessor. Drawing support from the Apex court decision in CIT .v. Madras Auto Service P Ltd 233 ITR 468 the expenditure was held to be revenue in nature and deductible as it was for the purpose of carrying on business. The minor repairs were but essential to use the leased premises as a hospital which require the damaged floor tiles to be replaced, painting of walls and minor partitions to be put in place. In the context of the assessee there, thes…

Amee Foster Wheeler India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes whereas that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1530/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Shri. Sriram Seshadri, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A.V. Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 32(1)

…e-laying of damaged floors, and partitions etc in a leased premise for running of a hospital. The lease deed did not provide for such expenditure to be undertaken by the lessor. Drawing support from the Apex court decision in CIT .v. Madras Auto Service P Ltd 233 ITR 468 the expenditure was held to be revenue in nature and deductible as it was for the purpose of carrying on business. The minor repairs were but essential to use the leased premises as a hospital which require the damaged floor tiles to be replaced, painting of walls and minor partitions to be put in place. In the context of the assessee there, thes…