CIT v. Madras Refineries Ltd.

266 ITR 170High Court2004#1206 most cited

What is CIT v. Madras Refineries Ltd. authority for?

Expenses incurred for community development, even if not directly linked to business operations, can be considered allowable business expenditure if they foster goodwill and are part of evolving business practices.

94

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Madras Refineries Ltd. · section 37(1) · business expenditure · community development expenses · goodwill · corporate social responsibility · allowable expenses · evolving concept of business

Also reported as

138 Taxmann 261

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 115JBSection 135Section 143(3)Section 154Section 8DSection 143(1)(a)

Issues it is cited on

section 35acsection 36(1)(viia)(c)section 40(a)(1)section 80ia(1)section 80hhesection 35absection 248section 135section 35acsr expendituresection 9(1)(vii)(b)substance over form

Judgments citing CIT v. Madras Refineries Ltd.

M/S. Odisha Power Generation Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 84/CTK/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita No Ita No.114/Ctk/2014: Assessment Year Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: S/Shri Dilip Kr. Mohanty/Pradyumna Kumar Sahu

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No ITA No.114/CTK/2014: Assessment Year Assessment Year : 2010-11 ITA No. ITA No.288/CTK/2016: Assessment Year : : Assessment Year : 2011-12 ITA No. ITA No.175/CTK/2016: Assessment Year : : Assessment Year : 2012-13 DCIT, Circle DCIT, Circle-1(1), Vs. Odisha Odisha Power Power Generation Generation Ltd.,7th…

DCIT, Bhubaneswar vs. Orissa Power Generation Corporation Ltd, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 114/CTK/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita No Ita No.114/Ctk/2014: Assessment Year Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: S/Shri Dilip Kr. Mohanty/Pradyumna Kumar Sahu

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No ITA No.114/CTK/2014: Assessment Year Assessment Year : 2010-11 ITA No. ITA No.288/CTK/2016: Assessment Year : : Assessment Year : 2011-12 ITA No. ITA No.175/CTK/2016: Assessment Year : : Assessment Year : 2012-13 DCIT, Circle DCIT, Circle-1(1), Vs. Odisha Odisha Power Power Generation Generation Ltd.,7th…

Pbs Oil Industries Limited, Dhamtari vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Raipur

Appeal is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 6/RPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 06/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Pbs Oil Industries Limited Plot No.1, Arjuni Industrial Area, Dhamtari (C.G.)-493773 Pan : Aabcp3646B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri R.B Doshi, Ar Revenue By : Shri G.N Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 04.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09.09.2022

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…vernment giving patronage or benefit can be no ground to deny the assessee a deduction of that amount under section 37(1) of the Act when such payment had been made for the purpose of assessee’s business. 8. In the case of CIT v. Madras Refineries Ltd. [2004] 266 ITR 170 1, Hon’ble Madras High Court has upheld deductibility of the amount spent by the assessee even on bringing drinking water to locality and in aiding local school. While doing so, Their Lordships observed as follows: The concept of business is not static. It has evolved over a period of time to include within its fold the concrete expression of car…

The DCIT, Circle-1, Bharuch vs. M/S. Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd., Bharuch

In the result, this ground of appeal is also dismissed

ITA 432/SRT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.431/Srt/2018 (Ay 2007-08) & (Hearing In Virtual Court) Deputy Commissioner Of Gujarat Narmada Valley Income-Tax, Circle-1 Bharuch, Fertilizers & Chemicals Vs Above Bank Of Baroda, Ltd. Station Road, Bharuch- P.O. Narmada Nagar, 320001 Dist. Bharuch-392015 Pan : Aaacg 8372 Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent आ.अ.सं./Ita No.432/Srt/2018 & ""या"ेप/C.O. No.12/Srt/2021 [A/O Ita No.432/Srt/2018] (Ay 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner Of Gujarat Narmada Valley Income-Tax, Circle-1 Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. Vs Bharuch, Above Bank Of P.O. Narmada Nagar, Dist. Baroda, Station Road, Bharuch-392015 Pan : Aaacg 8372 Q Bharuch-320001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent/Co- Objector

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…in section 37 is prospective in nature and is applicable from AY 2015-16 onwards. To support his various contention, the ld AR for the assessee also relied on the following decisions,  CIT Vs Chandulal Keshavlal & Co (38 ITR 601),  CIT Vs Madras Refineries (266 ITR 170),  CIT Vs Chetan Transport Corporation (219 ITR 203),  Maharashtra State Finance Corporation Limited Vs DCIT (12 SOT 446),  Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited Vs DCIT (92 TTJ 168), 27 ITA No.431-432/SRT/2018 & CO 12/SRT/2021 (A.Ys 07-08 & 12-13) M/s Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd.  Honda Motorcycle and Scooter India…

The DCIT, Circle-1, Bharuch vs. M/S. Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd., Bharuch

In the result, this ground of appeal is also dismissed

ITA 431/SRT/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.431/Srt/2018 (Ay 2007-08) & (Hearing In Virtual Court) Deputy Commissioner Of Gujarat Narmada Valley Income-Tax, Circle-1 Bharuch, Fertilizers & Chemicals Vs Above Bank Of Baroda, Ltd. Station Road, Bharuch- P.O. Narmada Nagar, 320001 Dist. Bharuch-392015 Pan : Aaacg 8372 Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent आ.अ.सं./Ita No.432/Srt/2018 & ""या"ेप/C.O. No.12/Srt/2021 [A/O Ita No.432/Srt/2018] (Ay 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner Of Gujarat Narmada Valley Income-Tax, Circle-1 Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. Vs Bharuch, Above Bank Of P.O. Narmada Nagar, Dist. Baroda, Station Road, Bharuch-392015 Pan : Aaacg 8372 Q Bharuch-320001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent/Co- Objector

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…in section 37 is prospective in nature and is applicable from AY 2015-16 onwards. To support his various contention, the ld AR for the assessee also relied on the following decisions,  CIT Vs Chandulal Keshavlal & Co (38 ITR 601),  CIT Vs Madras Refineries (266 ITR 170),  CIT Vs Chetan Transport Corporation (219 ITR 203),  Maharashtra State Finance Corporation Limited Vs DCIT (12 SOT 446),  Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited Vs DCIT (92 TTJ 168), 27 ITA No.431-432/SRT/2018 & CO 12/SRT/2021 (A.Ys 07-08 & 12-13) M/s Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd.  Honda Motorcycle and Scooter India…

Regan Powertech Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC-5(1), Chennai

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

ITA 570/CHNY/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.476/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Joint Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Regen Powertech Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Sivanandam, No. 1, Pulla Avenue, Corporate Circle 5(1), Shenoy Nagar, Chennai 600 030. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aadcr5531M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.570/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Regen Powertech Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Sivanandam, No. 1, Pulla Avenue, Income Tax, Corporate Circle 5(1), Shenoy Nagar, Chennai 600 030. Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri R. Venkateswara Reddy, Cit Assessee By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Fca सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 09.05.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15.07.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 3, Chennai, Dated 16.12.2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri R. Venkateswara Reddy, CIT
Section 37(1)Section 41(1)Section 43B

…f the Act when got reimbursed, will partake nature of income in the hands of assessee. 2.4 The ld CIT(A) erred in allowing the claim of deduction towards corporate social responsibility merely following the decision in CIT Vs Madras Refineries Ltd reported in 313 ITR 334 without examining the facts of the case, when such decision did not lay down any law. 2.5 The ld CIT(A) has failed to note that the expenses incurred towards corporate social responsibility were not incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business of assessee as envisaged in section 37(1) of the Act 2.6 The ld CIT(A) has erred in not f…

JCIT(OSD) Corporate Circle 5 (1), Chennai vs. Regen Powertech Private Limited, Chennai

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

ITA 476/CHNY/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.476/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Joint Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Regen Powertech Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Sivanandam, No. 1, Pulla Avenue, Corporate Circle 5(1), Shenoy Nagar, Chennai 600 030. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aadcr5531M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.570/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Regen Powertech Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Sivanandam, No. 1, Pulla Avenue, Income Tax, Corporate Circle 5(1), Shenoy Nagar, Chennai 600 030. Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri R. Venkateswara Reddy, Cit Assessee By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Fca सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 09.05.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15.07.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 3, Chennai, Dated 16.12.2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri R. Venkateswara Reddy, CIT
Section 37(1)Section 41(1)Section 43B

…f the Act when got reimbursed, will partake nature of income in the hands of assessee. 2.4 The ld CIT(A) erred in allowing the claim of deduction towards corporate social responsibility merely following the decision in CIT Vs Madras Refineries Ltd reported in 313 ITR 334 without examining the facts of the case, when such decision did not lay down any law. 2.5 The ld CIT(A) has failed to note that the expenses incurred towards corporate social responsibility were not incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business of assessee as envisaged in section 37(1) of the Act 2.6 The ld CIT(A) has erred in not f…

M/S. the Sandur Manganese & Iron Ores Ltd, Sandur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1965/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri S. Parthasarathi
Section 37(1)

…n is carried on is absolutely essential to exist in the business and to run it in a successful manner as held in the following cases: a) Sri Venkata Satyanarayana Rice Mill Contractors Co vs. CIT (1997) 223 ITR 101 (SC) b) CIT vs. Madras Refineries Ltd (2004) 266 ITR 170 (Mad) c) CIT 86 Anr vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd, 246 CTR 371 d) CIT vs. M.N. Swaminathan, 47 DTR 359. 6. The learned CIT(A) ought to have allowed the expenditure of Rs. 10,40,000/- incurred as Marriage Gift given to the employees as a part of staff welfare payment and accordingly the same is liable to be allowed under Section 37(1) of the Act. 7…

M/S. the Sandur Manganese & Iron Ores Ltd, Sandur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1964/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri S. Parthasarathi
Section 37(1)

…n is carried on is absolutely essential to exist in the business and to run it in a successful manner as held in the following cases: a) Sri Venkata Satyanarayana Rice Mill Contractors Co vs. CIT (1997) 223 ITR 101 (SC) b) CIT vs. Madras Refineries Ltd (2004) 266 ITR 170 (Mad) c) CIT 86 Anr vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd, 246 CTR 371 d) CIT vs. M.N. Swaminathan, 47 DTR 359. 6. The learned CIT(A) ought to have allowed the expenditure of Rs. 10,40,000/- incurred as Marriage Gift given to the employees as a part of staff welfare payment and accordingly the same is liable to be allowed under Section 37(1) of the Act. 7…

Reliance Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Large Taxpayer Unit-2, Mumbai

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 2876/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2022AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 28

…vernment giving patronage or benefit can be no ground to deny the assessee a deduction of that amount under section 37(1) of the Act when such payment had been made for the purpose of assessee's business. 8. In the case of CIT v. Madras Refineries Ltd. [2004] 266 ITR 170 1, Hon'ble Madras High Court has upheld deductibility of the amount spent by the assessee even on bringing drinking water to locality and in aiding local school. While doing so, Their Lordships observed as follows: The concept of business is not static. It has evolved over a period of time to include within its fold the concrete expression of car…

DCIT (Ltu)-2, Mumbai vs. M/S Reliance Industries Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 2344/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2022AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 28

…vernment giving patronage or benefit can be no ground to deny the assessee a deduction of that amount under section 37(1) of the Act when such payment had been made for the purpose of assessee's business. 8. In the case of CIT v. Madras Refineries Ltd. [2004] 266 ITR 170 1, Hon'ble Madras High Court has upheld deductibility of the amount spent by the assessee even on bringing drinking water to locality and in aiding local school. While doing so, Their Lordships observed as follows: The concept of business is not static. It has evolved over a period of time to include within its fold the concrete expression of car…

Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Mumbai

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 1645/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2022AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 28

…vernment giving patronage or benefit can be no ground to deny the assessee a deduction of that amount under section 37(1) of the Act when such payment had been made for the purpose of assessee's business. 8. In the case of CIT v. Madras Refineries Ltd. [2004] 266 ITR 170 1, Hon'ble Madras High Court has upheld deductibility of the amount spent by the assessee even on bringing drinking water to locality and in aiding local school. While doing so, Their Lordships observed as follows: The concept of business is not static. It has evolved over a period of time to include within its fold the concrete expression of car…

M/S Kumaraswamy Mineral Export Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Bellary Range, Bellary

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1654/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Kumaraswamy Mineral Exports Pvt. Ltd., [For & On Behalf Of The Joint Erstwhile Partnership Commissioner Of Firm M/S. Kumaraswamy Income Tax, Mineral Exports], Bellary Range, No. 58, Cunningham Vs. Bellary. Road Cross, Bangalore – 560 052. Pan: Aabfk8539K Appellant Respondent : Shri S.V. Ravishankar, Assessee By Advocate : Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Revenue By Cit Dr(Osd) Date Of Hearing : 21-12-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 04-01-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Has Been Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 22/03/2018 Passed By Ld.Cit(A), Gulbarga For Assessment Year 2011-12 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax [Appeals]-4, Bengaluru Dated 22/03/2018 & The Order Of Assessment Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer Under Section 143 [3] Of The Act Dated 28/03/2014, In So Far As It Is Against The Appellant, Is Opposed To The Law, Weight Of Evidence, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances In The Appellant'S Case.

For Respondent: Shri S.V. Ravishankar
Section 143Section 14ASection 234Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/s. Kumaraswamy Mineral Exports Pvt. Ltd., [For and on behalf of The Joint erstwhile Partnership Commissioner of Firm M/s. Kumaraswamy Income Tax, Mineral Exports], Bellary Range, No. 58, Cunningham Vs. Bellary. Road Cross, Bangalore – 560 052. PAN: AABFK8539K APPELLANT RESPONDENT : Shri S.V. Ravishankar, Assessee by Advocate : Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Revenue by CIT DR(OSD) Date of Hearing : 21-12-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 04-01-2022 ORDER…

M/S the Sandur Manganese & Iron Ores Ltd., Sandur vs. JCIT, Bellary

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1517/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R
Section 37(1)

…dered by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Courtin the case of M/s. Kanhaiyalal Dudheria Vs. JCIT (2019) 418 ITR 410. The Ld. A.R. also placed his reliance on the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Madras Refineries Ltd. (2004) 266 ITR 17, wherein the money has been spent by the assessee for establishing drinking water facilities or for providing aid to the school meant for residents of the locality in which business is situated is held to be allowable as business expenditure. 7.4 The Ld D.R, on the contrary, supported the order passed by Ld CIT(A). He placed his reliance on the d…

M/S the Sandur Manganese & Iron Ores Ltd., Sandur vs. JCIT, Bellary

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1516/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R
Section 37(1)

…dered by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Courtin the case of M/s. Kanhaiyalal Dudheria Vs. JCIT (2019) 418 ITR 410. The Ld. A.R. also placed his reliance on the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Madras Refineries Ltd. (2004) 266 ITR 17, wherein the money has been spent by the assessee for establishing drinking water facilities or for providing aid to the school meant for residents of the locality in which business is situated is held to be allowable as business expenditure. 7.4 The Ld D.R, on the contrary, supported the order passed by Ld CIT(A). He placed his reliance on the d…

M/S the Sandur Manganese & Iron Ores Ltd., Sandur vs. JCIT, Bellary

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1515/BANG/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Oct 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R
Section 37(1)

…dered by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Courtin the case of M/s. Kanhaiyalal Dudheria Vs. JCIT (2019) 418 ITR 410. The Ld. A.R. also placed his reliance on the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Madras Refineries Ltd. (2004) 266 ITR 17, wherein the money has been spent by the assessee for establishing drinking water facilities or for providing aid to the school meant for residents of the locality in which business is situated is held to be allowable as business expenditure. 7.4 The Ld D.R, on the contrary, supported the order passed by Ld CIT(A). He placed his reliance on the d…

National Building Construction Corporation Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addlcit, Special Range-6, Neww Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3819/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 37(1)

…bligation, is allowable as business expenditure. Merely because an expenditure is in the nature of donation, it does not cease to be an expenditure deductible under s. 37(1).” 9.7 The Commissioner of Income tax had mentioned in his order that “the Apex Court (313 ITR 334 SC) CIT Vs Madras Refineries Ltd., while hearing the allowability of CSR expenses observed that neither the High Court nor the Tribunal concerned had given specific finding to the effect that the said CSR expenditure is allowable as business expenditure “. In the above mentioned case, the Apex court has not given any decision on merits of the cas…

Sri. B. Rudragouda, Bellary vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 315/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 37(1)

…wing case laws:- (1) Sri Venkata Satyanarayana Rice Mill Contractors Co. [1997] 223 ITR 101 (SC) (2) CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd. [2014] 360 ITR 714 (Kar) (3) Mysore Kirloskar Ltd. v. CIT [1987] 30 Taxman 467 (Kar) (4) CIT v. Madras Refineries Ltd. [2004] 266 ITR 170 (Mad) (5) CIT v. Cheran Transport Corpn. Ltd. [1996] 219 ITR 203 (Mad) (6) CIT v. Madura Coats Ltd. [2009] 24 DTR (Mad) 24 (7) CIT v. Velumanickam Lodge [2009] 317 ITR 338 (Mad) (8) CIT v. Jayendra Kumar Hiralal [2010] 327 ITR 147 (Guj.) (9) Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. v. CIT [2003] 261 ITR 501 (Bom) (10) CIT v. Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mils Ltd…

Sri. B. Rudragouda, Bellary vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 314/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 37(1)

…wing case laws:- (1) Sri Venkata Satyanarayana Rice Mill Contractors Co. [1997] 223 ITR 101 (SC) (2) CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd. [2014] 360 ITR 714 (Kar) (3) Mysore Kirloskar Ltd. v. CIT [1987] 30 Taxman 467 (Kar) (4) CIT v. Madras Refineries Ltd. [2004] 266 ITR 170 (Mad) (5) CIT v. Cheran Transport Corpn. Ltd. [1996] 219 ITR 203 (Mad) (6) CIT v. Madura Coats Ltd. [2009] 24 DTR (Mad) 24 (7) CIT v. Velumanickam Lodge [2009] 317 ITR 338 (Mad) (8) CIT v. Jayendra Kumar Hiralal [2010] 327 ITR 147 (Guj.) (9) Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. v. CIT [2003] 261 ITR 501 (Bom) (10) CIT v. Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mils Ltd…

Rites Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range-7, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 706/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya[Assessment Year: 2012-13]

For Appellant: Shri R.S .Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gurmil Singh, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 2Section 37

…bligation, is allowable as business expenditure. Merely because an expenditure is in the nature of donation, it does not cease to be an expenditure deductible under s. 37(1)." 9.7 The Commissioner of Income tax had mentioned in his order that "the Apex Court (313 ITR 334 SC) CIT Vs Madras Refineries Ltd., while hearing the allowability of CSR expenses observed that neither the High Court nor the Tribunal concerned had given specific finding to the effect that the said CSR expenditure is allowable as business expenditure ". In the above mentioned case, the Apex court has not given any decision on merits of the cas…