CIT v. Monnet Industries Ltd.

332 ITR 627High Court2011#5385 most cited

What is CIT v. Monnet Industries Ltd. authority for?

Expenditure incurred for expansion of an ongoing business is often treated as revenue expenditure, and the functional test should be applied to determine the nature of expenditure, rather than solely classifying it as capital expenditure.

22

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2021.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Monnet Industries · software expenditure · revenue expenditure · capital expenditure · functional test · business expansion · ITAT · AO

Also reported as

221 CTR 266

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 80A(6)Section 80IASection 80IA(8)

Issues it is cited on

section 35absection 35abbsection 35asection 35commercial expediencyrevenue expenditurecapital expendituresection 139companyindiasection 143business

Judgments citing CIT v. Monnet Industries Ltd.

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 9, NEW DELHI vs. TIMES INTERNET LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3124/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 3124/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Addl. Cit, Vs M/S Times Internet Ltd., Special Range-9, 10, Daryaganj, New Delhi New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabct1559M

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Gupta, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Ajay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 35D

…of appeal of the revenue on this issue cannot be sustained. ITA No. 2210/Del/2018 A.Y. 2014-15: (Assessee) 13. With regard to the amount of Rs.6,00,000/- confirmed by the ld. CIT (A), the ld. AR relied on the judgment in the case of CIT Vs Monnet Industries 332 ITR 627(Del.) and CIT Vs Prithvi Insurance Company Ltd. 63 ITR 632. 14. Section 35DD of the Income Tax Act states as under: “Amortization of expenditure in case of amalgamation or demerger. 35DD (1) Where an assessee, being an Indian company, incurs any expenditure, on or after the 1st day of April, 1999, wholly and exclusively for the purposes of amal…

TIMES INTERNET LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 9, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2210/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 3124/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Addl. Cit, Vs M/S Times Internet Ltd., Special Range-9, 10, Daryaganj, New Delhi New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabct1559M

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Gupta, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Ajay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 35D

…of appeal of the revenue on this issue cannot be sustained. ITA No. 2210/Del/2018 A.Y. 2014-15: (Assessee) 13. With regard to the amount of Rs.6,00,000/- confirmed by the ld. CIT (A), the ld. AR relied on the judgment in the case of CIT Vs Monnet Industries 332 ITR 627(Del.) and CIT Vs Prithvi Insurance Company Ltd. 63 ITR 632. 14. Section 35DD of the Income Tax Act states as under: “Amortization of expenditure in case of amalgamation or demerger. 35DD (1) Where an assessee, being an Indian company, incurs any expenditure, on or after the 1st day of April, 1999, wholly and exclusively for the purposes of amal…

DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GAIL (INDIA) LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4642/DEL/2013[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 1996-97

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 80HSection 80I

…tion. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: i. CIT vs. Priya Village Roadshows Ltd. 332 ITR 594 (Del) ii. Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. 333 ITR 18 (Del) iii. Jay Engineering Works Ltd. vs. CIT 311 ITR 405 (Del) iv. CIT vs. Monnet Industries Ltd. 221 CTR 266 (Del) v. Prem Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 98 ITR 20 (All) vi. CIT vs. Alembic Glass Industries Ltd. 103 ITR 715 (Guj) vii. CIT vs. Shah Theatre Pvt. Ltd. 169 ITR 499 (Raj) viii. CIT vs. Hindustan Machine Tools Ltd. 175 ITR 212 (Kar) ix. CIT vs. Ghanashyam Machine Tools Ltd. Lex ID 390033 (Guj) x. DCIT vs. Samtel Color Ltd. (I…

GAIL (INDIA) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT-LTU DELHI, NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4454/DEL/2013[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 1996-97

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 80HSection 80I

…tion. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: i. CIT vs. Priya Village Roadshows Ltd. 332 ITR 594 (Del) ii. Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. 333 ITR 18 (Del) iii. Jay Engineering Works Ltd. vs. CIT 311 ITR 405 (Del) iv. CIT vs. Monnet Industries Ltd. 221 CTR 266 (Del) v. Prem Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 98 ITR 20 (All) vi. CIT vs. Alembic Glass Industries Ltd. 103 ITR 715 (Guj) vii. CIT vs. Shah Theatre Pvt. Ltd. 169 ITR 499 (Raj) viii. CIT vs. Hindustan Machine Tools Ltd. 175 ITR 212 (Kar) ix. CIT vs. Ghanashyam Machine Tools Ltd. Lex ID 390033 (Guj) x. DCIT vs. Samtel Color Ltd. (I…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SHRIRAM EPC LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2014/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)

…sting one and the same should be allowed as deduction if there is unity of control of two management as held by Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Idea Cellular 76 Taxcomm. 77 and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Monnet Industries Ltd, 332 ITR 627. 40. As regards to write off of amount paid to M/s. Alpha Energy Systems Ltd. Admittedly, advance was paid during the course of business of the assessee. Since the amount had become irrecoverable the same should be allowed as deduction as revenue loss if not as bad debts as held by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Devi Film…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SHRIRAM EPC LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2013/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)

…sting one and the same should be allowed as deduction if there is unity of control of two management as held by Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Idea Cellular 76 Taxcomm. 77 and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Monnet Industries Ltd, 332 ITR 627. 40. As regards to write off of amount paid to M/s. Alpha Energy Systems Ltd. Admittedly, advance was paid during the course of business of the assessee. Since the amount had become irrecoverable the same should be allowed as deduction as revenue loss if not as bad debts as held by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Devi Film…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SHRIRAM EPC LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2012/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)

…sting one and the same should be allowed as deduction if there is unity of control of two management as held by Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Idea Cellular 76 Taxcomm. 77 and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Monnet Industries Ltd, 332 ITR 627. 40. As regards to write off of amount paid to M/s. Alpha Energy Systems Ltd. Admittedly, advance was paid during the course of business of the assessee. Since the amount had become irrecoverable the same should be allowed as deduction as revenue loss if not as bad debts as held by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Devi Film…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. SHRIRAM EPC LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2011/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)

…sting one and the same should be allowed as deduction if there is unity of control of two management as held by Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Idea Cellular 76 Taxcomm. 77 and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Monnet Industries Ltd, 332 ITR 627. 40. As regards to write off of amount paid to M/s. Alpha Energy Systems Ltd. Admittedly, advance was paid during the course of business of the assessee. Since the amount had become irrecoverable the same should be allowed as deduction as revenue loss if not as bad debts as held by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Devi Film…

SHRIRAM EPC LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1740/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)

…sting one and the same should be allowed as deduction if there is unity of control of two management as held by Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Idea Cellular 76 Taxcomm. 77 and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Monnet Industries Ltd, 332 ITR 627. 40. As regards to write off of amount paid to M/s. Alpha Energy Systems Ltd. Admittedly, advance was paid during the course of business of the assessee. Since the amount had become irrecoverable the same should be allowed as deduction as revenue loss if not as bad debts as held by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Devi Film…

SHRIRAM EPC LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1604/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)

…sting one and the same should be allowed as deduction if there is unity of control of two management as held by Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Idea Cellular 76 Taxcomm. 77 and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Monnet Industries Ltd, 332 ITR 627. 40. As regards to write off of amount paid to M/s. Alpha Energy Systems Ltd. Admittedly, advance was paid during the course of business of the assessee. Since the amount had become irrecoverable the same should be allowed as deduction as revenue loss if not as bad debts as held by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Devi Film…

M/S. ELECTROSTEEL CASTING LIMITED.,KOLKATA vs. ITO (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) WARD, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 140/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 133(6)Section 201(1)Section 250Section 9(1)(vii)Section 9(2)

…ereto etc. and found that there was complete interlacing and intermingling of the funds of the assessee in all its units besides there being a common management. The Tribunal also referred to the judgment of this Court in CIT v. Monnet Industries Ltd., (2009) 221 CTR 266 and applying this decision to the facts found, it held that the expenditure was revenue in nature having been incurred for the expansion of the existing business and accordingly directed the Assessing Officer to allow the same as deduction.” 12. In the case on hand we are of the considered opinion that the facts of the case leads us to a conclusi…

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, HISAR

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

ITA 893/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. N. S. Sainiita No. 893/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Jindal Centre, 12, Bhikaji Cama Income Tax, Hisar Circle, Place, New Delhi-110066 Hisar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacj7079D Assessee By : Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv., Sh. Sumit Lal Chandani, Adv., Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv. & Ms. Pallavi Saigal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sanjay I. Bara, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :05.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Assessing Officer U/S 143(3)/144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 29.10.2018 For Assessment Years 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I. Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80Section 80I

…sha Iron & Ferro Metal Corp. Ltd. : 296 ITR 140 (Delhi) " CIT Vs. Rane (Madras) Ltd. : 293 ITR 459 (Delhi) " Indo rama Synthetics (I) Ltd.Vs. CIT: 228 CTR 278 (Delhi) " Jay Engineering works ltd. Vs. CIT: 311 ITR 405 (Delhi) " CIT Vs. Monnet Industries Ltd. : 221 CTR 266 (Delhi) " CIT Vs. havells India Limited: 352 ITR 376 (Delhi) 137. It is thus settled position that expenditure incurred for the purpose of expansion/extension of the existing business is allowable revenue expenditure. 138. In the present case, as stated above, expenses were, it is reiterated, incurred merely to explore possibility of raw materia…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 vs. CHL,LIMITED

ITA/693/2017HC Delhi21 Aug 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Section 14A

…* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 32&39 + ITA No. 638/2017 PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 Appellant Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Senior Standing Counsel versus CHL LIMITED Through: None Respondent + ITA No. 693/2017 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 Appellant Through: Mr Zoheb Hossain, Senior Standing Counsel versus CHL LIMITED Through: None CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH % ORDER 21.08.2017 Respondent 1. These appeals are directed by the Revenue against the common order dated 17'*' February 2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITA Nos. 638/2017 & 693/2017 Page 1 of3 Digi…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,DELHI vs. M/S SONA STEERING SYSTEMS LTD.

ITA/160/2001HC Delhi13 Jul 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA

…s been followed by the ITAT for AYs 1992-93, 1993-94 and 1995-96. Further the decisions of this Court in Jay Engineering Works Ltd. v. CIT (2009) 311 ITR 405 (Delhi), CIT v. SRF (2015) 372 ITR 425 (Delhi) and as well as CIT v. Monnet Industries Ltd (2011) 332 ITR 627 (Delhi) which was later affirmed by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Monnet Industries Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 304 (SC) support the case of the Assessee in this regard. 4. Consequently, the said question, which has been framed for the said three AYs 1992-93, 1993-94 and 1995-96, is answered in favour of the Assessee and against the Respondent.…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. BHARAT HOTELS LIMITED

The appeal is disposed of

ITA-62/2007HC Delhi31 Jul 2015
Section 36Section 43(1)

…ITA No.62 of 2007 Page 1 of 9 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI R-6A Date of Decision: 31st July, 2015 + ITA 62/2007 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through: Mr N. P. Sahni, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr Nitin Gulati, Junior Standing Counsel. versus BHARAT HOTELS LIMITED ..... Respondent Through: Mr Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate with Ms Bhavita Kumar, Advocate. Mr Prakash Kumar, Advocate. CORAM: HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU DR. S. MURALIDHAR, J. 1. This app…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. BHARAT HOTELS LIMITED

The appeal is disposed of

ITA/62/2007HC Delhi31 Jul 2015
Section 36Section 43(1)

…ITA No.62 of 2007 Page 1 of 9 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI R-6A Date of Decision: 31st July, 2015 + ITA 62/2007 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through: Mr N. P. Sahni, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr Nitin Gulati, Junior Standing Counsel. versus BHARAT HOTELS LIMITED ..... Respondent Through: Mr Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate with Ms Bhavita Kumar, Advocate. Mr Prakash Kumar, Advocate. CORAM: HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU DR. S. MURALIDHAR, J. 1. This app…

CIT vs. BHARTI INFOTEL LTD

ITA - 387 / 2012HC Delhi03 Feb 2015
Section 35A

…ongoing business and cited several judgments. The very same issue stands covered by the decision of this Court in CIT v. Modi Industries Ltd., 200 ITR 341 (Delhi). This has received further endorsement in judgments reported as CIT v. Monnet Industries, 221 CTR 266 (Del) and CIT v. Relaxo Footwears, 293 ITR 231 (Del). Question No.4 8. The assessee had claimed Rs.50,10,742/- as software expenditure. Even though the AO had initially disallowed the claim, the ITAT directed remitting of the matter. The ITAT relied upon its Special Bench decision in Amway India Enterprises v. DCIT, to hold that there…

CIT vs. BHARTI INFOTEL LTD

ITA - 386 / 2012HC Delhi03 Feb 2015
Section 35A

…ongoing business and cited several judgments. The very same issue stands covered by the decision of this Court in CIT v. Modi Industries Ltd., 200 ITR 341 (Delhi). This has received further endorsement in judgments reported as CIT v. Monnet Industries, 221 CTR 266 (Del) and CIT v. Relaxo Footwears, 293 ITR 231 (Del). Question No.4 8. The assessee had claimed Rs.50,10,742/- as software expenditure. Even though the AO had initially disallowed the claim, the ITAT directed remitting of the matter. The ITAT relied upon its Special Bench decision in Amway India Enterprises v. DCIT, to hold that there…

CIT vs. BHARTI TELENET LTD

ITA - 1110 / 2011HC Delhi03 Feb 2015
Section 35A

…ongoing business and cited several judgments. The very same issue stands covered by the decision of this Court in CIT v. Modi Industries Ltd., 200 ITR 341 (Delhi). This has received further endorsement in judgments reported as CIT v. Monnet Industries, 221 CTR 266 (Del) and CIT v. Relaxo Footwears, 293 ITR 231 (Del). Question No.4 8. The assessee had claimed Rs.50,10,742/- as software expenditure. Even though the AO had initially disallowed the claim, the ITAT directed remitting of the matter. The ITAT relied upon its Special Bench decision in Amway India Enterprises v. DCIT, to hold that there…

CIT vs. HAVELLS INDIA LTD

In the result the appeals filed by the revenue are disposed of with no

ITA/57/2012HC Delhi21 May 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 195Section 260ASection 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…ITA 55/2012 & 57/2012 Page 1 of 22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 7th May, 2012 % Date of Decision: 21st May, 2012 + ITA No.55/2012 + ITA No.57/2012 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .....Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel. Versus HAVELLS INDIA LTD. ....Respondents Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Ms. Kavita Jha & Mr. Somnath Shukla, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to…

Showing 1–20 of 22 · Page 1 of 2

CIT v. Monnet Industries Ltd. (332 ITR 627) — Cited in 22 Judgments | BharatTax