CIT v. Prakash Pictures

260 ITR 456High Court2003#11390 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2018.

Issues it is cited on

section 295carry forward of lossesbusiness expediencyrule of consistencysection 260section 260asection 40a(3)section 143(1)(a)section 40asection 29revenue expendituresection 28

Judgments citing CIT v. Prakash Pictures

Dharma Productions Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT - 16(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6174/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Dharma Productions Acit-16(1), Private Limited, Room No.439, बनाम/ Unit No.201 & 202, 2Nd 4Th Floor, Vs. Floor, Supreme Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, Off Veera Desai Road, Mumbai-40020 17/18, Shah Industrial Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.Aaacd3889K "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Rakesh Mohan Shri Ram Tiwari-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By 04/06/2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/07/2018 2 M/S Dharma Productions Pvt. Ltd.

Section 143(3)

…wable in its hands. I am also unable to agree with the argument of the learned ARs that it will add to the brand value of the assessee, though it may add to the brand value of actors. 12. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in the case of CIT vs. Prakash Pictures (260 ITR 456) has held that Rule 9B is a special code in the matter of deduction vis-à-vis computation of profits and gains of business of distribution. The observation of the Hon’ble Court would apply to Rule 9A also, which contains similar provisions and deals with computation of profits and gains of film production. Further, in the case of CIT vs S. M. Sag…

Dharma Productions P Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 16(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 25/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Dharma Productions Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of 29, Jains Arcade, 2Nd Floor, 14Th Road, Income-Tax- 16(1) Khar (West), Mumbai 400 052 Aayakar Bhavan, 4Th Floor, Pan:Aaacd 3889 K Room No.439,Mumbai .. Appellant Respondent Appellant By .. Shri Vijay Mehta, Ar .. Respondent By Shri B. S. Bist, Dr Date Of Hearing .. 23-12-2016 .. Date Of Pronouncement 21-03-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

Section 143(3)

…able in its hands. I am also unable to agree with the argument of the learned ARs that it will add to the brand value of the assessee, though it may add to the brand value of actors. 12. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in the case of CIT vs. Prakash Pictures (260 ITR 456) has held that Rule 9B is a special code in the matter of deduction vis-à-vis computation of profits and gains of business of distribution. The observation of the Hon’ble Court would apply to Rule 9A also, which contains similar provisions and deals with computation of profits and gains of film production. Further, in the case of CIT vs S. M. Sag…

Honey Enterprises vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

ITA - 163 / 2002HC Delhi08 Dec 2015
For Appellant: Ms Shashi M. Kapila with Mr Pravesh SharmaFor Respondent: Ms Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel
Section 260ASection 40A(3)

…is would render the expenses allowable under Section 37(1) of the Act as “dead expenses” and the normal computation provisions as wholly unworkable. Ms Kapila referred to the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Prakash Pictures: (2003) 260 ITR 456 (Bom.) in support of her contention that Rule 9B of the Rules has to be interpreted as 2015:DHC:10015-DB ITA 163/2002 & Connected Matters Page 12 of 39 laying down a principle for amortization of the cost of films for arriving at the true profits. She submitted that if the cost of feature films is amortized to the extent o…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Honey Enterprises

ITA - 537 / 2004HC Delhi08 Dec 2015
For Appellant: Ms Shashi M. Kapila with Mr Pravesh SharmaFor Respondent: Ms Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel
Section 260ASection 40A(3)

…is would render the expenses allowable under Section 37(1) of the Act as “dead expenses” and the normal computation provisions as wholly unworkable. Ms Kapila referred to the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Prakash Pictures: (2003) 260 ITR 456 (Bom.) in support of her contention that Rule 9B of the Rules has to be interpreted as 2015:DHC:10015-DB ITA 163/2002 & Connected Matters Page 12 of 39 laying down a principle for amortization of the cost of films for arriving at the true profits. She submitted that if the cost of feature films is amortized to the extent o…

Commr. of Income Tax vs. Honey Enterprises

ITA - 260 / 2002HC Delhi08 Dec 2015
For Appellant: Ms Shashi M. Kapila with Mr Pravesh SharmaFor Respondent: Ms Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel
Section 260ASection 40A(3)

…is would render the expenses allowable under Section 37(1) of the Act as “dead expenses” and the normal computation provisions as wholly unworkable. Ms Kapila referred to the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Prakash Pictures: (2003) 260 ITR 456 (Bom.) in support of her contention that Rule 9B of the Rules has to be interpreted as 2015:DHC:10015-DB ITA 163/2002 & Connected Matters Page 12 of 39 laying down a principle for amortization of the cost of films for arriving at the true profits. She submitted that if the cost of feature films is amortized to the extent o…

Honey Enterprises

ITA/537/2004HC Delhi08 Dec 2015
For Appellant: Ms Shashi M. Kapila with Mr Pravesh SharmaFor Respondent: Ms Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel
Section 260ASection 40A(3)

…is would render the expenses allowable under Section 37(1) of the Act as “dead expenses” and the normal computation provisions as wholly unworkable. Ms Kapila referred to the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Prakash Pictures: (2003) 260 ITR 456 (Bom.) in support of her contention that Rule 9B of the Rules has to be interpreted as 2015:DHC:10015-DB ITA 163/2002 & Connected Matters Page 12 of 39 laying down a principle for amortization of the cost of films for arriving at the true profits. She submitted that if the cost of feature films is amortized to the extent o…

Honey Enterprises

ITA/377/2004HC Delhi08 Dec 2015
For Appellant: Ms Shashi M. Kapila with Mr Pravesh SharmaFor Respondent: Ms Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel
Section 260ASection 40A(3)

…is would render the expenses allowable under Section 37(1) of the Act as “dead expenses” and the normal computation provisions as wholly unworkable. Ms Kapila referred to the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Prakash Pictures: (2003) 260 ITR 456 (Bom.) in support of her contention that Rule 9B of the Rules has to be interpreted as 2015:DHC:10015-DB ITA 163/2002 & Connected Matters Page 12 of 39 laying down a principle for amortization of the cost of films for arriving at the true profits. She submitted that if the cost of feature films is amortized to the extent o…

Honey Enterprises

ITA/260/2002HC Delhi08 Dec 2015
For Appellant: Ms Shashi M. Kapila with Mr Pravesh SharmaFor Respondent: Ms Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel
Section 260ASection 40A(3)

…is would render the expenses allowable under Section 37(1) of the Act as “dead expenses” and the normal computation provisions as wholly unworkable. Ms Kapila referred to the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Prakash Pictures: (2003) 260 ITR 456 (Bom.) in support of her contention that Rule 9B of the Rules has to be interpreted as 2015:DHC:10015-DB ITA 163/2002 & Connected Matters Page 12 of 39 laying down a principle for amortization of the cost of films for arriving at the true profits. She submitted that if the cost of feature films is amortized to the extent o…

Honey Enterprises

ITA/163/2002HC Delhi08 Dec 2015
For Appellant: Ms Shashi M. Kapila with Mr Pravesh SharmaFor Respondent: Ms Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel
Section 260ASection 40A(3)

…is would render the expenses allowable under Section 37(1) of the Act as “dead expenses” and the normal computation provisions as wholly unworkable. Ms Kapila referred to the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Prakash Pictures: (2003) 260 ITR 456 (Bom.) in support of her contention that Rule 9B of the Rules has to be interpreted as 2015:DHC:10015-DB ITA 163/2002 & Connected Matters Page 12 of 39 laying down a principle for amortization of the cost of films for arriving at the true profits. She submitted that if the cost of feature films is amortized to the extent o…

CIT v. Prakash Pictures (260 ITR 456) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax