CIT v. PVP Ventures Ltd.

211 Taxmann 554High Court2012#708 most cited

What is CIT v. PVP Ventures Ltd. authority for?

Employee Stock Option Plan (ESOP) expenses are an allowable business deduction. Such costs are to be recognized and deducted over the vesting period, as they are not considered contingent in nature.

143

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,421 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. PVP Ventures Ltd. · PVP Ventures Ltd. · Section 37(1) · ESOP expenses · employee stock option plan · allowability of deduction · vesting period · share-based payments · contingent expenses

Also reported as

23 Taxmann.com 28690 DTR 340

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 115JBSection 132Section 139Section 145(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 2(15a)section 17(2)(iiia)profit split methodsection 17(2)section 92ca(4)cost plus methodcomparable uncontrolled price methodsection 43ainterest on interestsection 32(1)(iia)section 80hinterest free advances

Judgments citing CIT v. PVP Ventures Ltd.

Arivent Technologies Holdings Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1308/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…"द"ली म"म"म"म" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, "द"ली आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "द"ली "द"ली "यायपीठ "द"ली "यायपीठ "यायपीठ “आई "यायपीठ आई आई-1”, "द"ली आई "द"ली "द"ली IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘I-1’, NEW DELHI) सुौी सुषमा चावला सुौी सुषमा चावला सुौी सुषमा चावला, सुौी सुषमा चावला , , , "याियक सदःय एवं "याियक सदःय एवं "याियक सदःय एवं "याियक सदःय एवं ौी ौी ौी ूशांत मह"ष" ौी ूशांत मह"ष" ूशांत मह"ष", , , , लेखा सदःय के ूशांत मह"ष" लेखा सदःय के लेखा सदःय के सम" लेखा सदःय के सम" सम" सम" BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आय…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 2(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 781/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singh

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “H”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 781 & 782/Mum/2018 (Assessment year: 2013-14 & 2014-15) ACIT-2(3)(2), Vs M/s Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd Room No. 552, 5th Floor, 27, BKC, C-27, “G Block Aayakar Bhawan, M.K.Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai Bandra (E) Mumbai-400 051 PAN : AAACK4409J APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Appellant by Shri B. Srinivas, CIT-DR Respondent by Shri FV Irani / Chetan Kaka-ARs Date of hearing 31-07-2019 Date of pronouncement 27-08-2019 O R D E R Per Pawan Singh, Judicial Member : 1. These…

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(OSD), Circle - 4(1)(2), Bangalore vs. M/S. Molecular Connections Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by revenue stands dismissed

ITA 937/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran & Smt.Beena Pillai, Judical Member

For Appellant: Shri K. Seshadri, CAFor Respondent: Dr.P.V.Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT
Section 37(1)

…ITA No937(B)/2019. 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES : “C”, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B.R.BASKARAN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT.BEENA PILLAI, JUDICAL MEMBER ITA No.937(Bang)/2019 (Assessment Year : 2013-14) The Joint Commissioner of Income tax, Cirle-4(1)(2), 2nd Floor, BMTC Building, 80ft Road, 6th Block, Koramangala Bangalore Appellant Vs M/s Molecular Connections Pvt.Ltd., No.5, Brigade Seshamahal, Vanivilas Road, Bangalore-560 004 PAN No.AACCM5956A Respondent Revenue by : Dr.P.V.Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT Appellant by : Shri K. Seshadri, CA Date of hearing : 30-07-2019 Date of pronouncemen…

M/S. Religare Wealth Management Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1780/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Religare Wealth Vs. Dcit, Management Ltd., Circle-21(1), C.R. Building, D3, P3B, District Centre, New Delhi Saket, New Delhi Pan :Aadcr5677C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By S/Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Tejasvi Jain, Ca Respondent By Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr.Dr

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: “E”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Religare Wealth Vs. DCIT, Management Ltd., Circle-21(1), C.R. Building, D3, P3B, District Centre, New Delhi Saket, New Delhi PAN :AADCR5677C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by S/shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Tejasvi Jain, CA Respondent by Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr.DR Date of hearing 27.03.2019 Date of pronouncement 28.03.2019 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27.01.2016 passed by Ld. CIT(A)-…

JCIT (OSD), Chennai vs. Sify Technologies Limited, Chennai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1795/CHNY/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 1650/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Sify Technologies Ltd., Tidel Park, 2Nd Floor, Tax, Vs. Large Taxpayer Unit – 1, No.4, Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 101. Taramani, Chennai – 600 113. [Pan: Aaacs 9032R] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1793, 1794 & 1795/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S. Sify Technologies Ltd., Tidel Park, 2Nd Floor, (Osd), Large Taxpayer Unit – 1, No.4, Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 034 Taramani, Chennai – 600 113. [Pan: Aaacs 9032R] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Respondent: Shri.Homi Rajvangh, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 40

…res are allotted through SEBI guidelines and expenditure is in the nature of Revenue expenditure and claimed deduction and ld. Authorised Representative supported his arguments with decision of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. PVP Ventures Ltd 90 DTR 340 (Mad) wherein it held that staff welfare expenditure incurred by the assessee in respect of Employees Staff Option Plan as per SEBI guidelines is an ascertained liability and is allowable as expenditure in computation of income. Considering the jurisdictional High Court decision, we uphold the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and allo…

JCIT (OSD), Chennai vs. Sify Technologies Limited, Chennai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1794/CHNY/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 1650/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Sify Technologies Ltd., Tidel Park, 2Nd Floor, Tax, Vs. Large Taxpayer Unit – 1, No.4, Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 101. Taramani, Chennai – 600 113. [Pan: Aaacs 9032R] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1793, 1794 & 1795/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S. Sify Technologies Ltd., Tidel Park, 2Nd Floor, (Osd), Large Taxpayer Unit – 1, No.4, Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 034 Taramani, Chennai – 600 113. [Pan: Aaacs 9032R] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Respondent: Shri.Homi Rajvangh, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 40

…res are allotted through SEBI guidelines and expenditure is in the nature of Revenue expenditure and claimed deduction and ld. Authorised Representative supported his arguments with decision of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. PVP Ventures Ltd 90 DTR 340 (Mad) wherein it held that staff welfare expenditure incurred by the assessee in respect of Employees Staff Option Plan as per SEBI guidelines is an ascertained liability and is allowable as expenditure in computation of income. Considering the jurisdictional High Court decision, we uphold the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and allo…

JCIT (OSD), Chennai vs. Sify Technologies Limited, Chennai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1793/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 1650/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Sify Technologies Ltd., Tidel Park, 2Nd Floor, Tax, Vs. Large Taxpayer Unit – 1, No.4, Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 101. Taramani, Chennai – 600 113. [Pan: Aaacs 9032R] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1793, 1794 & 1795/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S. Sify Technologies Ltd., Tidel Park, 2Nd Floor, (Osd), Large Taxpayer Unit – 1, No.4, Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 034 Taramani, Chennai – 600 113. [Pan: Aaacs 9032R] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Respondent: Shri.Homi Rajvangh, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 40

…res are allotted through SEBI guidelines and expenditure is in the nature of Revenue expenditure and claimed deduction and ld. Authorised Representative supported his arguments with decision of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. PVP Ventures Ltd 90 DTR 340 (Mad) wherein it held that staff welfare expenditure incurred by the assessee in respect of Employees Staff Option Plan as per SEBI guidelines is an ascertained liability and is allowable as expenditure in computation of income. Considering the jurisdictional High Court decision, we uphold the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and allo…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Corporate Circle 6 (2), Chennai vs. M/S Solarwinds India Private Limited, Chennai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 428/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 428/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Solarwinds India Private Limited, Corporate Circle -6(2), Vs. No. 16, Iii Floor, Rms Apartment, Aayakarbhavan, New Block, No. 12, Gopalakrishna Street, 7Th Floor, 121 M.G. Road, Pondy Bazaar, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai 600 017. [Pan: Aacct 4499H] ("#यथ%/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Bagmar. R, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. D. Rohini, JCIT
Section 263

…le High Court and in order to keep the issue alive, he disallowed the assessee’s claim. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) considered the Jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of CIT Vs PVP Ventures Ltd 23 Taxmann.com 286 and the CBDT Circular :-3-: 9/2007 dated 20.12.2007 and in view of the binding decisions of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court decision, directed the AO to delete the disallowance made by him. 5. Aggrieved, the Revenue filed this appeal with the following grounds: “1.The Order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) is con…

Larsen & Toubro Infotech Ltd., Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -2, Mumbai

In the result the grounds of

ITA 2263/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanlarsen & Toubro Infotech Pcit-2 Room No. 384, 3Rd Floor, Ltd. Taxation Department, L&T House, 2Nd Floor, N.M. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400001 Pan: Abgps5477E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistri (AR)For Respondent: Shri N.S. Jangpangi (CIT-
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 154Section 253Section 254(1)Section 263Section 37Section 37(1)Section 92

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “A”,MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Larsen & Toubro Infotech PCIT-2 Room No. 384, 3rd Floor, Ltd. Taxation Department, L&T House, 2nd Floor, N.M. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400001 PAN: ABGPS5477E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri J.D. Mistri (AR) Revenue by : Shri N.S. Jangpangi (CIT- DR) Date of hearing 16.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement 19.09.2018 Order Under Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by assessee…

Addl CIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Trent Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1727/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin, D.R
Section 14ASection 23(1)(a)Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/s. Trent Ltd., Additional CIT, Bombay House, Range – 2(3), 2nd Floor, 24, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Homy Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAACL 1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2006-07 DCIT-2(3), M/s. Trent Ltd., R.No.555, Bombay House, 2nd Floor, 24, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai Homi Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAACL 1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Nitesh Joshi, A.R. Revenu…

Trent Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1163/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin, D.R
Section 14ASection 23(1)(a)Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/s. Trent Ltd., Additional CIT, Bombay House, Range – 2(3), 2nd Floor, 24, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Homy Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAACL 1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2006-07 DCIT-2(3), M/s. Trent Ltd., R.No.555, Bombay House, 2nd Floor, 24, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai Homi Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAACL 1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Nitesh Joshi, A.R. Revenu…

The Prl Commissioner of Income Tax [Central] Hyderabad vs. M/S Sree Nagendra Constructions, Khammam

ITTA/490/2016HC Telangana21 Aug 2018

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

Jyoti Structures Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 41, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 5367/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2006-07 Jyoti Structures Ltd. Dcit Central Circle- Valecha Chambers, 6Th 7(2), Mumbai, Room Vs. Floor, New Link Road, No. 655, 6Th Floor, Oshiwara, Andheri (W), Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400053. Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacj2499R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Aditya R. Ajgaonkar, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Ajit K. Srivastava, Dr Date Of Hearing : 05/07/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 08/08/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Aditya R. Ajgaonkar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Ajit K. Srivastava, DR
Section 115WSection 143(3)Section 17(2)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Jyoti Structures Ltd. DCIT Central Circle- Valecha Chambers, 6th 7(2), Mumbai, Room Vs. floor, New Link Road, No. 655, 6th floor, Oshiwara, Andheri (W), Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400053. Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAACJ2499R Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Aditya R. Ajgaonkar, AR Revenue by : Mr. Ajit K. Srivastava, DR Date of Hearing : 05/07/2018 Date of pronouncement : 08/08/2018 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM This is an…

DCIT Cir. 7(3)(2), Mumbai vs. People Interactive (I) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 5132/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. R. C. Sharma, Am & Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5132 & 5133/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11 &2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri M. C. OmiFor Respondent: ShriR. S. Samria, AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SH. R. C. SHARMA, AM & SH. SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5132 & 5133/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11 &2011-12) People Interactive (I) Pvt. DCIT Cir -7 (3) (2) Room No. 669A, 6th Ltd. बिधम/ 205, Shiv E Numh, 2nd Floor, AayakarBhavan, M. Vs. Floor, Dr. Annie Besant k. road, Mumbai-400020 Road, Worli, Mumbai-400018. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN No. AAECS7931B (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri M. C. Omi Ningshen, DR प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : ShriR. S. Samria, AR सुनवाईकीतारी…

M/S. Religare Securities Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4644/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Religare Securities Ltd, Vs. Dcit, D3, P3B, District Centre, Saket, Circle-21(1), New Delhi-110017 Cr Building, New Delhi Pan:Aaacf1952D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 251Section 28Section 37(1)

…Religare Securities Ltd V DCIT , Circle -21(1) New Delhi AY 2010-11 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Religare Securities Ltd, Vs. DCIT, D3, P3B, District Centre, Saket, Circle-21(1), New Delhi-110017 CR Building, New Delhi PAN:AAACF1952D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv Shri Gaurav Jain, Adv Ms. Tejasvi Jain, CA Revenue by: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 03/08/2017 Date of pronouncement 09/10/2017 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This is…

M/S. Religare Macquarie Wealth Management Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result ground No. 5 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2396/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Religare Macquarie Wealth Vs. Acit, Management Ltd, Circle-15(1), D-3, P-3B, District Centre, New Delhi Saket, New Delhi Pan:Aadcr5677C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 28Section 36Section 37(1)

…bench in 144 ITD 21 claim of the assessee with respect to both the above items were allowed vide para No. 7 of that order. The coordinate bench in para No. 8 also held that the issue is also squarely covered by the decision of the Hon‟ble Madras High Court in 211 Taxmann 554 wherein it has been held that the above expenditure on account of employee stock option scheme is an ascertained liability for deduction and further the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in CIT versus Lemon tree hotels Ltd in ITA No. 107/2015 has also Religare Macquarie wealth management Ltd versus ACIT, circle – 15 (1), New Delhi ITA number 2396/Del/…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Sical Logistics Ltd., Chennai

ITA 1697/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Milind Madhukar, JCIT &For Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 10Section 14A

…udgement of Supreme Court in the case of C.I.T Vs. Vegetable Products Ltd., in [1973] 88 ITR 192 (SC) held that decision is in favour of assessee have to be acted upon. 28. Further, the jurisdictional High Court in the case of C.I.T vs. PVP Venture Ltd in 90 DTR 340 held that while adjudicating 99 - - ITA 1695 to 1697 & CO 84/Mds/14 the issue relating to the gain on exchange of fluctuation, which related to the issue of shares in the form of GDS considered as a capital nature and not taxable by placing reliance on the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. In [1979] 116 ITR 1 (…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Sical Logistics Ltd., Chennai

ITA 1696/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Milind Madhukar, JCIT &For Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 10Section 14A

…udgement of Supreme Court in the case of C.I.T Vs. Vegetable Products Ltd., in [1973] 88 ITR 192 (SC) held that decision is in favour of assessee have to be acted upon. 28. Further, the jurisdictional High Court in the case of C.I.T vs. PVP Venture Ltd in 90 DTR 340 held that while adjudicating 99 - - ITA 1695 to 1697 & CO 84/Mds/14 the issue relating to the gain on exchange of fluctuation, which related to the issue of shares in the form of GDS considered as a capital nature and not taxable by placing reliance on the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. In [1979] 116 ITR 1 (…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Sical Logistics Ltd., Chennai

ITA 1695/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Milind Madhukar, JCIT &For Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 10Section 14A

…udgement of Supreme Court in the case of C.I.T Vs. Vegetable Products Ltd., in [1973] 88 ITR 192 (SC) held that decision is in favour of assessee have to be acted upon. 28. Further, the jurisdictional High Court in the case of C.I.T vs. PVP Venture Ltd in 90 DTR 340 held that while adjudicating 99 - - ITA 1695 to 1697 & CO 84/Mds/14 the issue relating to the gain on exchange of fluctuation, which related to the issue of shares in the form of GDS considered as a capital nature and not taxable by placing reliance on the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. In [1979] 116 ITR 1 (…

M/S. Religare Finvest Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2284/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. Acit, Circle-15(1), New Delhi Religare Finvest Ltd., D-3, P3B, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi Pan : Aafcs6801H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Rohit Garg, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Ca Respondent By Sh. F.R. Meena, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 28.03.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 28.04.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xviii, New Delhi, Dated 28.02.2013, Raising The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 28Section 36Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)(b)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘F’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. ACIT, Circle-15(1), New Delhi Religare Finvest Ltd., D-3, P3B, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi PAN : AAFCS6801H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Rohit Garg, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, CA Respondent by Sh. F.R. Meena, Sr.DR Date of hearing 28.03.2017 Date of pronouncement 28.04.2017 ORDER Per O.P. KANT, A.M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XVIII, New Delhi, dated…