CIT v. Raj Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd.

272 ITR 487High Court2005#8362 most cited

What is CIT v. Raj Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. authority for?

The test of enduring benefit is not a conclusive test for distinguishing capital from revenue expenditure and should not be applied mechanically.

13

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2021.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Raj Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. · capital expenditure · revenue expenditure · enduring benefit test · factual circumstances

Judgments citing CIT v. Raj Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd.

The Gadchiroli Dist. Central Co Op. Bank Ltd., Gadchiroli vs. The Jt, CIT, Chandrapur Range, Chandrapur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 337/NAG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 Nov 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Agnes Thomas
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…s incurred only for the purpose of business of deriving benefit of preserving the business or to facilitate the running of the business and, therefore, the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Rajasthan Spg. And Wvg. Mills Ltd., 272 ITR 487 and the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd vs. CIT, 124 ITR 1 (SC) is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. Accordingly, keeping in view of the above precedents, we are of the considered opinion that the expenditure incurred is purely revenue in nature incurred wholly or exclusively for the pu…

Mumbai International Airport P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2018/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodmumbai International Airport Vs. Dcit,Circle-10(2)(2) Private Limited Room No.209,Aaykar Bhawan Finance Department M.K.Road 1St Floor, Terminal 1B Mumbai-400 020 Chhatrapati Shivaji Internaitonal Airport Santacruz (E) Mumbai-400 099 Pan/Gir No.Aaecm6285C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & Dcit-10(2)(2) Vs. Mumbai International Room No.216-A,Aaykar Bhawan Airport Private Limited M.K.Road Finance Department, 1St Floor, Terminal 1B Mumbai-400 020 Chhatrapati Shivaji Internaitonal Airport Santacruz (E) Mumbai-400 099

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai International Airport Vs. DCIT,Circle-10(2)(2) Private Limited Room No.209,Aaykar Bhawan Finance Department M.K.Road 1st Floor, Terminal 1B Mumbai-400 020 Chhatrapati Shivaji Internaitonal Airport Santacruz (E) Mumbai-400 099 PAN/GIR No.AAECM6285C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & DCIT-10(2)(2) Vs. Mumbai International Room No.216-A,Aaykar Bhawan Airport Private Limited M.K.Road Finance Department, 1st Floor, Terminal 1B Mumbai-400 020 Chhatrapati Shivaji Internaitonal Airp…

Rajasthan State Industrial Development & Investment Corp. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

In the result, both set of cross appeals for the respective assessment years are disposed off with above directions

ITA 380/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Mar 2018AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P C ParwalFor Respondent: Shri Varindar Mehta (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 115JSection 14ASection 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 380 & 381/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 cuke M/s Rajasthan State Industrial ACIT Vs. Development & Investment Corp. Circle-6, Ltd., Jaipur. Udyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C- scheme, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. AABCR 4695 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 511 & 512/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k…

DCIT 10(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Mumbai International Airport P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed and revenue’s appeal is

ITA 4838/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ranjit Singh Arneja

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “B”, MUMBAI Before Shri P K Bansal, Vice President & Shri Pawan Singh, Judicial Member ITA No.4382/Mum/2015 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Mumbai International Airport P Ltd. Dy CIT 10(2)(2) Finance Department, 1st Floor, Mumbai Vs. Terminal 1B, Chatrapati Shivaji International Airport, Santacruz (E), Mumbai 400 099 PAN : AAECM6285C (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.4838/Mum/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy CIT Range 10(2)(2) Mumbai International Airport P Ltd. Mumbai Mumbai 400 099 Vs. PAN : AAECM6285C (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Assessee : Shri Vijay Mehta…

Mumbai International Airport P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed and revenue’s appeal is

ITA 4382/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ranjit Singh Arneja

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “B”, MUMBAI Before Shri P K Bansal, Vice President & Shri Pawan Singh, Judicial Member ITA No.4382/Mum/2015 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Mumbai International Airport P Ltd. Dy CIT 10(2)(2) Finance Department, 1st Floor, Mumbai Vs. Terminal 1B, Chatrapati Shivaji International Airport, Santacruz (E), Mumbai 400 099 PAN : AAECM6285C (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.4838/Mum/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy CIT Range 10(2)(2) Mumbai International Airport P Ltd. Mumbai Mumbai 400 099 Vs. PAN : AAECM6285C (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Assessee : Shri Vijay Mehta…

DCIT 8(2), Mumbai vs. Mumbai International Airport P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are statistically allowed and revenue’s

ITA 5655/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan
Section 14ASection 40

…nt. It was held that such expenditure was incurred with a view to obtain commercial advantage and, therefore, it was revenue expenditure. 25. Further, we noted that Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raj Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. [2005] 272 ITR 487 (Raj), following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd. [1980] 124 ITR 1 (SC) held as under: “In determining whether a particular expenditure is capital expenditure or revenue expenditure the test of enduring benefit is not a certain or conclusive test and it cannot be applied blindly and mechanically without…

Mumbai International Airport P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are statistically allowed and revenue’s

ITA 4784/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan
Section 14ASection 40

…nt. It was held that such expenditure was incurred with a view to obtain commercial advantage and, therefore, it was revenue expenditure. 25. Further, we noted that Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raj Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. [2005] 272 ITR 487 (Raj), following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd. [1980] 124 ITR 1 (SC) held as under: “In determining whether a particular expenditure is capital expenditure or revenue expenditure the test of enduring benefit is not a certain or conclusive test and it cannot be applied blindly and mechanically without…

DCIT 8(2), Mumbai vs. Mumbai International Airport P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are statistically allowed and revenue’s

ITA 5592/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan
Section 14ASection 40

…nt. It was held that such expenditure was incurred with a view to obtain commercial advantage and, therefore, it was revenue expenditure. 25. Further, we noted that Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raj Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. [2005] 272 ITR 487 (Raj), following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd. [1980] 124 ITR 1 (SC) held as under: “In determining whether a particular expenditure is capital expenditure or revenue expenditure the test of enduring benefit is not a certain or conclusive test and it cannot be applied blindly and mechanically without…

Mumbai International Airport P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are statistically allowed and revenue’s

ITA 4911/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan
Section 14ASection 40

…nt. It was held that such expenditure was incurred with a view to obtain commercial advantage and, therefore, it was revenue expenditure. 25. Further, we noted that Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raj Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. [2005] 272 ITR 487 (Raj), following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd. [1980] 124 ITR 1 (SC) held as under: “In determining whether a particular expenditure is capital expenditure or revenue expenditure the test of enduring benefit is not a certain or conclusive test and it cannot be applied blindly and mechanically without…

DCIT 8(2), Mumbai vs. Mumbai Internaiotnal Airport P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are statistically allowed and revenue’s

ITA 4675/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan
Section 14ASection 40

…nt. It was held that such expenditure was incurred with a view to obtain commercial advantage and, therefore, it was revenue expenditure. 25. Further, we noted that Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raj Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. [2005] 272 ITR 487 (Raj), following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd. [1980] 124 ITR 1 (SC) held as under: “In determining whether a particular expenditure is capital expenditure or revenue expenditure the test of enduring benefit is not a certain or conclusive test and it cannot be applied blindly and mechanically without…

Mumbai International Airport P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 8(20, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are statistically allowed and revenue’s

ITA 1081/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan
Section 14ASection 40

…nt. It was held that such expenditure was incurred with a view to obtain commercial advantage and, therefore, it was revenue expenditure. 25. Further, we noted that Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raj Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. [2005] 272 ITR 487 (Raj), following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd. [1980] 124 ITR 1 (SC) held as under: “In determining whether a particular expenditure is capital expenditure or revenue expenditure the test of enduring benefit is not a certain or conclusive test and it cannot be applied blindly and mechanically without…

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…

CIT v. Raj Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. (272 ITR 487) — Cited in 13 Judgments | BharatTax