CIT v. Raychem RPG Ltd.

DCIT 1(2), Mumbai vs. Maharshtra State Electricity Board, Mumbai

In the result , the Cross Objections preferred by the assessee for the Asst Year 2004-05 is partly allowed and Cross Objections preferred by the assessee for the Asst Year 2005-06 is allowed

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI M. BALAGANESH, AM & SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & DCIT – 1(2), Mumbai Vs. M/s. Maharashtra State R.No.535, 5th Floor Electricity Board B.A. Section, 6th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan M.K.Road, Mumbai -400020 Prakashganga, Plot No.C- 19, ‘E’ Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400 051 PAN/GIR No. AAACM7507P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) CO No.198/Mum/2010 (Arising out of ITA No.1649/Mum/2010) (Assessment Year :2004-05) & CO No.171/Mum/2010 (Arising out of ITA No.945/Mum/2010 (Assessment Year :2005-06) M/s. Maharashtra State Vs. DCIT – 1(2), Mumbai…

M/S. Nicholas Piramal India Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir. - 7(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am M/S. Piramal Enterprises Ltd. Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Formerly Known As Piramal Circle 7(1), Aayakar Bhavan Healthcare Ltd.,) Mumbai - 400020 (Before Known As Nicholas Piramal India Ltd.,) Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013 Pan/Gir No.Aaacn4538P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Addl. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Piramal Enterprises Ltd. Income Tax (Formerly Known As Piramal Healthcare Circle 7(1), Aayakar Ltd.,) Bhavan (Before Known As Nicholas Piramal India Mumbai - 400020 Ltd.,) Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013 Pan/Gir No.Aaacn4538P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ronak Joshi Revenue By Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora Date Of Hearing 29/11/2019 Date Of Pronouncement 20/02 /2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per M. Balaganesh (A.M): These Cross Appeals In Ita Nos.3927/Mum/2006 & 4066/Mum/2006 For A.Y.2002-03 Arises Out Of The Order By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xix, Mumbai In Appeal No.Cit(A)Xix/It-104/05-06 Dated 31/03/2006 (Ld. Cit(A) In Short) Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As Act) Dated 31/03/2005 By The Ld. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range 7(1), Mumbai (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. Ao). M/S. Piramal Enterprises Ltd.

…eld by the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of PCIT Vs. Holicin Services (South Asia) Ltd. (2018) 93 Taxmann.com 270 (Bom), as allowable as a revenue expenditure. Further, the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Raychem RPG Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 138 (Bom) had observed that the expenditure incurred by an assessee on purchase of a software which facilitated its trading operations or enabled the management to conduct its business more efficiently or more profitably would not form part of the profit making apparatus of the assessee and would be allowable as a revenue expenditure. Also, we find t…

M/S Nicholas Piramal India Ltd vs. Addlcit RG - 7(1)

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ravish Soodm/S Nicholas Piramal India Ltd. Addl. Commissioner Of Piramal Healthcare Ltd. Income - Tax Range-7(1), (Earlier Known As Nicholas Piramal India Ltd), Mumbai 4Th Floor, Piramal Tower Annexe, Vs. Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai – 400013 Pan – Aaacn4538P (Appellant) (Respondent) D.C.I.T, Circle-7 (1), M/S Nicholas Piramal India Ltd. 452, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Piramal Healthcare Ltd. Mumbai. 4Th Floor, Piramal Tower Annexe, Vs. Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai – 400013

…(2018) 93 ITA Nos.6141& 6392/Mum/2003 AY. 2000-01 18 M/s Nicholas Piramal India Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Range-7(1) Taxmann.com 270 (Bom), as allowable as a revenue expenditure. Further, the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Raychem RPG Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 138 (Bom) had observed that the expenditure incurred by an assessee on purchase of a software which facilitated its trading operations or enabled the management to conduct its business more efficiently or more profitably would not form part of the profit making apparatus of the assessee and would be allowable as a revenue expenditure. Also, we find t…

DCIT Cir 7(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Piramal Enterprises Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathapiramal Enterprise Limited Vs. Addl.Cit, Range-7(3) (Formerly Known As Piramal Aaykar Bhawan Healthcare Limited) M.K.Road Piramal Tower Mumbai-400 020 Ganpatrao Kadam Marg Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013

…e co-ordinate bench of ITAT, Mumbai ‘J’ bench in assessee’s own case for AY 2009-10 in ITA No. 1257/Mum/2014, where under identical set of facts, the Tribunal by following the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Raychem RPG Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 138 held that expenditure incurred on purchase of a software and licenses are in the nature of revenue expenditure deductible u/s 37(1) of the I.T.Act, 1961. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are as under:- 11. We have deliberated at length on the issue under consideration and are unable to persuade ourselves to subscribe to the view taken by th…

Idbi Capital Markets & Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, this ground of appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhidbi Capital Markets & Dcit Range-4(1)(1) Securities Ltd., 3Rd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Vs. Mafatlal Center, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaaci1268F Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Madhur Agarwal (Ar) Respondent By : Sh. H.N. Singh (Cit-Dr) Shri Manish Singh (Sr-Dr) Date Of Hearing : 21.06.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act

…e, and in any case, the issue as to whether expenditure on purchase of software is a revenue or capital ITA No. 190 Mum 2017-IDBI Capital Markets & Securities Ltd. expenditure is concluded by jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Raychem RPG Ltd. 346 ITR 138 wherein the jurisdictional High Court has held that even if the expenditure is incurred for acquisition of a software, the same is allowable as revenue expenditure. Therefore, the Appellant submits that the lower authority was not justified in disallowing such expenses. 14. On the other hand, the ld. DR for the revenue supported the order of lo…

ACIT 1(1), Mumbai vs. Forbes & Co.Ltd, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri G S Pannu, Vice-And Shri Pawan Singh

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G S PANNU, VICE-PRESIDENTAND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 5536/Mum/2011 Assessment Year: 2007-08 ACIT 1(1), M/s. Forbes & Co. Ltd., Mumbai. Forbes Building, Vs. Charnjit Singh Rai Marg, Fort, Mumbai 400 001. PAN: AAACF1765A (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 5540/Mum/2011 Assessment Year: 2007-08 M/s. Forbes & Co. Ltd., Dy. CIT OSD, Fort, Mumbai 400 001. Mumbai. Vs. PAN: AAACF1765A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Girish Dave (AR) Respondent By : Shri S C Tiwari (CIT-DR) Date of Hearing : 01.07.2019 Date of Pronouncemen…

ACIT 11(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Total Oil India P.Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…xpenditure. Thus the 1st ground of appeal is allowed.” 6. On appraisal of the above mentioned finding, we find that the Hon’ble ITAT has allowed the claim of the assessee on the basis of the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Raychem RPG Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 138 (Bom). Since the claim of the assessee has duly been covered by the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT in the assessee’s own case for the A.Y. 2008-09 in ITA. No.1271/M/2013 dated 20.12.2017, therefore, in the said circumstances, we set aside ITA. Nos. 4135/M/2016 & 4300/M/2016 A.Y.2010-11 the finding of the CIT(A) on this issue and allowed the claim…

Total Oil India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 8(3), Mumbai

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…xpenditure. Thus the 1st ground of appeal is allowed.” 6. On appraisal of the above mentioned finding, we find that the Hon’ble ITAT has allowed the claim of the assessee on the basis of the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Raychem RPG Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 138 (Bom). Since the claim of the assessee has duly been covered by the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT in the assessee’s own case for the A.Y. 2008-09 in ITA. No.1271/M/2013 dated 20.12.2017, therefore, in the said circumstances, we set aside ITA. Nos. 4135/M/2016 & 4300/M/2016 A.Y.2010-11 the finding of the CIT(A) on this issue and allowed the claim…

J.P. Morgan India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO RG 4(3)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. S. Pannu, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2745/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2004-05) In The Matter Of: J. P. Morgan India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit Range -4(3)(1), J. P. Morgan Towers, Aayakarbhavan, M.K. बिधम/ Off- Cst Road, Kalina Road, Vs. Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400098. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2452/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit Range -4(3)(1), J. P. Morgan India Pvt. Aayakarbhavan, M.K. Road, Ltd. बिधम/ Mumbai-400020. J. P. Morgan Towers, Off- Cst Road, Kalina Vs. Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400098. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacj1022G आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2746/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2005-06) J. P. Morgan India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit Range -4(3)(1), J. P. Morgan Towers, Aayakarbhavan, M.K. बिधम/ Off- Cst Road, Kalina Road, Vs. Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400098. & आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2453/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2005-06) Dcit Range -4(3)(1), J. P. Morgan India Pvt. Aayakarbhavan, M.K. Road, Ltd. बिधम/ Mumbai-400020. J. P. Morgan Towers, Off- Cst Road, Kalina Vs. Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400098. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacj1022G अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Madhur Agrawal, Ar प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri V. Jenardhanan & Subhas Kulkarni, Drs सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 05/04/2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 26.06.2019 Date Of Pronouncement

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI G. S. PANNU, VP & HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2745/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2004-05) In the matter of: J. P. Morgan India Pvt. Ltd. DCIT Range -4(3)(1), J. P. Morgan Towers, AayakarBhavan, M.K. बिधम/ Off- CST Road, Kalina Road, Vs. Santacruz (east), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400098. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2452/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2004-05) DCIT Range -4(3)(1), J. P. Morgan India Pvt. AayakarBhavan, M.K. Road, Ltd. बिधम/ Mumbai-400020. J. P. Morgan Towers, Off- CST Road, Kalina V…

Piramal Healthcare Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 7(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Ravish Soodpiramal Healthcare Limited Deputy Commissioner Of Income (Now Known As Piramal Enterprises Ltd.) Tax- 7(1) Piramal Tower, Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Vs. M.K. Road Lower Parel, Mumbai- 400 020 Mumbai – 400 013

…lthcare Limited Vs. DCIT-7(1 DCIT-Circle 7(1) Vs. Piramal Enterprises Ltd. ) softwares/licenses was in the nature of a revenue expenditure, the ld. A.R. relied on the judgments of the Hon‟ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Raychem RPG Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 138 (Bom) and PCIT Vs. Holcim Services (South Asia) (2018) 255 Taxman 392 (Bom). Further, support was also drawn by the ld. A.R from the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Amway India Enterprises (2012) 346 ITR 341 (Del). Alternatively, it was submitted by the ld. A.R. that in case his aforesaid contention was to be re…

Cwt India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD) RG 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2009-

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Cwt India Private Limited, The Assistant Commissioner Of Unit No. 2, Raheja Centre, Income Tax-9(2)(2), Ground Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Free Press Journal Marg, Vs. Mumbai - 400020 Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021 Pan : Aaaci7084H (Appellant) (Respondent)

…e nature of expenditure incurred on account of computer software the ownership test, enduring benefits test and functional test have to be evaluated. The Ld. counsel further relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case Raychem RPG Ltd. 346 ITR 138 and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Asahi Safety Glass Ltd 346 ITR 329, submitted that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the above said decisions. 19. On the other hand, the Ld. DR relying on the assessment order passed in terms of the directions issued under section 144C (5) of the Act by the Ld. DRP…