CIT v. Raychem RPG Ltd.

Asst CIT 11(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Total Lubricants India Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

…le of the Assessing Officer. 7. Upon careful consideration we find that since on the issue of disallowance of EDP expenses of Rs.8,42,189/-, the ITAT had relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raychem RPG Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 138 (Bom) and deleted the said addition, the penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) does not survive. Hence, we uphold the deletion of addition on this account. As regards the disallowance of advertisement expenses of Rs.10,31,614/-, the issue has been remitted to the file of the assessing officer, the issue of levy of penalty in this connection also deserv…

Hdfc Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated hereinabove whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm M/S. Hdfc Securities Ltd., Vs. Dcit – 4(1) Office Floor 8 Mumbai I-Think Techno Campus Alpha Building, B Kanjurmarg (E) Mumbai – 400 042 Pan/Gir No.Aaach8215R Appellant) Respondent) .. Dcit – 4(1) (1) Vs. M/S. Hdfc Securities Ltd., Mumbai Office Floor 8 I-Think Techno Campus Alpha Building, B Kanjurmarg (E) Mumbai – 400 042 Pan/Gir No. Aaach8215R Appellant) Respondent) .. Assessee By Ms. Krupa R. Gandhi / Shri Vidhi Doshi Revenue By Shri Rajat Mittal

…277) (Delhi HC)  CIT v. Varinder Agro Chemicals Lid. (309 ITR 272) (P & H) 11. In the following judicial pronouncements, it has been held that updation / modification for improving the operational efficiency are revenue in nature.  CIT v. Raychem RPG Ltd. (346 ITR 138) (Bom.)  Amway India Enterprises v. Dy. CIT (111 ITD 112 (Del Trib) (SB) affirmed in CIT v. Amway India Enterprises (346 ITR 341 ) (Del HC)  CIT v, N. J. Invest ((P.) Ltd. (215 Taxnmn 78)(Guj) HDFC Securities Ltd.,  ACIT v. Sanghvi Savla Stock Brokers Ltd.(152 ITD 820) (Mum.)  ACIT v. M/s. Maersk India Pvt. Ltd (ITA No.3072/Mum/2013)  Claria…

Larsen & Toubro Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 1999-00 Larsen & Toubro Ltd. Dcit-2(2) Taxation Department L&T Room No. 577, 5Th Vs. House, N.M. Ballard Estate, Floor, Aayakar Mumbai-400001 Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacl0140P Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 1999-00 Dcit-2(2) Larsen & Toubro Ltd. Room No. 577, 5Th Floor, Taxation Department Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. L&T House, N.M. Road Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400001 Pan No. Aaacl0140P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. J.D. Mistry & Mr. Madhur Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Anadi Varma, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 14/02/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2018

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 1999-00 Larsen & Toubro Ltd. DCIT-2(2) Taxation Department L&T Room No. 577, 5th Vs. House, N.M. Ballard Estate, floor, Aayakar Mumbai-400001 Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAACL0140P Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 1999-00 DCIT-2(2) Larsen & Toubro Ltd. Room No. 577, 5th floor, Taxation Department Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. L&T House, N.M. Road Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400001 PAN No. AAACL0140P Appellant Respondent Asse…

DCIT Cir. 2(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, grounds 9 & 10 raised by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

…entation of ERP Software of Rs.3,25,809. The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted that the issue involved in this ground is also squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in the case of CIT vs Rajchem RPG Ltd (2012) 346 ITR 318 (Bom), wherein the Hon’ble High Court observed that expenses incurred for enterprise resource planning package, facilitates the assessee’s trading operations or enabled the management to conduct the assessee’s business more efficiently or more profitably, but it was not in the nature of profit-making apparatus. Therefore, the expenditure was…

Kuoni Travel (India) P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Deym/S. Kuoni Travel (India) Pvt. Ltd. (Merged With Travel Corporate (India) Ltd.) 8Th Floor, Tower A, Urmi Estate ……………. Appellant 95 Ganpatrao Kadam Marg Lower Parel(W), Mumbai 400013 Pan Aaacs0170L V/S Dcit, Circle – 3(2) Room No. 609, 6Th Floor ……………. Respondent Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg Mumbai 400020 Appellant By : Shri Jay Bhansali Respondent By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav

…ital in nature. In support of his contention he relied upon the following decisions: – i. CIT v/s. Southern Roadways Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 84 (Mad) ii. CIT v/s. Geoffrey Manners and Co. Ltd. (2014) 49 taxmann.com 320 (Bom) iii. CIT v/s. Raychem RPG Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 138 (Bom) 5 M/s. Kuoni Travel (India) Pvt. Ltd. iv. ACIT v/s. N.K.V. Krishna (2014) 41 taxmann.com 306 (Chennai). 6. Learned Departmental Representative relied upon the observations the Commissioner (Appeals) and Assessing Officer. 7. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the materials on record in the light of the decisions relied…

Empire Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 6(2), Mumbai

Appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4065/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Empire Industries Limited Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax Empire House बनाम/ 414, Senapati Bapat Marg Range 6(2) Lower Parel Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Mumbai – 400 013 M.K.Road Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaace-2757-R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

…expense is allowable, being revenue in nature as the same was incurred only to ensure smooth / efficient running of assessee’s business:- (i) CIT Vs. Geoffrey Manners & Co. Ltd. [2014 49 taxmann.com 320 Bombay High Court] (ii) CIT Vs. Raychem RPG Ltd. [2011 346 ITR 138 Bombay High Court] (iii) CIT Vs. Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. [2011 245 CTR 529 Delhi High Court] The Ld. DR contended that as the assessee acquired benefit of enduring nature, the same was capital in nature and rightly been allowed depreciation against the same as these expenses were intangible rights in nature. 9. We have heard the rival cont…

Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

…the order of Tribunal in the case of AMWAY. 23.1.Before us, it was stated that while deciding the appeal for the AY.1997-98(second round of litigation), the Tribunal had followed the judgment of the honorable Bombay High Court in the case of Raychem RPG Ltd. (346 ITR 138) and that the Tribunal had allowed the claim as revenue expenditure. The DR left the issue to the discretion of the bench. Respectfully following the order of the Tribunal for the AY. 1997-98(supra),we hold that expenditure incurred on implementation of SAP ERP systems was revenue in nature.Fifth ground is decided in favour of the assessee. 24.Ne…

Muncipal Co Op Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD) 1(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

…ge and in such circumstances, the expenditure incurred for purchase of these software is called as revenue expenditure and not capital in nature. This issue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Raychem RPG Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 138 (Bom), wherein it has been held as under: “Held, (i) that the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2001-02 had allowed the software expenditure as revenue expenditure finding that software did not form part of the profit-making apparatus of the assessee. Further, it held that the business of the assessee was that of manufac…

Rohda Specialtiy Chemicals India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Cir 6(1), Mumbai

Appeal stands dismissed for want of substantial question of law

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri C.N. Prasadita No. 830/Mum/2014 : (A.Y : 2009-10) M/S Rhodia Specialty Chemicals Vs. Addl. Cit – Circle 6(1) India Ltd. (Formerly Known As Room No.511, Aayakar Bhawan M/S Albright & Wilson Chemicals Mk Road India Ltd.), Phoenix House, A Wing New Marine Lines 4Th Floor, 462 Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai – 400 020 Lower Parel (West) Mumbai – 400 013 Pan : Aaaca3841L Ita No. 622/Mum/2014 : (A.Y : 2009-10) Dcit -7(2) Vs. M/S Rhodia Specialty Chemicals Room No.624, Mk Road India Ltd. (Formerly Known As Mumbai – 400 020 M/S Albright & Wilson Chemicals India Ltd.), Phoenix House, A Wing 4Th Floor, 462 Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Parel (West) Mumbai – 400 013 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)

…. Therefore, such software applications do not help in increasing the business of the Assessee and only helps in efficient and effective conduct of the business placing reliance on the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Raychem RPG Ltd. [346 ITR 138] and CIT Vs. Kotak Securities Ltd. [346 ITR 349]. The Ld. Counsel submits that the software expenses should be allowed as revenue expenditure. 57. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. In the case of CIT Vs. Raychem RPG Ltd (supra), Bombay High Court confirmed the order of the Tribunal and held that so…

DCIT 7(2), Mumbai vs. Albright & Wilson Chemicals India Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal stands dismissed for want of substantial question of law

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri C.N. Prasadita No. 830/Mum/2014 : (A.Y : 2009-10) M/S Rhodia Specialty Chemicals Vs. Addl. Cit – Circle 6(1) India Ltd. (Formerly Known As Room No.511, Aayakar Bhawan M/S Albright & Wilson Chemicals Mk Road India Ltd.), Phoenix House, A Wing New Marine Lines 4Th Floor, 462 Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai – 400 020 Lower Parel (West) Mumbai – 400 013 Pan : Aaaca3841L Ita No. 622/Mum/2014 : (A.Y : 2009-10) Dcit -7(2) Vs. M/S Rhodia Specialty Chemicals Room No.624, Mk Road India Ltd. (Formerly Known As Mumbai – 400 020 M/S Albright & Wilson Chemicals India Ltd.), Phoenix House, A Wing 4Th Floor, 462 Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Parel (West) Mumbai – 400 013 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)

…. Therefore, such software applications do not help in increasing the business of the Assessee and only helps in efficient and effective conduct of the business placing reliance on the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Raychem RPG Ltd. [346 ITR 138] and CIT Vs. Kotak Securities Ltd. [346 ITR 349]. The Ld. Counsel submits that the software expenses should be allowed as revenue expenditure. 57. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. In the case of CIT Vs. Raychem RPG Ltd (supra), Bombay High Court confirmed the order of the Tribunal and held that so…

Bayer Cropscience Ltd, Thane vs. Asst CIT 15(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby Partly

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.2248/Mum/2015 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) Bayer Cropscience Limited बनाम/ Asst. Commissioner Of Bayer House, Income Tax 15(1)(2) Vs. Central Avenue, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Hiranandani Estate, Mumbai - 400020 Thane(W) - 400607 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacb9651K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) .. (""थ" /Respondent)

…ing Officer has wrongly applied the law whereas the designing and development of software was not an enduring benefit to the company, hence, it is revenue in nature and also relied upon the law settled in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Raychem RPG Ltd. [2012] 346 ITR 138 Hon’ble Bombay High Court and Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. [2012] 346 ITR 329 Hon’ble Delhi High Court. However, on the other hand the learned representative of the department has strongly relied upon the order of the CIT(A) in question. Keeping in view of the argument advanced by the parties and by going through t…

D.C.I.T.RG.8(3), Mumbai vs. Sanofi Synthelabo (I) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Ashwani Taneja, Am

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND ASHWANI TANEJA, AM ITA No.6755/Mum/2011 (A.Y:2005-06) The Asst. Commissioner of Income Sanofi Synthelabo (India) Ltd. Tax-8(3), Room No.217, Aayakar 54/4, Sir Mathuradas Vasanji Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai-20 Vs. Road, Andheri (east) Mumbai-400093 PAN No.AACCT3824E Appellant .. Respondent Revenue by .. Miss. Anupama Singha, DR .. Shri J.D Mistry, AR Assessee by Shri Sanjiv M. Shah, AR Date of hearing .. 22-11-2016 Date of pronouncement .. 22-11-2016 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: These three appeals by the Revenue are arisin…

D.C.I.T. 8(3), Mumbai vs. Sanofi Syntheabo (India) Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Ashwani Taneja, Am

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND ASHWANI TANEJA, AM ITA No.6755/Mum/2011 (A.Y:2005-06) The Asst. Commissioner of Income Sanofi Synthelabo (India) Ltd. Tax-8(3), Room No.217, Aayakar 54/4, Sir Mathuradas Vasanji Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai-20 Vs. Road, Andheri (east) Mumbai-400093 PAN No.AACCT3824E Appellant .. Respondent Revenue by .. Miss. Anupama Singha, DR .. Shri J.D Mistry, AR Assessee by Shri Sanjiv M. Shah, AR Date of hearing .. 22-11-2016 Date of pronouncement .. 22-11-2016 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: These three appeals by the Revenue are arisin…

ACIT RG 8(3), Mumbai vs. Sanofi Synthellabo (I) Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Ashwani Taneja, Am

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND ASHWANI TANEJA, AM ITA No.6755/Mum/2011 (A.Y:2005-06) The Asst. Commissioner of Income Sanofi Synthelabo (India) Ltd. Tax-8(3), Room No.217, Aayakar 54/4, Sir Mathuradas Vasanji Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai-20 Vs. Road, Andheri (east) Mumbai-400093 PAN No.AACCT3824E Appellant .. Respondent Revenue by .. Miss. Anupama Singha, DR .. Shri J.D Mistry, AR Assessee by Shri Sanjiv M. Shah, AR Date of hearing .. 22-11-2016 Date of pronouncement .. 22-11-2016 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: These three appeals by the Revenue are arisin…

First Advantage P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 9(1), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosaindcit, Range 9(1) M/S. First Advantage P. Ltd. Room No. 223 1St Floor, Interface Bldg. No. 7 Vs. Àayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Link Road, Malad (W) Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400064 Pan - Aaacq0706E Appellant Respondent

…eration of the assessee more efficiently. In addition to the decision of the Coordinate Bench cited (supra), the learned A.R. for the assessee also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raychem RPG Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 138 (Bom.). 3.4.1 We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused and carefully considered the material on record. The details of expenses on software licence fee of `60,35,642/- claimed by the assessee in the year under consideration and placed before the AO in assessment proceedings vide letter dated 28.06.2011 are as under: -…

First Advantage P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 9(1), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosaindcit, Range 9(1) M/S. First Advantage P. Ltd. Room No. 223 1St Floor, Interface Bldg. No. 7 Vs. Àayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Link Road, Malad (W) Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400064 Pan - Aaacq0706E Appellant Respondent

…eration of the assessee more efficiently. In addition to the decision of the Coordinate Bench cited (supra), the learned A.R. for the assessee also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raychem RPG Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 138 (Bom.). 3.4.1 We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused and carefully considered the material on record. The details of expenses on software licence fee of `60,35,642/- claimed by the assessee in the year under consideration and placed before the AO in assessment proceedings vide letter dated 28.06.2011 are as under: -…

D.C.I.T.9(1), Mumbai vs. First Advantage Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosaindcit, Range 9(1) M/S. First Advantage P. Ltd. Room No. 223 1St Floor, Interface Bldg. No. 7 Vs. Àayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Link Road, Malad (W) Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400064 Pan - Aaacq0706E Appellant Respondent

…eration of the assessee more efficiently. In addition to the decision of the Coordinate Bench cited (supra), the learned A.R. for the assessee also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raychem RPG Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 138 (Bom.). 3.4.1 We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused and carefully considered the material on record. The details of expenses on software licence fee of `60,35,642/- claimed by the assessee in the year under consideration and placed before the AO in assessment proceedings vide letter dated 28.06.2011 are as under: -…

The Dy CIT 4(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Icici Brokerage Services, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee

…ount of procurement expenses. 10. The next grievance of the assessee relates to disallowance of software expenses of Rs.1,20,000/-. The issue under consideration is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Raychem RPG Ltd., 346 ITR 138 (Bom). Respectfully following the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court, we do not find any merit for disallowance of software expenses of Rs.1,20,000/- so incurred by assessee, which is essentially revenue in nature. 11. The last grievance of assessee relates to invoking Explanation to Section 73 and treating share trading loss as speculative lo…