CIT v. Sagar Talkies

325 ITR 133High Court2010#9681 most cited

What is CIT v. Sagar Talkies authority for?

Expenditure incurred for replacing a sound system in a theatre is considered revenue expenditure, not capital expenditure.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2021.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sagar Talkies · 325 ITR 133 · revenue expenditure · capital expenditure · replacement of sound system · theatre · repair and maintenance

Judgments citing CIT v. Sagar Talkies

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 4(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S. Karnataka State Police Housing & Infrastructure Developent Corporation Limited, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue and the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13 and 2014-15 are treated as partly allowed

ITA 187/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Nov 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

…e claim of repair and maintenance expenses has to be examined on the basis of principles explained in the above said case. Before us, the Ld A.R placed his reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sagar Talkies (325 ITR 133). We have gone through the said decision. In the above said case, the assessee was running a theatre installing mono sound system. The assessee replaced mono sound system with Doby system and claimed the expenses incurred on such replacement as revenue in nature. The Hon’ble High Court accepted the plea of the assessee and held as under:- “In thi…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 4(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S. Karnataka State Police Housing & Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue and the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13 and 2014-15 are treated as partly allowed

ITA 186/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

…e claim of repair and maintenance expenses has to be examined on the basis of principles explained in the above said case. Before us, the Ld A.R placed his reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sagar Talkies (325 ITR 133). We have gone through the said decision. In the above said case, the assessee was running a theatre installing mono sound system. The assessee replaced mono sound system with Doby system and claimed the expenses incurred on such replacement as revenue in nature. The Hon’ble High Court accepted the plea of the assessee and held as under:- “In thi…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 4(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S. Karnataka State Police Housing & Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue and the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13 and 2014-15 are treated as partly allowed

ITA 185/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

…e claim of repair and maintenance expenses has to be examined on the basis of principles explained in the above said case. Before us, the Ld A.R placed his reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sagar Talkies (325 ITR 133). We have gone through the said decision. In the above said case, the assessee was running a theatre installing mono sound system. The assessee replaced mono sound system with Doby system and claimed the expenses incurred on such replacement as revenue in nature. The Hon’ble High Court accepted the plea of the assessee and held as under:- “In thi…

M/S. Karnataka State Police Housing and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue and the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13 and 2014-15 are treated as partly allowed

ITA 144/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Nov 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

…e claim of repair and maintenance expenses has to be examined on the basis of principles explained in the above said case. Before us, the Ld A.R placed his reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sagar Talkies (325 ITR 133). We have gone through the said decision. In the above said case, the assessee was running a theatre installing mono sound system. The assessee replaced mono sound system with Doby system and claimed the expenses incurred on such replacement as revenue in nature. The Hon’ble High Court accepted the plea of the assessee and held as under:- “In thi…

M/S. Karnataka State Police Housing and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -11(5), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue and the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13 and 2014-15 are treated as partly allowed

ITA 143/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

…e claim of repair and maintenance expenses has to be examined on the basis of principles explained in the above said case. Before us, the Ld A.R placed his reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sagar Talkies (325 ITR 133). We have gone through the said decision. In the above said case, the assessee was running a theatre installing mono sound system. The assessee replaced mono sound system with Doby system and claimed the expenses incurred on such replacement as revenue in nature. The Hon’ble High Court accepted the plea of the assessee and held as under:- “In thi…

M/S. Karnataka State Police Housing and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -11(5), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue and the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13 and 2014-15 are treated as partly allowed

ITA 142/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

…e claim of repair and maintenance expenses has to be examined on the basis of principles explained in the above said case. Before us, the Ld A.R placed his reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sagar Talkies (325 ITR 133). We have gone through the said decision. In the above said case, the assessee was running a theatre installing mono sound system. The assessee replaced mono sound system with Doby system and claimed the expenses incurred on such replacement as revenue in nature. The Hon’ble High Court accepted the plea of the assessee and held as under:- “In thi…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 4(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S. Karnataka State Police Housing & Infrastructure Development Corp Limited, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue and the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13 and 2014-15 are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1349/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

…e claim of repair and maintenance expenses has to be examined on the basis of principles explained in the above said case. Before us, the Ld A.R placed his reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sagar Talkies (325 ITR 133). We have gone through the said decision. In the above said case, the assessee was running a theatre installing mono sound system. The assessee replaced mono sound system with Doby system and claimed the expenses incurred on such replacement as revenue in nature. The Hon’ble High Court accepted the plea of the assessee and held as under:- “In thi…

M/S. Karnataka State Police Housing and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 4(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue and the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13 and 2014-15 are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1267/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

…e claim of repair and maintenance expenses has to be examined on the basis of principles explained in the above said case. Before us, the Ld A.R placed his reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sagar Talkies (325 ITR 133). We have gone through the said decision. In the above said case, the assessee was running a theatre installing mono sound system. The assessee replaced mono sound system with Doby system and claimed the expenses incurred on such replacement as revenue in nature. The Hon’ble High Court accepted the plea of the assessee and held as under:- “In thi…

M/S. Karnataka Soaps & Detergents Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Circle-1, Bangalore

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

ITA 707/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Ashok A.Kulkarni, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Kannan Narayanan, JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)

…ble deduction. The assessee also placed reliance on the following judicial pronouncements:- (i) CIT v. MAC Charles (India) Ltd. (2015) 233 Taxman 177 (Kar.). (ii) CIT v. Infosys Technologies (No.2) (2012) 349 ITR 588 (Kar.). (iii) CIT v. Sagar Talkies (2010) 325 ITR 133 (Kar.) 5. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that the expenditure incurred is for substantial repairs and cannot be stated to be revenue expenditure. It was submitted that the expenditure was incurred prior to the assessee occupying the premises and the same ought to be capitalised. It was stated that it is not current repairs or r…

Hero Motocorp Limited, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1545/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. NC Sawain, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…2016 (AY 2011-12) Page 340 of 484 31(1) or section 37(1) of the Act as has also been held in following cases: (i) CIT vs Saravana Spinning Mills (P) Ltd.: 293 ITR 201 (SC) (ii) Ramaraju Surgical Cotton Mills: 294 ITR 328 (SC) (iii) CIT v. Sagar Talkies Ltd.: 325 ITR 133 (Kar) (iv) CIT vs Sree Ayyanar Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd.: 211 Taxmann 534 (SC) (v) CIT vs. Co-operative Sugars Ltd. 235 ITR 343 (Ker.) (vi) CIT vs. Udaipur Distillary Co. Ltd. (No. 3) 268 ITR 451 (Raj.) (vii) B and A Plantations and Industries Ltd. vs. CIT 171 CTR 266 (Gau.) (viii) DCIT v. Modi Rubber: ITA 686/Del/2005 (Del ITAT) (ix) South…

Sh. Ankit Mittal, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

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

ITA 1511/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. V. R. Sonbhadra, Sr. DR
Section 24Section 24(1)(vi)

…of spouse is against the statutory provisions.” 7. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Podar Cement (P) Ltd. Etc. (1997) 226 ITR 0625 (SC) " CIT Vs AIR Deal Traders (2010) 327 ITR 0034 (P&H) " CIT Vs Babu Khan Builders & Ors. (2010) 325 ITR 133 (A.P.) " Pallonji M. Mistry (DECD.) Vs CIT (2009) 319 ITR 0167 (Bom.) " Universal Radiators Ltd. Vs CIT (2006) 281 ITR 0261 (Mad.) " Mysore Minerals Ltd. Vs CIT (1999) 239 ITR 775(SC) " S.V. Chandra Pandian Vs S.V. Sivalinga Nadar (1995) 212 ITR 592 (SC) " CIT Vs Fazilka Dabwali TPT. CO. (P) Ltd. (2004) 270 ITR 0398 (P&H) " Addl. CIT Vs U.P. Stat…

CIT v. Sagar Talkies (325 ITR 133) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax