CIT v. Samsung India Electronics Ltd.

356 ITR 354High Court2013#3887 most cited

What is CIT v. Samsung India Electronics Ltd. authority for?

Expenditure incurred before commencement of business is deductible if the business has been set up, meaning the assessee is ready to commence operations, even if no commercial activity has begun.

31

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2014 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Samsung India Electronics Ltd. · business setup · commencement of business · readiness to commence operations · revenue expenditure · pre-commencement expenses · eligibility for deduction

Also reported as

37 Taxmann.com 239
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 2(11)section 10(2)section 57(iii)section 57revenue expendituresection 44absection 10income from other sourcesprevious yearsalaryassistant commissionerindia

Judgments citing CIT v. Samsung India Electronics Ltd.

M/S. COASTAL ENERGEN PRIVATE LIMITED,EGMORE, CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 507/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 505, 506 & 507/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years:2012-2013, 2013-2014 & 2014-2015. M/S. Coastal Energen Private The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax No. 5, Buhari Building, Central Circe 1(1) Moores Road, Egmore, Chennai Chennai 600 006. ( Previously The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(2) Pan: Aadcc 0886G Chennai.) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri N. Balakrishnan, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14.03.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri N. Balakrishnan, IRS, CIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 44A

…ompany was ready to commence business operations as on the date of incorporation. Ld. Counsel for the assessee on the given facts and circumstances relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Samsung India Electronics Ltd, (2013) 37 Taxmann.com 239 (Delhi) wherein on identical facts the Tribunal has categorically recorded the findings that the business has not been set-up. The Hon’ble High Court has affirmed the order of the Tribunal wherein there is a finding that business has been setup and assessee is eligible for deduction and held at paras 6 to 8 as under:- ‘’6. We have examine…

M/S. COASTAL ENERGEN PRIVATE LIMITED,EGMORE, CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 506/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 505, 506 & 507/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years:2012-2013, 2013-2014 & 2014-2015. M/S. Coastal Energen Private The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax No. 5, Buhari Building, Central Circe 1(1) Moores Road, Egmore, Chennai Chennai 600 006. ( Previously The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(2) Pan: Aadcc 0886G Chennai.) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri N. Balakrishnan, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14.03.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri N. Balakrishnan, IRS, CIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 44A

…ompany was ready to commence business operations as on the date of incorporation. Ld. Counsel for the assessee on the given facts and circumstances relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Samsung India Electronics Ltd, (2013) 37 Taxmann.com 239 (Delhi) wherein on identical facts the Tribunal has categorically recorded the findings that the business has not been set-up. The Hon’ble High Court has affirmed the order of the Tribunal wherein there is a finding that business has been setup and assessee is eligible for deduction and held at paras 6 to 8 as under:- ‘’6. We have examine…

M/S. COASTAL ENERGEN PRIVATE LIMITED,EGMORE, CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 505/CHNY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 505, 506 & 507/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years:2012-2013, 2013-2014 & 2014-2015. M/S. Coastal Energen Private The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax No. 5, Buhari Building, Central Circe 1(1) Moores Road, Egmore, Chennai Chennai 600 006. ( Previously The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(2) Pan: Aadcc 0886G Chennai.) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri N. Balakrishnan, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14.03.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri N. Balakrishnan, IRS, CIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 44A

…ompany was ready to commence business operations as on the date of incorporation. Ld. Counsel for the assessee on the given facts and circumstances relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Samsung India Electronics Ltd, (2013) 37 Taxmann.com 239 (Delhi) wherein on identical facts the Tribunal has categorically recorded the findings that the business has not been set-up. The Hon’ble High Court has affirmed the order of the Tribunal wherein there is a finding that business has been setup and assessee is eligible for deduction and held at paras 6 to 8 as under:- ‘’6. We have examine…

HONDA ACCESS INDIA PVT. LTD.,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, NOIDA

ITA 3368/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh.Anubhav Sharma

Section 143(3)

…f readiness to undertake its business which was very much established in the case of assessee. Ld. Counsel placed reliance on the judgments of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Carefoul WC & C India (P.) Ltd.368 ITR 692, CIT vs. Samsung India Electronics Ltd.[2013] 356 ITR 354 (Delhi) and Dhoomketu Builders and Developmen (P) Ltd.216 Taxman 27 for aforesaid contentions. 7. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied the findings of Ld. Tax Authorities below. 8. Appreciating the matter on record, it can be observed that primarily the Ld. AO was pleased to draw conclusion that assessee is in the state of incorporation only becaus…

BHAVAN LAKHMAN RAVARIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD, 21(3)(1). MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

ITA 1127/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blebhavan Lakhman Ravaria V. Income Tax Officer- 21(3)(1) 401, D Wing, Golden Oak Mumbai Opposite D-Mart, Powai Hiranandani, Mumbai Maharashtra - 400076 Pan: Acwpr6513M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Khushiram Jadhwani Department Represented By : Shri Chetan M. Kacha

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Bhavan Lakhman Ravaria v. Income Tax Officer- 21(3)(1) 401, D Wing, Golden Oak Mumbai Opposite D-Mart, Powai Hiranandani, Mumbai Maharashtra - 400076 PAN: ACWPR6513M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri Khushiram Jadhwani Department Represented by : Shri Chetan M. Kacha Date of Hearing : 09.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 17.04.2023 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against order of Learned…

JCIT(OSD), CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI vs. BHARTI LAND LTD, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 608/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2023AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Anil Bhalla, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘A’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.195/Del./2020 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2016-17) Bharti Land Limited, vs. ACIT, Circle 4 (2), 3rd Floor, Worldmark 2, Asset No.8, New Delhi. Aerocity, NH – 8, New Delhi – 110 037. (PAN : AAGCN1520K) ITA No.608/Del./2020 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2016-17) ACIT, Circle 4 (2), vs. Bharti Land Limited, 3rd Floor, Worldmark 2, Asset No.8, New Delhi. Aerocity, NH – 8, New Delhi – 110 037. (PAN : AAGCN1520K) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Anil Bhalla, CA REVENUE BY : Shri P…

BHARTI LAND LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 195/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2023AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Anil Bhalla, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘A’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.195/Del./2020 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2016-17) Bharti Land Limited, vs. ACIT, Circle 4 (2), 3rd Floor, Worldmark 2, Asset No.8, New Delhi. Aerocity, NH – 8, New Delhi – 110 037. (PAN : AAGCN1520K) ITA No.608/Del./2020 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2016-17) ACIT, Circle 4 (2), vs. Bharti Land Limited, 3rd Floor, Worldmark 2, Asset No.8, New Delhi. Aerocity, NH – 8, New Delhi – 110 037. (PAN : AAGCN1520K) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Anil Bhalla, CA REVENUE BY : Shri P…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD vs. NSL MINING RESOURCES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

ITA 1411/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 The Dy.Commissioner Of Vs M/S. Nsl Mining Income Tax, Resources India Private Circle 16(1), Hyderabad. Limited, Hyderabad. Pan : Aadcn0483C. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Sri Kprr Murthy Date Of Hearing: 19.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.09.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sri KPRR Murthy
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2016-17 The Dy.Commissioner of Vs M/s. NSL Mining Income Tax, Resources India Private Circle 16(1), Hyderabad. Limited, Hyderabad. PAN : AADCN0483C. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: None Revenue by: Sri KPRR Murthy Date of hearing: 19.09.2022 Date of pronouncement: 20.09.2022 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. This appeal is filled by the Revenue feeling aggrieved with the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 4, Hyderabad dt.…

RBL HOTELS PVT LTD(FORMERLY KNOWN YS LEBARA HOTELS PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CORP CIR-4(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stands allowed

ITA 3429/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Aravindan & Shri. PawanFor Respondent: Shri Sajit Kumar (JCIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(34)Section 3Section 71(1)

…ras in M/s Ascendas IT Park Chennai Ltd. V/s DCIT (TCA ITA No.3428 & 3429/Chny/2018 No.668 of 2016 dated 27.04.2017) as well as in CIT V/s Club Resorts P. Ltd. (203 CTR 587); the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT V/s Samsung India Electronics Ltd. (356 ITR 354) & Carefour WC&C India Pvt. Ltd. V/s DCIT (368 ITR 692); the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in Western India Vegetable Products V/s CIT (26 ITR 151) besides various other decisions of Tribunal. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, submitted that setting up of business would mean group of activities which would make assessee completely ready t…

RBL HOTELS PVT LTD(FORMERLY KNOWN YS LEBARA HOTELS PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CORP CIR-4(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stands allowed

ITA 3428/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Aravindan & Shri. PawanFor Respondent: Shri Sajit Kumar (JCIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(34)Section 3Section 71(1)

…ras in M/s Ascendas IT Park Chennai Ltd. V/s DCIT (TCA ITA No.3428 & 3429/Chny/2018 No.668 of 2016 dated 27.04.2017) as well as in CIT V/s Club Resorts P. Ltd. (203 CTR 587); the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT V/s Samsung India Electronics Ltd. (356 ITR 354) & Carefour WC&C India Pvt. Ltd. V/s DCIT (368 ITR 692); the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in Western India Vegetable Products V/s CIT (26 ITR 151) besides various other decisions of Tribunal. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, submitted that setting up of business would mean group of activities which would make assessee completely ready t…

ITO CORPORATE WARD 1(3), CHENNAI vs. C.S.HOUSING PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

Accordingly, the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is confirmed and the appeal of the Revenue in I.T.A No.2427/Chny/2018 is dismissed

ITA 2427/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Mr. R. Sivaraman, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 35D

…rinciple has been laid down by the Hon’ble High Courts in the following cases are as under: i. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs ESPN Software India P. Limited (2008) 301 ITR 68 (Del.); ii. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Samsung India Electronics Limited (2013) 356 ITR 354 (Del.); iii. Carefour Wc & C India P. Limited Vs. DCIT (2014) 368 ITR 692 (Del.); iv. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dhoomketu Builder and Development P. Limited (2014) 368 ITR 680 (Del.); v. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Axis Private Equity Limited (Bombay High Court), 391 ITR 370; vi. Maruti Insurance Broking Private Limited Vs. Deputy Commiss…

ACIT, CIRCLE-30(1), NEW DELHI vs. MSK (JV), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7232/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, C. A.; &For Respondent: Shri M. N. Shete, Sr. D.R
Section 3

…ommencement of business. This distinction and principle has been laid down by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the following cases:- (i) CIT Vs. ESPN SOFTWARE INDIA P. LTD. (2008) 301 ITR 368 (Del.); (ii) CIT Vs. Samsung India Electronics Ltd. (2013) 356 ITR 354 (Del.); (iii) Carefour Wc & C India P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2014) 368 ITR 692 (Del.); (iv) CIT Vs. Dhoomketu Builder And Development P Ltd. (2014) 368 ITR 680 (Del.); (v) CIT Vs. Axis Pvt. Equity Limited (Bombay High Court) 391 ITR 370; (vi) Maruti Insurance Broking Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT 435 ITR 34. 7. Thus, we do not find any merit in the case of the rev…

ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), , KOLKATA vs. TCG URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE HOLDINGS PVT LTD.,, KOLKATA

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

ITA 2584/KOL/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. M.L.Meenaआयकर अपील सं.य/

Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…setting up and­maintenance of any office, and a definite period of gestation before any activity from such Office would yield income. The Hon'ble Delhi High Courts in the case of CIT Vs. Samsung India Electronics Ltd [ 2013] 37 taxmann.com 239 (Delhi)/(2013) 356 ITR 354 (Delhi) has adjudicated that any running expenses for the period between setting up and the commencement of business would be allowable as a business expenditure. IT: Running expenses incurred for period between setting up and commencement of business, is to be allowed as business expenditure ••••• [2013] 37 taxmann.com 239 (Delhi) HIGH' COURT OF…

STATKRAFT MARKETS PRIVATE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 24(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4536/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 4536/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Statkraft Markets Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, 403, 4Th Floor, Salcon Rasvilas Circle-24(2), Building, Saket District Centre, New Delhi New Delhi-110017 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqcs6900E Assessee By : Sh. R. M. Mehta, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Richa Khoda, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.04.2021

For Appellant: Sh. R. M. Mehta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Khoda, CIT DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member (Through Video Conferencing) ITA No. 4536/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Statkraft Markets Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, 403, 4th Floor, Salcon Rasvilas Circle-24(2), Building, Saket District Centre, New Delhi New Delhi-110017 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAQCS6900E Assessee by : Sh. R. M. Mehta, Adv. Revenue by : Ms. Richa Khoda, CIT DR Date of Hearing: 08.03.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 26.04.2021 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has…

BTW-ATLANTA TRANSFORMERS INDIA PVT. LTD.,BHARUCH vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

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

ITA 1642/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Mar 2020AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri S.N.Soparkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr. D.R
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154

…s and prior to commencement of business are allowable expenses. The assessee has placed reliance on the following pronouncements:- - Western India Vegetable Products Limited v. CIT (1954) 26ITR151 (Bombay HC) - CIT vs. Samsung India Electronics Limited (2013) 356 ITR 354 (Delhi HC) - CIT v. Hughes Escorts Communications (2007) 165 Taxman 3i8(Delhi HC) - CIT vs. Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Industries Ltd. (1973) 91 ITR 170 (Gujarat HC) The ld. counsel has submitted that assessee company has obtained necessary regulatory registration and approval required for commencement of its business and also set up its admin…

ACIT, CIRCLE - 5(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. THIESS MINES INDIA PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, this issue is adjudicated in favour of the assessee

ITA 485/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Judicial Member) I.T.A No. 2163/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 I.T.A No. 485/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(2), Kolkata......................................……Appellant M/s. Thiess Mines India Pvt. Ltd...............................................………………………......….......Respondent PS Srijan Corporate Park 1502,15th Floor, Tower-1 Plot No.2 Block EP & GP Sector-V Bidhan Nagar Kolkata - 700091 [PAN : AACCT 3570 B] C.O. No.…

ACIT, CIRCLE-5(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S THIESS MINES INDIA PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, this issue is adjudicated in favour of the assessee

ITA 2163/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Judicial Member) I.T.A No. 2163/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 I.T.A No. 485/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(2), Kolkata......................................……Appellant M/s. Thiess Mines India Pvt. Ltd...............................................………………………......….......Respondent PS Srijan Corporate Park 1502,15th Floor, Tower-1 Plot No.2 Block EP & GP Sector-V Bidhan Nagar Kolkata - 700091 [PAN : AACCT 3570 B] C.O. No.…

CSJ INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 456/CHANDI/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Ajay JainFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta
Section 35DSection 5Section 70Section 71

…construction during the year. The expenses incurred are related to marketing office, rental expenses, printing & stationary expenses and other miscellaneous expenses. He relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Samsung India Electronics 356 ITR 354 wherein it has been held that the expenses incurred on commencement of business are permissible deductions. In the case of Samar Estates Pvt. Ltd. 170 TTJ 14 the coordinate Bench of ITAT, Chandigarh held that it was not correct and observing that assessee had not commenced its business. In case of construction company, once construction activity…

CSJ INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. JCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 455/CHANDI/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Ajay JainFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta
Section 35DSection 5Section 70Section 71

…construction during the year. The expenses incurred are related to marketing office, rental expenses, printing & stationary expenses and other miscellaneous expenses. He relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Samsung India Electronics 356 ITR 354 wherein it has been held that the expenses incurred on commencement of business are permissible deductions. In the case of Samar Estates Pvt. Ltd. 170 TTJ 14 the coordinate Bench of ITAT, Chandigarh held that it was not correct and observing that assessee had not commenced its business. In case of construction company, once construction activity…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. LODHI PROPERTY COMPANY LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4970/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri K.Narasimha Charylodhi Property Company Ltd. Vs Dcit C/O Authorized Representative Sr Circle 4(1) Batliboi & Co., Golf View New Delhi. Corporate Tower-B, Sector 42, Sector Road, Gurgaon. Aabch0299N & Dcit Vs Lodhi Property Company Ltd. Circle 4(1) C/O Authorized Representative Sr Batliboi & New Delhi. Co., Golf View Corporate Tower-B, Sector 42, Sector Road, Gurgaon. Aabch0299N Assessee By Sh. R.S. Singhvi, Ca Sh. Satyajeet Goel, Ca Revenue By Sh. Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr. Dr

Section 35Section 36Section 37(1)

…October 2002, as such it cannot be said that the business of the assessee was not set up. He placed reliance on the decisions reported in CIT vs Dhumketu Builders & Development Pvt. Ltd. [2014] 368 ITR 680 (Del.); CIT vs Samsung India Electronics Ltd. [2013] 356 ITR 354 (Del.); Carefour WC & C India P. Ltd. vs DCIT [2014] 368 ITR 692 (Del.); CIT vs ESPN Software India Pvt. Ltd. [2009] 184 taxmann 452 (Del.); CIT vs Arcane Developers (P.) Ltd. [2014] 42 taxmann.com 10 (Del.); and M/s Multi Act Realty Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO [ITA No.7274/Mum/2011] (Mumbai Tribunal) in support of his contention that the busine…

Showing 1–20 of 31 · Page 1 of 2