How many judgments cite CIT v. Samtel Color Ltd.?

63 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Samtel Color Ltd. (326 ITR 425), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Samtel Color Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 37(1), Section 139(1), Section 143(1), Section 144B, Section 154.

CIT v. Samtel Color Ltd.

326 ITR 425High Court2010#1817 most cited

What is CIT v. Samtel Color Ltd. authority for?

Corporate club membership fees, including admission and subscription fees, incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes to improve business relations and prospects, are allowable as revenue expenditure. This principle applies when there is a proximate nexus between the expenditure and the business.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Samtel Color Ltd. · section 37(1) · club membership fees · corporate club membership · revenue expenditure · business expenditure · allowable deduction · wholly and exclusively for business · proximate nexus

Also reported as

184 Taxmann 12064 DTR 4613 ITR-OL 639

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 144B Section 154 Section 250 Section 263

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

proximate nexus section 10(35)dependent agent pe service pe section 135 csr expenditure section 35(2ab)weighted deduction enduring benefit section 10(34)transactional net margin method section 40(a)(i)

Judgments citing CIT v. Samtel Color Ltd.

Jubilant Life Sciences Ltd., Noida vs. JCIT, Moradabad

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 4773/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Jubilant Pharmova Ltd. Vs. Jcit, (Earlier Known As M/S. Range-1, Jubilant Life Sciences Ltd.), Moradabad Plot No. 1A, Sectore-16A, Noida Pan :Aabcv0200H (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Jubilant Pharmova Ltd. Circle-1, (Earlier Known As Jubilant Moradabad Life Sciences Ltd.), Gajraula, Amroha, Uttar Pradesh Pan :Aabcv0200H (Appellant) (Respondent)

…igh Court. The honourable Supreme Court has also held in CIT vs. United Glass manufacturing company limited civil appeal number 6449 of 2012 that club expenses are also PO of business expenditure. The honourable Delhi High Court has also taken similar view in 326 ITR 425 and 218 taxmann 69 in view of this ground number 3 of appeal of assessee is allowed.” 3.3 Facts being identical, respectfully following the decision of the coordinate bench, we allow assessee’s claim of deduction. Consequently, disallowance is deleted. This ground is allowed.” 3.5 Facts being identical, respectfully following the consistent vie…

DCIT, Moradabad vs. Sh. Jubilant Life Sciences Ltd., Uttar Pradesh

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6196/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

…igh Court. The honourable Supreme Court has also held in CIT vs. United Glass manufacturing company limited civil appeal number 6449 of 2012 that club expenses are also PO of business expenditure. The honourable Delhi High Court has also taken similar view in 326 ITR 425 and 218 4 ITA No. 4637/Del/2014; 4827/Del/2014; 4638/Del/2014 & 6196/Del/2014 (M/s. Jubilant Life Sciences Ltd.) taxmann 69 in view of this ground number 3 of appeal of assessee is allowed.” 3.3 Facts being identical, respectfully following the decision of the coordinate bench, we allow assessee’s claim of deduction. Consequently, disallowance…

DCIT, Moradabad vs. M/S. Jubilant Organosyes Ltd., Uttar Pradesh

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4827/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

…igh Court. The honourable Supreme Court has also held in CIT vs. United Glass manufacturing company limited civil appeal number 6449 of 2012 that club expenses are also PO of business expenditure. The honourable Delhi High Court has also taken similar view in 326 ITR 425 and 218 4 ITA No. 4637/Del/2014; 4827/Del/2014; 4638/Del/2014 & 6196/Del/2014 (M/s. Jubilant Life Sciences Ltd.) taxmann 69 in view of this ground number 3 of appeal of assessee is allowed.” 3.3 Facts being identical, respectfully following the decision of the coordinate bench, we allow assessee’s claim of deduction. Consequently, disallowance…

M/S. Jubilant Life Sciences Limited, Noida vs. Addl.CIT, Moradabad

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4638/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

…igh Court. The honourable Supreme Court has also held in CIT vs. United Glass manufacturing company limited civil appeal number 6449 of 2012 that club expenses are also PO of business expenditure. The honourable Delhi High Court has also taken similar view in 326 ITR 425 and 218 4 ITA No. 4637/Del/2014; 4827/Del/2014; 4638/Del/2014 & 6196/Del/2014 (M/s. Jubilant Life Sciences Ltd.) taxmann 69 in view of this ground number 3 of appeal of assessee is allowed.” 3.3 Facts being identical, respectfully following the decision of the coordinate bench, we allow assessee’s claim of deduction. Consequently, disallowance…

M/S. Jubilant Life Sciences Limited, Noida vs. Addl.CIT, Moradabad

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4637/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

…igh Court. The honourable Supreme Court has also held in CIT vs. United Glass manufacturing company limited civil appeal number 6449 of 2012 that club expenses are also PO of business expenditure. The honourable Delhi High Court has also taken similar view in 326 ITR 425 and 218 4 ITA No. 4637/Del/2014; 4827/Del/2014; 4638/Del/2014 & 6196/Del/2014 (M/s. Jubilant Life Sciences Ltd.) taxmann 69 in view of this ground number 3 of appeal of assessee is allowed.” 3.3 Facts being identical, respectfully following the decision of the coordinate bench, we allow assessee’s claim of deduction. Consequently, disallowance…

Addl. C.I.T., Bangalore vs. M/S Abb Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed and the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 335/BANG/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2007-08 M/S. Abb Ltd., 49, Khanija Bhavan, The Addl. Race Course Road, Commissioner Of 2Nd Floor, East Wing, Income-Tax (Ltu), Bangalore – 560 001. Bangalore. Vs. Pan: Aaaca3834B Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year : 2007-08 (By Revenue)

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, Advocate

Section 10ASection 14A

…A) was justified in deleting the disallowances of entrances fee made by the Assessing Officer. [Dy. CIT vs. Bank of America Securities (India) (P) Ltd. 136 TTJ 441]. Again, Corporate membership fees payable to club is revenue exp. [CIT v Samtel Colour Limited 326 ITR 425]. Ground No.3 is accordingly dismissed.” 3.2 There is nothing brought on record by the revenue to take a contrary view. Respectfully following the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal, we allow this ground raised by the assessee. 4. Ground No. 3 – Telecommunication expenses of Rs.29,11,762/- - Not pressed. The Ld.AR submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has…

Abb Limited, Bangalore vs. Addl.C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed and the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 317/BANG/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, Advocate

Section 10ASection 14A

Abb Ltd., Bangalore vs. Addl. CIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by assessee for assessment year

ITA 1129/BANG/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Sept 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Reddy, Sr. Counsel

…A) was justified in deleting the disallowances of entrances fee made by the Assessing Officer. [Dy. CIT vs. Bank of America Securities (India) (P) Ltd. 136 TTJ 441]. Again, Corporate membership fees payable to club is revenue exp. [CIT v Samtel Colour Limited 326 ITR 425]. Ground No.3 is accordingly dismissed. 9.2 There is nothing brought on record by the assessee to take a contrary view. Respectfully following the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal, we dismiss this grounds raised by the revenue for both years under consideration. 10. Ground No.4 – Liability of warranty expenses 10.1 It is submitted that the coo…

M/S. Abb Limited(Formerly Asea Brown Boveri Limited), Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed and appeal filed by Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1227/BANG/2007[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2004-05

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Reddy, Sr. Counsel

Section 28Section 80Section 801ASection 80I

…A) was justified in deleting the disallowances of entrances fee made by the Assessing Officer. [Dy. CIT vs. Bank of America Securities (India) (P) Ltd. 136 TTJ 441]. Again, Corporate membership fees payable to club is revenue exp. [CIT v Samtel Colour Limited 326 ITR 425]. Ground No.3 is accordingly dismissed. 12.2 There is nothing brought on record by the revenue to take a contrary view. Respectfully following the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal, we dismiss this grounds raised by the revenue. 13. Ground No.4 - Expenses on the basis of purchase of packing material, loose tools etc., in the year of purchase 1…

ACIT, Bangalore vs. M/S. Abb Limited, Bangalore

In the result, ground No.3 raised by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 897/BANG/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranita No.790 & 791/Bang/2008 Assessment Year : 2002-03 & 2003-04 M/S. Abb Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Ii Floor, East Wing, Income Tax (Ltu), Khanija Bhavan, Bengaluru. Race Course Road, Bengaluru-560 001. Pan : Aaaca 3834 B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. V. Aravind, Standing Counsel

Section 2Section 80H

…A) was justified in deleting the disallowances of entrances fee made by the Assessing Officer. [Dy. CIT vs. Bank of America Securities (India) (P) Ltd. 136 TTJ 441]. Again, Corporate membership fees payable to club is revenue exp. [CIT v Samtel Colour Limited 326 ITR 425]. Ground No.3 is accordingly dismissed. 7. Ground No.4 raised by the Revenue reads as follows: 4. The ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the claim of the assessee amounting to Rs.9,33,995 being R & D expenditure under section ITA Nos. 790, 791, 896 and 897/Bang/2008 Page 5 of 48 35(1)(iv) when the activity claimed to be the R & D activity is part of…

ACIT, Bangalore vs. M/S. Abb Limited, Bangalore

In the result, ground No.3 raised by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 896/BANG/2008[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2021AY 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. V. Aravind, Standing Counsel

Section 2Section 80H

…A) was justified in deleting the disallowances of entrances fee made by the Assessing Officer. [Dy. CIT vs. Bank of America Securities (India) (P) Ltd. 136 TTJ 441]. Again, Corporate membership fees payable to club is revenue exp. [CIT v Samtel Colour Limited 326 ITR 425]. Ground No.3 is accordingly dismissed. 7. Ground No.4 raised by the Revenue reads as follows: 4. The ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the claim of the assessee amounting to Rs.9,33,995 being R & D expenditure under section ITA Nos. 790, 791, 896 and 897/Bang/2008 Page 5 of 48 35(1)(iv) when the activity claimed to be the R & D activity is part of…

M/S. Abb Limited(Formerly Asea Brown Boveri Limited), Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

In the result, ground No.3 raised by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 791/BANG/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2021AY 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. V. Aravind, Standing Counsel

Section 2Section 80H

…A) was justified in deleting the disallowances of entrances fee made by the Assessing Officer. [Dy. CIT vs. Bank of America Securities (India) (P) Ltd. 136 TTJ 441]. Again, Corporate membership fees payable to club is revenue exp. [CIT v Samtel Colour Limited 326 ITR 425]. Ground No.3 is accordingly dismissed. 7. Ground No.4 raised by the Revenue reads as follows: 4. The ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the claim of the assessee amounting to Rs.9,33,995 being R & D expenditure under section ITA Nos. 790, 791, 896 and 897/Bang/2008 Page 5 of 48 35(1)(iv) when the activity claimed to be the R & D activity is part of…

M/S. Abb Limited(Formerly Asea Brown Boveri Limited), Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, ground No.3 raised by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 790/BANG/2008[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2021AY 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. V. Aravind, Standing Counsel

Section 2Section 80H

…A) was justified in deleting the disallowances of entrances fee made by the Assessing Officer. [Dy. CIT vs. Bank of America Securities (India) (P) Ltd. 136 TTJ 441]. Again, Corporate membership fees payable to club is revenue exp. [CIT v Samtel Colour Limited 326 ITR 425]. Ground No.3 is accordingly dismissed. 7. Ground No.4 raised by the Revenue reads as follows: 4. The ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the claim of the assessee amounting to Rs.9,33,995 being R & D expenditure under section ITA Nos. 790, 791, 896 and 897/Bang/2008 Page 5 of 48 35(1)(iv) when the activity claimed to be the R & D activity is part of…

DCIT CC 8(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Jainam Investments, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 4474/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2021AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Suchek Anchaliya (AR)For Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman (DR)

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

…4474/Mum/2019 A.Ys. 2011-12 & 2016-17 prove the genuineness of the transactions as between its creditors and the creditors' source of income, i.e. the sub creditors. 6.3.28 In a recent decision given by the Delhi High Court in case of CIT v. Samtel Color Ltd. 64 DTR 46, it was held that by bringing on record every possible information regarding the depositors included in the application form which included particulars of applicant/depositor, telephone No., particulars of demand draft/cheque through which the deposit was made, tax status of applicant and other deposits with the assessee, if any, assessee had disch…

Klaxon Trading (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-28, New Delhi

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

ITA 5348/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaasstt. Year 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishnan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Shivani Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…lowed. He further submitted that since the assessee is a company such expenditure shall always be held to be allowable. Ld. Counsel for the assessee also referred to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Samtel Colour Ltd. reported in 326 ITR 425 and various other decisions. 6. Ld. Sr. DR on the other hand strongly supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 7. I have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides perused the orders of the AO and Ld. CIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. I have also considered the various decisions cited before me. I find the AO i…

Rahul Mohanlal Bafna, Mumbai vs. ITO-21(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assesee is dismissed

ITA 453/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunatharahul Mohanlal Bafna Vs. Ito-21(3)(1) 2004, Casa Grande Tower Piramal Chambers, S.B.Marg, Delisle Road Lalbaug, Parel Next To Peninsula Park Mumbai-400 012 Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013

Section 143(2)Section 37Section 37(1)

…Appeal Nos, 6447 to 6449 of 2012] 2. CIT (Large Tax Payer Unit), Centre-1, Mumbai v. Lubrizol India Ltd. [2013] 218 Taxman 69 (Bombay) 5 Rahul Mohanlal Bafna 3. CIT v- Apollo Tyres Ltd. (NO. 3) [2019] 416 ITR 554 (Ker) 4. PC1T v. Bayer Vapi Pvt. Ltd. [2019] 13 ITR-OL 639 (Guj) 5. Dy. CIT v, M/s. Deloitte ToucheeTohmatsu [ITA no.3017/Mum./2016 Mum-Trib] 6. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, strongly supporting order of the Ld. AO, as well as the Ld.CIT(A) submitted that the Ld. AO was right in disallowed subscription and membership fee paid to National Sports Club of India, because the assessee has not carried out…

Shailender Mayank Hemchand, Mumbai vs. ACIT 19(3), Mumbai

ITA 5352/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5352/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Dr. P. Daniel, ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar

Section 30Section 37Section 37(1)

…d to the golf club was of revenue expenditure. CIT v. ENGINEERS INDIA LTD. [1999] 239 ITR 237 (Delhi), CIT v. NESTLE INDIA LTD. [2008] 296 ITR 682 (Delhi), GUJARAT STATE EXPORT CORPORATION LTD. v. CIT [1994] 209 ITR 649 (Guj), CIT v. SAMTEL COLOR LTD. [2010] 326 ITR 425 (Delhi) and OTIS ELEVATOR Co. (INDIA) LTD. v. CIT [1992] 195 ITR 682 (Bom) approved. 10. In the present case, assessee has taken permanent membership of CCI Club and assessee is allowed to use the facility of the club and it can never create any capital assets. As the assessee can only utilize the facility and in case, he decides to surrender th…

Firstsource Solutions Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 5(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 3539/MUM/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm M/S. Firstsource Solutions Ltd. Vs. The Deputy Commissioner 5Th Floor, Paradigm B Of Income Tax, Circle- 5(2) Mind Space, New Link Road Aayakar Bhavan, Malad (W) Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400 064 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aaaci8904N (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…were filed by the assessee before the ld CITA and hence there is no violation of Rule 46A of the IT Rules. We find that on merits, the issue is covered by the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Samtel Colour Limited reported in (2010) 326 ITR 425 (Del) and Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs United Glass Manufacturing Company Ltd in Civil Appeal No. 30146/2008 dated 13.9.2012 (SC) , wherein it was held that the subscription and admission fee paid towards corporate membership to club was an expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business of the assessee…

Alstom India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6960/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri G. Manjnatha

For Appellant: Shri Mrunal Parekh a/wFor Respondent: Shri Anadi Verma

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 35D

….); vii) Clariant Chemicals India Ltd. v/s ACIT, [2015] 53 taxmann. com 39 (Mum.); viii) CIT v/s Nestle India Ltd., [2008] 296 ITR 682 (Del.); ix) CIT v/s M/s. Upper India Steel Mfg. and Engg. Co. Ltd., 50 taxmann.com 395; x) CIT v/s Samtel Color Ltd., [2010] 326 ITR 425 (Del.); and xi) CIT v/s Groz Beckert Asia Ltd., 31 taxmann.com 155 (P&H). 35. The learned Departmental Representative submitted, there is a difference between entrance fee and subscription fee. He submitted, any payment made towards entrance is of capital nature, hence, not allowable as expenditure. 36. In rejoinder, the learned Authorised Repr…

ACIT, Moradabad vs. M/S. Jubilant Organosyes Ltd., Uttar Pradesh

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 4975/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Beena A. Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R.M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 43(1)

…igh Court. The honourable Supreme Court has also held in CIT vs. United Glass manufacturing company limited civil appeal number 6449 of 2012 that club expenses are also PO of business expenditure. The honourable Delhi High Court has also taken similar view in 326 ITR 425 and 218 taxmann 69 in view of this ground number 3 of appeal of assessee is allowed. 77. The ground number 4 of appeal is against confirmation of disallowance of Rs. 231,000 being notional interest on refundable deposits made to club. The fact shows that assessee has made an interest free on refundable deposit of INR 1,800,000 with club. The lear…