CIT v. Sarabhai Management Corpn. Ltd.

192 ITR 151Supreme Court of India1991#2588 most cited

What is CIT v. Sarabhai Management Corpn. Ltd. authority for?

Expenses incurred after a business has been set up but before its actual commencement are allowable as business deductions under section 37 of the Income-tax Act. The Supreme Court clarified that even expenses related to activities at a preparatory stage are admissible.

45

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sarabhai Management Corpn. Ltd. · 192 ITR 151 · section 37 · business set up · commencement of business · preparatory stage expenses · allowability of expenses · business deduction · pre-commencement expenses · section 143(3) · section 68 · section 133(6)

Sections most often in play

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 56Section 68

Issues it is cited on

businesspersonsection 143(3)indianfacinterest

Judgments citing CIT v. Sarabhai Management Corpn. Ltd.

M/S. TRAC MEDIA PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CORP. CIRCLE-20(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are decided as under:-

ITA 1306/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1305/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1306/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2016-17 M/S.Trac Media Pvt Ltd., Assistant Commissioner Of No.35, 3Rd Main Road, Income Tax, Kalaimagal Nagar, Corporate Circle-20(1), Ekkattuthangal, Chennai. Chennai-600 032. [Pan: Aadct4184G] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri D.Anand, Advocate. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, Cit(Virtual) & Ms.V.Supraja, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri D.Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, CIT(Virtual) &
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 56

…of Franco Tosi Ingegneria as at Page - 2 - of 8 ITA Nos.1305 & 1306/Chny/2025 241 ITR 268, of Delhi High Court in the case of Samsung India Electronic as at 360 ITR 354 as well as of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarabhai Management Corporation as at 192 ITR 151. It was argued that the impugned cases support the assessee’s claims. As regards the issue of sundry creditors the Ld.Counsel argued that it has all the evidence in its possession to establish sources of credit, genuineness of transaction as well as identity of the parties. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee requested for final opportunity and to r…

M/S. TRAC MEDIA PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CORP. CIRCLE-20(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are decided as under:-

ITA 1305/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1305/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1306/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2016-17 M/S.Trac Media Pvt Ltd., Assistant Commissioner Of No.35, 3Rd Main Road, Income Tax, Kalaimagal Nagar, Corporate Circle-20(1), Ekkattuthangal, Chennai. Chennai-600 032. [Pan: Aadct4184G] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri D.Anand, Advocate. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, Cit(Virtual) & Ms.V.Supraja, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri D.Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, CIT(Virtual) &
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 56

…of Franco Tosi Ingegneria as at Page - 2 - of 8 ITA Nos.1305 & 1306/Chny/2025 241 ITR 268, of Delhi High Court in the case of Samsung India Electronic as at 360 ITR 354 as well as of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarabhai Management Corporation as at 192 ITR 151. It was argued that the impugned cases support the assessee’s claims. As regards the issue of sundry creditors the Ld.Counsel argued that it has all the evidence in its possession to establish sources of credit, genuineness of transaction as well as identity of the parties. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee requested for final opportunity and to r…

DIVYANIDHI BUILDCON PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

ITA 616/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Jain (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 45(3)

…ing that interval are also permissible for deduction. The decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sarabhai Management Corpn. Ltd. (supra) has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Sarabhai Management Corpn. Ltd. [1991] 192 ITR 151, where the Hon'ble Supreme Court went a step ahead that even the activities at a preparatory stage are also admissible. It is well settled that all the expenses incurred after the business had been set up are allowable as business deduction under section 37 of the Act.” The ld. AO noted that the reply of the assessee is not acceptable on the gro…

DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI vs. HMS REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4190/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 37(1)

…at interval are also permissible for deduction. 6.12 The decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sarabhai Management Corpn. Ltd. (supra) has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Sarabhai Management Corpn. Ltd. [1991] 192 ITR 151, where the Hon'ble Supreme Court went a step ahead that even the activities at a preparatory stage are also admissible. It is well settled that all the expenses incurred after the business had been set up are allowable as business deduction under section 37 of the Act. There may be interval between the setting up of the business and the actual co…

DCIT CIR 6(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. KARJAT GOLF CLUB P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 638/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.638/Mum/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-6(3)(2), Vs. Karjat Golf Club P. Ltd., Mumbai. Tower, 1502 B One India Bulls Centre, 841 Jupier Mills, Off Senapati Bpat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai- 400013 Pan : Aadck0915A Appellant Respondent C.O. No.236/Mum/2017 (Arising Out Of Ita No.638/Mum/2016) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 Karjat Golf Club P. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle-6(3)(2), Tower, 1502 B One India Mumbai. Bulls Centre, 841 Jupier Mills, Off Senapati Bpat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai- 400013 Pan : Aadck0915A Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Keyur Patel Assessee By : Shri Vilesh Dalya Date Of Hearing : 15.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.11.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 12, Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri Vilesh DalyaFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel
Section 143(3)

…rval between setting up of the business and actual commencement of business are allowable as deduction as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Ramaraju Surgical Cotton Mills Ltd, 63 ITR 478 (SC) and CIT vs. Sarabhai Management Corpn. Ltd., 192 ITR 151 (SC) followed by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sarabhai Management Corpn. Ltd. vs. CIT, 102 ITR 25 (Guj.) and also followed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Western India Vegetable Products Ltd. vs. CTI, 26 ITR 151 (Bom.). In the present case, the ld. CIT(A) simply discussed the legal principles without adverting to…

MESSUNG SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 14 (4),, PUNE

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

ITA 683/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.683/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Messung Systems Private Vs. Ito, Ward-14(4), Pune. Limited, 501, Lunkad Skyvista, Sr. No.230/A/3/2, Viman Nagar, Pune- 411014. Pan : Aabcm1832E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani Date Of Hearing : 29.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.11.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 15.02.2018 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Briefly, The Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Company Incorporated Under The Provisions Of The Companies Act, 1956. It Is Engaged In The Business Of Trading Of Programmable Logic Controllers (Plc) & Parts Thereof. The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2014-15 Was Filed On 30.09.2014 Declaring Total

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 143(3)

…nterval between setting up of the business and commencement of the business are allowable as deduction as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Ramaraju Surgical Cotton Mills Ltd, 63 ITR 478 (SC) and CIT vs. Sarabhai Management Corpn. Ltd., 192 ITR 151 (SC) followed by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sarabhai Management 5 Corpn. Ltd. vs. CIT, 102 ITR 25 (Guj.) and also followed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Western India Vegetable Products Ltd. vs. CTI, 26 ITR 151 (Bom.). In the present case, the Assessing Officer as well as the ld. CIT(A) simply discussed the l…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. PVP VENTURES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2308/CHNY/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Feb 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri M. Rajan, CITFor Respondent: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 28

…ugh its subsidiaries. By this process, the assessee company has initiated steps for development of real estate project on the land parcel of 70 acres. In such facts, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Sarabhai Management Corporation Ltd., (1991) 192 ITR 151 and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Western India Sea Food (P) Ltd., (1993) 199 ITR 777 has considered the exactly identical facts. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarabhai Management Corporation Ltd., supra, held as under:- 2. Dr. Gauri Shankar, learned Counsel for the Union of India, vehemently contends that the finding a…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. PVP VENTURES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1707/CHNY/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Feb 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri M. Rajan, CITFor Respondent: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 28

…ugh its subsidiaries. By this process, the assessee company has initiated steps for development of real estate project on the land parcel of 70 acres. In such facts, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Sarabhai Management Corporation Ltd., (1991) 192 ITR 151 and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Western India Sea Food (P) Ltd., (1993) 199 ITR 777 has considered the exactly identical facts. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarabhai Management Corporation Ltd., supra, held as under:- 2. Dr. Gauri Shankar, learned Counsel for the Union of India, vehemently contends that the finding a…

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)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH “B” KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Dr. M.L.Meena, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं.य/ ITA Nos.2584 to 2588/Kol/2019 Assessment Years:2004-05, ’05- 06, ’06-07,’07-08 & ’09-10 बनाम / ACIT,Cir-2(1), Kolkata M/s. TCG Urban Circle-2(1), Aaykar Bhawan, Infrastructure Holdings Pvt. V/s. P-7 Chowringhee Square, Ltd. (Earlier known as TCG Kolkata-700 069. Infrastructure Holdings Ltd.) Ground Fl., Bldg Beta, Bengal Intelligent Park, Salt Lake Electronics Complex, Block EP & GP, Sector V, Salt Lake, Kolkata. PAN: AADCS8821M अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent…

DCIT CC 6(3), MUMBAI vs. HORIZON INFRASTRUCTURE LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee ITA No

ITA 844/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodita No.2471/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Horizon Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Dcit,Cc-6(3) (Now Known As Skil Air India Building Infrastructure Ltd.) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 021 Skil House, 209 Bank Street Cross Lane, Fort Mumbai-400 023

Section 14ASection 32

…ss was actual setup only, when the machinery was installed and the factory was ready to commence business . The Hon’ble Supreme Court, while affirmed the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High court in the case of CIT vs Sarabhai Management corporation Ltd.(1991 192 ITR 151) held that in the case of a company formed for leasing of the property, it could not be said that the business was not setup till the first lease took place, ”the earlier part of the activities, namely engaged staff, buying the equipment and making the staff familiar with the same are all part of the business and the business can be said to be…

HORIZON INFRASTRUCTURE LTD(NOW KNOWN AS SKIL INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED),MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 6(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee ITA No

ITA 2470/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodita No.2471/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Horizon Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Dcit,Cc-6(3) (Now Known As Skil Air India Building Infrastructure Ltd.) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 021 Skil House, 209 Bank Street Cross Lane, Fort Mumbai-400 023

Section 14ASection 32

…ss was actual setup only, when the machinery was installed and the factory was ready to commence business . The Hon’ble Supreme Court, while affirmed the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High court in the case of CIT vs Sarabhai Management corporation Ltd.(1991 192 ITR 151) held that in the case of a company formed for leasing of the property, it could not be said that the business was not setup till the first lease took place, ”the earlier part of the activities, namely engaged staff, buying the equipment and making the staff familiar with the same are all part of the business and the business can be said to be…

HORIZON COUNTRY WIDE LOGISTICS LTD(NOW SUCCEEDED ON AMALGAMATION BY SKIL INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED ),MUMBAI vs. DCIT 1(2)(PRESENTLY ACIT--6(3)), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee ITA No

ITA 5817/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodita No.2471/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Horizon Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Dcit,Cc-6(3) (Now Known As Skil Air India Building Infrastructure Ltd.) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 021 Skil House, 209 Bank Street Cross Lane, Fort Mumbai-400 023

Section 14ASection 32

…ss was actual setup only, when the machinery was installed and the factory was ready to commence business . The Hon’ble Supreme Court, while affirmed the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High court in the case of CIT vs Sarabhai Management corporation Ltd.(1991 192 ITR 151) held that in the case of a company formed for leasing of the property, it could not be said that the business was not setup till the first lease took place, ”the earlier part of the activities, namely engaged staff, buying the equipment and making the staff familiar with the same are all part of the business and the business can be said to be…

DCIT CC 6(3), MUMBAI vs. HORIZON INFRASTRUCTURE LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee ITA No

ITA 5779/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodita No.2471/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Horizon Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Dcit,Cc-6(3) (Now Known As Skil Air India Building Infrastructure Ltd.) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 021 Skil House, 209 Bank Street Cross Lane, Fort Mumbai-400 023

Section 14ASection 32

…ss was actual setup only, when the machinery was installed and the factory was ready to commence business . The Hon’ble Supreme Court, while affirmed the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High court in the case of CIT vs Sarabhai Management corporation Ltd.(1991 192 ITR 151) held that in the case of a company formed for leasing of the property, it could not be said that the business was not setup till the first lease took place, ”the earlier part of the activities, namely engaged staff, buying the equipment and making the staff familiar with the same are all part of the business and the business can be said to be…

M/S SAMBHAV INSTITUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-12(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1760/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 271(1)(c)

…to us in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. The Commissioner will pay the costs of this reference to the assessee. 3.12. Aforesaid decision was affirmed by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Sarabhai Management Corpn. Ltd. [1991] 192 ITR 151 (SC). 3.13. Reference can be made and reliance can be placed on the ruling of the Honourable Court in the case of Prem Conductors (P.) Ltd. Vs CIT [1977] 108 ITR 654 (GUJ.) wherein it was observed and held as under The business of the company was to manufacture aluminum and other conductors and to sell them. In the instant case, the company has s…

M/S SAMBHAV INSTITUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED , BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-12(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1759/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 271(1)(c)

…to us in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. The Commissioner will pay the costs of this reference to the assessee. 3.12. Aforesaid decision was affirmed by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Sarabhai Management Corpn. Ltd. [1991] 192 ITR 151 (SC). 3.13. Reference can be made and reliance can be placed on the ruling of the Honourable Court in the case of Prem Conductors (P.) Ltd. Vs CIT [1977] 108 ITR 654 (GUJ.) wherein it was observed and held as under The business of the company was to manufacture aluminum and other conductors and to sell them. In the instant case, the company has s…

M/S SAMBHAV INSTITUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-12(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1758/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 271(1)(c)

…to us in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. The Commissioner will pay the costs of this reference to the assessee. 3.12. Aforesaid decision was affirmed by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Sarabhai Management Corpn. Ltd. [1991] 192 ITR 151 (SC). 3.13. Reference can be made and reliance can be placed on the ruling of the Honourable Court in the case of Prem Conductors (P.) Ltd. Vs CIT [1977] 108 ITR 654 (GUJ.) wherein it was observed and held as under The business of the company was to manufacture aluminum and other conductors and to sell them. In the instant case, the company has s…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. JATRA RUCHI COSMETICS (INDIA) PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5877/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, Vs. Jatra Ruchi Cosmetics Circle-13(1), (India) Pvt. Ltd, Cr Building, Shop No. 1 To 4, World New Delhi Trade Centre, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaccj2047F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Janardan Das, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…tional decisions wherein it has been held that where the essential activities of carrying on business are fulfilled, the business should be considered to have been set up: a) Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in CIT v. Sarabhai Management Corporation Ltd. [1991] 192 ITR 151 (SC) held that when the respondent was in a position to offer services and paid salaries to employees, expenditure on like repairs, legal and stationery charges, printing, stationery and conveyance charges, the business is said to set up and expenditure is allowable while computing income for business and profession. (Copy has been enclosed as An…

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

…d in view of judicial pronouncement of the Bombay High Court in Western India Vegetables Products Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 151 and Supreme Court in CWT v. Ramaraju Surgical Cotton Mills Ltd. [1967] 63 ITR 478 and Sarabhai Management Corpn. Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 192 ITR 151 (SC), the same should be disallowed as expenditure. We may only note that the Assessing Officer did not go into the factual matrix applicable to the assessee's case to find out the date of setting up of business. He simply took the date 1st October, 1995 i.e. as the date of start of the actual commercial sale transactions as the relevant date. Th…

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

…d in view of judicial pronouncement of the Bombay High Court in Western India Vegetables Products Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 151 and Supreme Court in CWT v. Ramaraju Surgical Cotton Mills Ltd. [1967] 63 ITR 478 and Sarabhai Management Corpn. Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 192 ITR 151 (SC), the same should be disallowed as expenditure. We may only note that the Assessing Officer did not go into the factual matrix applicable to the assessee's case to find out the date of setting up of business. He simply took the date 1st October, 1995 i.e. as the date of start of the actual commercial sale transactions as the relevant date. Th…

DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI vs. HMS REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3289/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambledcit Vs Hms Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. Circle- 11(1) 1 Ad, Vandhana Building , New Delhi 11, Tolstoy Marg, (Appellant) New Delhi Aacch0745G (Respondent)

Section 37(1)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT Vs HMS Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. Circle- 11(1) 1 AD, Vandhana Building , New Delhi 11, Tolstoy Marg, (APPELLANT) New Delhi AACCH0745G (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Amit Kutoch, SR. DR Respondent by Sh. Salil Aggarwal, Sr. Adv, Sh. R. P. Mall, Adv Date of Hearing 17.12.2018 Date of Pronouncement 27.12.2018 ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order dated 19/2/2018 passed by CIT(A)-4, New Delhi for Assessment Year 201…

Showing 1–20 of 45 · Page 1 of 3