CIT v. Selan Exploration Technology Ltd.

188 Taxmann 1High Court2010#9490 most cited

What is CIT v. Selan Exploration Technology Ltd. authority for?

Expenses incurred for buyback of shares are an allowable business expense for the purpose of computation of income. Such expenditure is not in the nature of capital expenditure and is not required to be capitalised.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v Selan Exploration Technology Ltd · share buyback expenses · allowable business expense · capital expenditure · advisory services · shareholder relationship · 188 Taxmann 1

Sections most often in play

Section 115QASection 133ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)(iii)Section 391Section 394Section 56(2)(viia)

Issues it is cited on

enduring benefitput to usecapital expendituresection 23section 14aprevious yeartransfersection 143companysection 14indiatotal income

Judgments citing CIT v. Selan Exploration Technology Ltd.

ACIT, Chennai vs. Updater Services Limited, Chennai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by both the assessee and the Revenue, as well as the grounds raised in the cross-objections filed by the assessee, are treated as allowed for statistical...

ITA 1616/CHNY/2025[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1339 /Chny/2025 िनधा#रण वष# / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Updater Services Limited (Formerly Dcit, Known As Updater Services Private Vs. Central Circle -2(3), Limited), No.2/302-A, Uds Salai, Chennai. Off Old Mahabalipuram Road, Thoraipakkam, Chennai – 600 097. [Pan:Aaacu-6845-J] (अपीलाथ%/Appellant) (&'थ%/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. K. Prasanna, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T
Section 115QSection 250Section 263Section 391Section 77A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एस एस िव"ने" रिव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.:1339 /Chny/2025 िनधा#रण वष# / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s. Updater Services Limited (formerly DCIT, known as Updater Services Private vs. Central Circle -2(3), Limited), No.2/302-A, UDS Salai, Chennai. Off Old Mahabalipuram Road, Thoraipakkam, Chennai – 600 097. [PAN:AAACU-6845-J] (अपीलाथ%/Appellant) (&'थ%/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./…

M/S. Updater Services Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(3), Chennai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by both the assessee and the Revenue, as well as the grounds raised in the cross-objections filed by the assessee, are treated as allowed for statistical...

ITA 1339/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1339 /Chny/2025 िनधा#रण वष# / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Updater Services Limited (Formerly Dcit, Known As Updater Services Private Vs. Central Circle -2(3), Limited), No.2/302-A, Uds Salai, Chennai. Off Old Mahabalipuram Road, Thoraipakkam, Chennai – 600 097. [Pan:Aaacu-6845-J] (अपीलाथ%/Appellant) (&'थ%/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. K. Prasanna, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T
Section 115QSection 250Section 263Section 391Section 77A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एस एस िव"ने" रिव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.:1339 /Chny/2025 िनधा#रण वष# / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s. Updater Services Limited (formerly DCIT, known as Updater Services Private vs. Central Circle -2(3), Limited), No.2/302-A, UDS Salai, Chennai. Off Old Mahabalipuram Road, Thoraipakkam, Chennai – 600 097. [PAN:AAACU-6845-J] (अपीलाथ%/Appellant) (&'थ%/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./…

DCIT RG. - 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Bajaj Auto Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 4372/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Bajaj Auto Limited V. Dcit – Range – 3(1) Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai – 400021 M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan : Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit – Range – 3(1) V. M/S. Bajaj Auto Limited Room No. 623, 6Th Floor Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point Mumbai – 400021 Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan : Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Ms. Vasanti Patel& Shri Kirit Kamdar Department Represented By : Shri Ankush Kapoor

Section 143(4)(b)Section 234Section 35Section 35DSection 37(1)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Bajaj Auto Limited v. DCIT – Range – 3(1) Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point 6th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai – 400021 M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 PAN : AAACB3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) DCIT – Range – 3(1) v. M/s. Bajaj Auto Limited Room No. 623, 6th Floor Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point Mumbai – 400021 Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 PAN : AAACB3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Ms. Vasanti Patel& Shri Kirit Kamdar…

M/S. Bajaj Auto Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT RG. - 3(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4236/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Bajaj Auto Limited V. Dcit – Range – 3(1) Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai – 400021 M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan : Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit – Range – 3(1) V. M/S. Bajaj Auto Limited Room No. 623, 6Th Floor Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point Mumbai – 400021 Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan : Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Ms. Vasanti Patel& Shri Kirit Kamdar Department Represented By : Shri Ankush Kapoor

Section 143(4)(b)Section 234Section 35Section 35DSection 37(1)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Bajaj Auto Limited v. DCIT – Range – 3(1) Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point 6th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai – 400021 M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 PAN : AAACB3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) DCIT – Range – 3(1) v. M/s. Bajaj Auto Limited Room No. 623, 6th Floor Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point Mumbai – 400021 Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 PAN : AAACB3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Ms. Vasanti Patel& Shri Kirit Kamdar…

Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 10(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 6766/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Ms. Soumya Kulkarni/Mr. Arvind V. Sonde, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Michael Jerald, DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Colgate – Palmolive (India) Ltd., Addl. Commissioner of Income Colgate Research Centre, Main Vs. Tax-10(3), Mumbai. Street, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai-400076. PAN No. AAACC4309B Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Ms. Soumya Kulkarni/Mr. Arvind V. Sonde, AR Revenue by : Mr. Michael Jerald, DR Last Date of Hearing : 06/03/2020 Date of pronouncement : 31/07/2020 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee. Th…

The Supreme Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT Ltu, Mumbai

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

ITA 4673/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singh: A.Y : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh
Section 115JSection 14ASection 32Section 37(1)Section 43(6)Section 45Section 51Section 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : A.Y : 2009-10 The Supreme Industries Limited, Vs. ACIT (LTU), Mumbai 612, Raheja Chambers, 213, (Respondent) Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021. PAN : AAACT1344F (Appellant) : A.Y : 2009-10 DCIT (LTU), Mumbai Vs. The Supreme Industries Limited, (Appellant) 612, Raheja Chambers, 213, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021. PAN : AAACT1344F (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Nitesh Joshi Revenue by : Shri Amit Pratap Singh Date of Hearing : 01/10/2019 Date of Pronouncement : 20/12/20…

Abott India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No 3472/Mum/2013 and ITA No

ITA 832/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Respondent: Shri Morya Pratap
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)Section 80

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “A” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3472/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 832/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Abbot India Limited,, Assistant Commissioner of बनाम/ 3/4,Corporate Park, Income Tax- Circle – 2(1), v. Sion Trombay Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 071. Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : AAACB5170B .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) As…

Abbott India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No 3472/Mum/2013 and ITA No

ITA 3472/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Respondent: Shri Morya Pratap
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)Section 80

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “A” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3472/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 832/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Abbot India Limited,, Assistant Commissioner of बनाम/ 3/4,Corporate Park, Income Tax- Circle – 2(1), v. Sion Trombay Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 071. Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : AAACB5170B .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) As…

Merck Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 7(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year

ITA 1222/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2016AY 2009-10
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…s 36,70,816. 58. Having heard the rival contentions and having perused the material on record, we find this issue is also covered, in favour of the assessee, by Hon’ble Delhi High Court’s judgment in the case of CIT Vs Selan Exploration Technology Ltd [(2010) 188 Taxmann 1 (Del)]. In this case, Their Lordships have, inter alia, observed as follows: 5. Insofar as the amount of Rs. 20,40,000 is concerned, it was paid by the assessee to HSBC Securities and Capital Markets (India) (P) Ltd. for advisory services in regulatory compliance undertaken by them to enable the assessee to prove exist opportunity to the share…

DCIT Cir 7(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Merck Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year

ITA 1172/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2016AY 2010-11
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…s 36,70,816. 58. Having heard the rival contentions and having perused the material on record, we find this issue is also covered, in favour of the assessee, by Hon’ble Delhi High Court’s judgment in the case of CIT Vs Selan Exploration Technology Ltd [(2010) 188 Taxmann 1 (Del)]. In this case, Their Lordships have, inter alia, observed as follows: 5. Insofar as the amount of Rs. 20,40,000 is concerned, it was paid by the assessee to HSBC Securities and Capital Markets (India) (P) Ltd. for advisory services in regulatory compliance undertaken by them to enable the assessee to prove exist opportunity to the share…

Merck Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year

ITA 1946/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2016AY 2009-10
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…s 36,70,816. 58. Having heard the rival contentions and having perused the material on record, we find this issue is also covered, in favour of the assessee, by Hon’ble Delhi High Court’s judgment in the case of CIT Vs Selan Exploration Technology Ltd [(2010) 188 Taxmann 1 (Del)]. In this case, Their Lordships have, inter alia, observed as follows: 5. Insofar as the amount of Rs. 20,40,000 is concerned, it was paid by the assessee to HSBC Securities and Capital Markets (India) (P) Ltd. for advisory services in regulatory compliance undertaken by them to enable the assessee to prove exist opportunity to the share…