What is CIT v. Southern Roadways Ltd. authority for?

Expenditure on software useful for a short period or requiring regular updates, for which subscription fees are paid, constitutes revenue expenditure, distinguishable from capitalized software purchased on a perpetual license model, based on the test of enduring benefit.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Southern Roadways Ltd.?

76 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Southern Roadways Ltd. (288 ITR 15), spanning 2011 to 2026.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 10A, Section 37, Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, Section 43(5), Section 10A of the Income Tax Act, Section 194J of the Income Tax Act.

CIT v. Southern Roadways Ltd. (288 ITR 15)

S T I India Ltd., Indore vs. ACIT-5(1), Indore

Appeals are disposed of as under:

ITA 13/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

…re, the assessee has not derived or obtained any benefit in respect of such trading liability. Therefore, the addition made on the basis of presumption cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. The Ld. AR has relied in the case of CIT v/s Southern Roadways Ltd. 282 ITR 379 wherein the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v/s Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd., (1999) 152 CTR (SC) 46: (1999) 236 ITR 518(SC) was considered and it was held that the principle that expiry of period of limitation prescribed under the Limitation Act, could not extinguish the debt but it would only prevent the creditor from enforcing th…

S T I India Ltd., Indore vs. ACIT-5(1), Indore

Appeals are disposed of as under:

ITA 12/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

…re, the assessee has not derived or obtained any benefit in respect of such trading liability. Therefore, the addition made on the basis of presumption cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. The Ld. AR has relied in the case of CIT v/s Southern Roadways Ltd. 282 ITR 379 wherein the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v/s Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd., (1999) 152 CTR (SC) 46: (1999) 236 ITR 518(SC) was considered and it was held that the principle that expiry of period of limitation prescribed under the Limitation Act, could not extinguish the debt but it would only prevent the creditor from enforcing th…

S T I India Ltd., Indore vs. ACIT-5(1), Indore

Appeals are disposed of as under:

ITA 11/IND/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

…re, the assessee has not derived or obtained any benefit in respect of such trading liability. Therefore, the addition made on the basis of presumption cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. The Ld. AR has relied in the case of CIT v/s Southern Roadways Ltd. 282 ITR 379 wherein the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v/s Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd., (1999) 152 CTR (SC) 46: (1999) 236 ITR 518(SC) was considered and it was held that the principle that expiry of period of limitation prescribed under the Limitation Act, could not extinguish the debt but it would only prevent the creditor from enforcing th…

The ACIT, Central-1, Indore vs. M/S Surya Infra Venture Pvt. Ltd., Indore

In the result ground no.2 raised by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 233/IND/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit(Central)-1 Surya Infraventures Pvt. Indore Ltd. Nanda Nagar, Indore बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Appellant) Pan: Aadca 4235 D Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal & Shri Bhavesh Agrawal, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 01.12.2022

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…ore, the assessee has not derived or obtained any benefit in respect of such trading liability. Therefore, the addition made on the basis of presumption cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. The Ld. AR has relied on the case of CIT Vs. Southern Roadways Ltd 282 ITR 379 wherein the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v/s Sugauli Sugar Works (P) LId, (1999) 152 CTR (SC) 46: (1999) 236 ITR 518 (SC) was considered and it was held that the principle that expiry of period of limitation prescribed under the Limitation Act, could not extinguish the debt but it would only prevent the creditor from enforcing th…

ACIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Pentasoft Technologies Ltd., Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 449/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Nov 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.121/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2004-05 M/S.Pentasoft Technologies Ltd., V. The Income Tax – No.1, First Main Road, Officer (Osd), United India Colony, Company Circle-V(2), Kodambakkam, Chennai. Chennai – 600 024. [Pan: Aaacp 1895 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mrs.Sree Lakshmi Valli, AdvFor Respondent: Dr.S.Palanikumar, CIT

Section 10ASection 143(3)

…of Rs.18,24,821/- towards expenditure incurred for purchase of software as capital in nature, since, the assessee derived enduring benefit, but has allowed depreciation. The Ld.CIT(A) by following the decision of CIT v. Southern Roadways Ltd. reported in 288 ITR 15, allowed relief and held that expenditure incurred for purchase of software is Revenue in nature. 9.1 The Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee has incurred expenditure for accreditation of software for improving the efficiency of existing system with a view to keep business pace with latest technology. Therefore, the same doe…

Pentasoft Technologies Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO (OSD), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 121/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Nov 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.121/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2004-05 M/S.Pentasoft Technologies Ltd., V. The Income Tax – No.1, First Main Road, Officer (Osd), United India Colony, Company Circle-V(2), Kodambakkam, Chennai. Chennai – 600 024. [Pan: Aaacp 1895 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mrs.Sree Lakshmi Valli, AdvFor Respondent: Dr.S.Palanikumar, CIT

Section 10ASection 143(3)

…of Rs.18,24,821/- towards expenditure incurred for purchase of software as capital in nature, since, the assessee derived enduring benefit, but has allowed depreciation. The Ld.CIT(A) by following the decision of CIT v. Southern Roadways Ltd. reported in 288 ITR 15, allowed relief and held that expenditure incurred for purchase of software is Revenue in nature. 9.1 The Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee has incurred expenditure for accreditation of software for improving the efficiency of existing system with a view to keep business pace with latest technology. Therefore, the same doe…

Dy CIT - 8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Tata Aig General Insurance Co.Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, ground No. 3 of the appeal is dismissed

ITA 14/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am The Dy. Commissioner Of M/S Tata Aig General Income Tax-8(3)(1), Insurance Co. Ltd. 15Th Floor, Tower A, Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. 615, Peninsula Corporate Park, Vs. M.K. Road, G.K. Marg, New Marine Lines, Mumbai- Lower Parel, 400 020 Mumbai-400 013 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabct3518Q Appellant By : Shri Rajesh Damor, Cit Dr Respondent By : S/Shri J.D. Mistry & Madhur Agrawal, Ars’ Date Of Hearing: 23.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.03.2022

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Damor, CIT DRFor Respondent: S/Shri J.D. Mistry & Madhur

Section 143(3)Section 32Section 37(1)Section 40Section 44

…tical issue arose in case of the assessee for Assessment Tata AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd.; AY 15-16 Year 2006-07 to 2008-09. The co-ordinate Bench vide Para nos. 22,23, relaying on the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in case of Southern Roadways Ltd. 288 ITR 15 (Mad) held that purchase of hard disk, battery, etc. is revenue expenditure and not capital. Further identical issue in case of the assessee honourable Bombay High Court in [2020] 116 taxmann.com 492 (Bombay) [05-08-2019] as already decided this issue in favour of the assessee. Therefore, this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee. H…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Pune vs. M/S. Atlas Copco (India) Ltd., Pune

ITA 1353/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri R. MuralidharFor Respondent: Shri Sangram Gaikwad

Section 92C

…ssessing Officer. As regards to the addition on account of Software Development Expenses of Rs.1.26 lakhs, ld.CIT(A) had directed the Assessing Officer to allow the same as Revenue expenditure by following decisions : i. CIT Vs. Southern Roadway Ltd (2008) 304 ITR 84 (Mad). ii. CIT Vs. Asashi India Safety Glass Ltd (2011) 203 Taxman 277. iii. CIT Vs. Renuga Textiles Mills Ltd (2012) 254 CTR (Mad) 423. 6. As regards to the disallowance of Repairs and Maintenance Expenses of Rs.1,01,869/-, the ld.CIT(A) following his order in assessee’s own case for earlier years i.e., A.Ys. 2009-10 had directed the Assessing Of…

Alcatel Lucent India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5554/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Delhi16 Aug 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Surenderpal, CIT DR

Section 10ASection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 920(3)Section 92D

…CIT (1955) 27 ITP 34, the enduring benefit or the permanent character means acquisition of the assets or the right having enough durability.” 27. Before us, during the arguments, the ld. AR relied on the following judgments:  CIT Vs Southern Roadways Ltd. 288 ITR 15 (Madras)  L&T Ramboll Consulting Engineers Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA No.886/Mds/2006 (Chennai ITAT)  CIT Vs G.E. Capital Services ltd. (2007) 164 Taxman 46 (Del.)  Amway India Enterprises Vs DCIT & SQL Star International Ltd. Vs ACIT (2008) 111 ITD (Delhi -SB)  IBM India Ltd. Vs CIT (2006) 290 ITR 183 (Bang.)  CIT Vs K & Co. (2003) 181 CTR 378 (Del…

Alcatel Lucent India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5553/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Delhi16 Aug 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Surenderpal, CIT DR

Section 10ASection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 920(3)Section 92D

…CIT (1955) 27 ITP 34, the enduring benefit or the permanent character means acquisition of the assets or the right having enough durability.” 27. Before us, during the arguments, the ld. AR relied on the following judgments:  CIT Vs Southern Roadways Ltd. 288 ITR 15 (Madras)  L&T Ramboll Consulting Engineers Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA No.886/Mds/2006 (Chennai ITAT)  CIT Vs G.E. Capital Services ltd. (2007) 164 Taxman 46 (Del.)  Amway India Enterprises Vs DCIT & SQL Star International Ltd. Vs ACIT (2008) 111 ITD (Delhi -SB)  IBM India Ltd. Vs CIT (2006) 290 ITR 183 (Bang.)  CIT Vs K & Co. (2003) 181 CTR 378 (Del…