CIT v. Southern Roadways Ltd.

288 ITR 15High Court2007#1503 most cited

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.

76

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Southern Roadways Ltd. · Southern Roadways · Section 37(1) · Income Tax Act Section 37 · software expenditure · revenue expenditure · capital expenditure · enduring benefit test · perpetual license software · software subscription fees · deductibility of software expenses.

Also reported as

183 Taxmann 2341 SOT 232

Sections most often in play

Section 10ASection 37Section 37(1) of the Income Tax ActSection 43(5)Section 10A of the Income Tax ActSection 194J of the Income Tax ActSection 37(1)Section 43(5) of the Income Tax Act

Issues it is cited on

section 41(1)(a)stpi unittest of enduring benefitsoftware technology parksection 203convertible foreign exchangewaiver of loansection 43(6)(c)section 43(b)section 10(2)section 39speculative transaction

Judgments citing CIT v. Southern Roadways Ltd.

Gujarat Power Corporation Ltd. - Gpcl, Ahmedabad vs. The JCIT, Gandhinagar Range, Gandhinagar

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

ITA 1928/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Uma Shankar Prasad, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.R
Section 115JSection 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Asstt. Appeal(s) by Nos. Year(s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 1172/Ahd/2016 2011-12 Joint Commissioner of Gujarat Power Corporation Ltd., 6th Income Tax (OSD), Gandhinagar Floor, Block No.8, Udhyog Bhavan, Sector – 11, Gandhinagar – 382 011. PAN No. AAACG 5596 J 2. 1361/Ahd/2016 2011-12 Gujarat Power Joint Commissioner of Corporation Ltd., 6th Income Tax (OSD), Floor, Block No.8, Gandhinagar. Udhyog Bhavan, Sector – 11, Gandhinagar – 382 011.…

Gujarat Power Corporation Ltd., -Gpcl, Ahmedabad vs. The JCIT, Gandhinagar Range, Gandhinagar

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

ITA 1361/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Uma Shankar Prasad, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.R
Section 115JSection 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Asstt. Appeal(s) by Nos. Year(s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 1172/Ahd/2016 2011-12 Joint Commissioner of Gujarat Power Corporation Ltd., 6th Income Tax (OSD), Gandhinagar Floor, Block No.8, Udhyog Bhavan, Sector – 11, Gandhinagar – 382 011. PAN No. AAACG 5596 J 2. 1361/Ahd/2016 2011-12 Gujarat Power Joint Commissioner of Corporation Ltd., 6th Income Tax (OSD), Floor, Block No.8, Gandhinagar. Udhyog Bhavan, Sector – 11, Gandhinagar – 382 011.…

The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(OSD), Gandhinagar vs. Gujarat Power Corporation Ltd., Gandhinagar

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

ITA 1172/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Uma Shankar Prasad, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.R
Section 115JSection 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Asstt. Appeal(s) by Nos. Year(s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 1172/Ahd/2016 2011-12 Joint Commissioner of Gujarat Power Corporation Ltd., 6th Income Tax (OSD), Gandhinagar Floor, Block No.8, Udhyog Bhavan, Sector – 11, Gandhinagar – 382 011. PAN No. AAACG 5596 J 2. 1361/Ahd/2016 2011-12 Gujarat Power Joint Commissioner of Corporation Ltd., 6th Income Tax (OSD), Floor, Block No.8, Gandhinagar. Udhyog Bhavan, Sector – 11, Gandhinagar – 382 011.…

M/S. Itt Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., Baroda vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(2), Baroda

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 2737/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Mar 2019AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)

…if it is treated as capital expenditure, depreciation as applicable to computers also should be granted. The Tribunal, on an appeal filed by the Revenue, followed the decision of Honourable Division Bench of this Court in CIT v. Southern Roadways Ltd. [2008] 304 ITR 84/[2009] 183 Taxman 234 (Mad.). 4. Mr. T. Ravikumar, learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue, placed reliance on the decision of the Delhi High Court in Bharti Televentures Ltd. v. Addl. Jt. CIT [2013] 29 taxmann.com 326/213 Taxman 320. 5. We have gone through the facts of the said case and we find that in the said case, the assessee was a telecom…

DCIT, Gurgaon vs. M/S. Dlf Projects Ltd., Gurgaon

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5178/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit, Dlf Projects Ltd. Circle 1(1), (Formerly Dt Projects Ltd.), Vs Gurgaon. 3Rd Floor, Shopping Mall, Arjun Nagar, Dlf City, Phase-I, Gurgaon. (Pan: Aaccd3093R) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: S/Shri R.S. Singhvi, Satyejeet, CAs
Section 192Section 195Section 40

…46 (Del.) 25 Assessment year 2009-10 d) Oracle India Pvt.Ltd. Vs. CIT (Delhi High Court) ITA Nos. 25/2012, 287/2008,417/2009, 447/2009, 461/2009 and 683/2009 e) CIT Vs. Southern Roadways Ltd. (2007) 288-ITR- 15 (Mad.) f) Naveen Projects Ltd. Vs. CIT (2005) 1 SOT 232 (Delhi) g) CIT Vs. Citicorp. Overseas Softwares Ltd. (2004) 85 TTJ (Mumb.)87 h) CIT Vs. Jasper Investments Ltd. (2007) 109 TTJ (Mum.)530 i) Ajit Kumar C Kamadar Vs. CIT (2005) 1 SOT 183 (Mum) The above facts of the case read in light of the various judicial pronouncements make it clear that the item shown by the appellant under the head “Software E…

Hdfc Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated hereinabove whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 738/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm M/S. Hdfc Securities Ltd., Vs. Dcit – 4(1) Office Floor 8 Mumbai I-Think Techno Campus Alpha Building, B Kanjurmarg (E) Mumbai – 400 042 Pan/Gir No.Aaach8215R Appellant) Respondent) .. Dcit – 4(1) (1) Vs. M/S. Hdfc Securities Ltd., Mumbai Office Floor 8 I-Think Techno Campus Alpha Building, B Kanjurmarg (E) Mumbai – 400 042 Pan/Gir No. Aaach8215R Appellant) Respondent) .. Assessee By Ms. Krupa R. Gandhi / Shri Vidhi Doshi Revenue By Shri Rajat Mittal

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 194JSection 40

…lakshmi Textiles Mills Limited (66 ITR 710)(SC)  CIT V. Chowgule and Co. Pvt. Lid. (214 ITR 523) (Bom)  New Shorrock Spg. & Mfg. Co. Ltd, v. CIT (1956) (30 ITR 338) (Bom)  PCIT v. Sesa Resources Ltd. (250 Taxman 182) (Bom)  CIT vs. Southern Roadways Ltd. (304 ITR 84(Mad)(HC)  Commissioner of Income-tax vs. MAC Charles (India) Lid. (60 taxmann.com 68) (Kar)  M/s. Sprang & Associates v. DCIT (ITA No. 31/Mum/2016)  Am way India Enterprises v. DCIT 27 SOT 344 (Del Trib) 16. Even decision with regard to treating the expenditure incurred in a lease property to be treated as revenue expenditure is also supported…

Ilink Multitech Solutions Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai

ITA 1546/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1544, 1545 & 1546/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 37

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1544, 1545 & 1546/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/s ILink Multitech Solutions Pvt. Ltd., C/O M/s Ramesh & Ramachandran The Deputy Commissioner of Chartered Accountants, v. Income Tax, New No.39, Old No.29/3, Corporate Circle 2(2), Viswanathapuram Main Road, Chennai - 600 034. Kodambakkam, Chennai - 600 024.…

Ilink Multitech Solutions Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai

ITA 1545/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1544, 1545 & 1546/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 37

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1544, 1545 & 1546/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/s ILink Multitech Solutions Pvt. Ltd., C/O M/s Ramesh & Ramachandran The Deputy Commissioner of Chartered Accountants, v. Income Tax, New No.39, Old No.29/3, Corporate Circle 2(2), Viswanathapuram Main Road, Chennai - 600 034. Kodambakkam, Chennai - 600 024.…

Ilink Multitech Solutions Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai

ITA 1544/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1544, 1545 & 1546/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 37

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1544, 1545 & 1546/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/s ILink Multitech Solutions Pvt. Ltd., C/O M/s Ramesh & Ramachandran The Deputy Commissioner of Chartered Accountants, v. Income Tax, New No.39, Old No.29/3, Corporate Circle 2(2), Viswanathapuram Main Road, Chennai - 600 034. Kodambakkam, Chennai - 600 024.…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Chennai Petroleum Corporation Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 853/CHNY/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.Prabhu Mukunth Arun-
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40

…t clearly shows that the expenditure on the software was capital in nature. 4.3 In reply, the Ld.AR submitted that the issue was squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s.Southern Roadways Ltd., reported in 304 ITR 84. He vehemently supported the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on this issue. 4.4 We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on this issue clearly shows that the assessee had paid software license fees and maintenance fees to M/s.Aspen Tech for the ITA Nos.687 & 853/Mds/2013 :- 9 -: systems which is used by the refi…

Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Chennai vs. JCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 687/CHNY/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.Prabhu Mukunth Arun-
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40

…t clearly shows that the expenditure on the software was capital in nature. 4.3 In reply, the Ld.AR submitted that the issue was squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s.Southern Roadways Ltd., reported in 304 ITR 84. He vehemently supported the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on this issue. 4.4 We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on this issue clearly shows that the assessee had paid software license fees and maintenance fees to M/s.Aspen Tech for the ITA Nos.687 & 853/Mds/2013 :- 9 -: systems which is used by the refi…

DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Alliance Broad Band Services Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1318/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1318/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Alliance Broad Band Services Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aaeca 3151 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri David Z. Chowngthu, Addl. CIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Datta, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…to Existence any asset capable of generating any income. In most of the cases, the value of spares are below Rs 5,000/-. The assessee also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs Southern Roadways Ltd reported in 288 ITR 15 (Mad) and 304 ITR 84 (Mad). The assessee also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd reported in 203 Taxman 277 (Del). 2.3. The ld CITA deleted the disallowance by observing as under:- “6.2. I have considered the submission of the AR of the appellant in the backdrop of th…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Satish Sehrawat, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2791/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 201(1)Section 40Section 40(1)(ia)

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘G’, New Delhi Before : Shri H.S. Sidhu, Judicial Member And Shri L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member ITA No. 2791/Del./2013 Assessment Year: 2009-10 ACIT, Central Circle-24 (1), Vs. Satish Sehrawat, Prop., M/s. Tehn New Delhi Travels, 1, Prakash House, Main Road, Mahipalpur, New Delhi (PAN: ABAPS4331H) Appellant Respondent ITA No. 2491/Del./2013 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Satish Sehrawat, Prop., M/s. Tehn Vs. ACIT Travels, 1, Prakash House, Main Road, Central Circle-24 (1), Opp. State Bank of Patiala, New Delhi Mahipalpur, New Delhi Revenue by Sh. Kaushlendra Tiwari…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Bosch Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeals are partly allowed and revenue’s appeal for the A

ITA 750/BANG/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Kumar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Parbat, CIT-III (D.R)
Section 23

…r the Assessee has submitted that when the expenditure has not brought into existence any capital asset then the same cannot be treated as capital in nature. He has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Southern Roadways 304 ITR 84 as well as decision dt.29.11.2016 of the co- ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of AXA Business Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT in IT(TP)A No.334/Bang/2013 and others. 38. Having considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record, at the outset we note that the expenditure incurred by the assessee is in respect of applica…

Kuoni Travel (India) P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 4285/MUM/2014[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2017AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Deym/S. Kuoni Travel (India) Pvt. Ltd. (Merged With Travel Corporate (India) Ltd.) 8Th Floor, Tower A, Urmi Estate ……………. Appellant 95 Ganpatrao Kadam Marg Lower Parel(W), Mumbai 400013 Pan Aaacs0170L V/S Dcit, Circle – 3(2) Room No. 609, 6Th Floor ……………. Respondent Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg Mumbai 400020 Appellant By : Shri Jay Bhansali Respondent By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Jay BhansaliFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav
Section 143(3)

…ing business. Therefore, the software developed cannot be considered to be profit making apparatus to treat the expenditure as capital in nature. In support of his contention he relied upon the following decisions: – i. CIT v/s. Southern Roadways Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 84 (Mad) ii. CIT v/s. Geoffrey Manners and Co. Ltd. (2014) 49 taxmann.com 320 (Bom) iii. CIT v/s. Raychem RPG Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 138 (Bom) 5 M/s. Kuoni Travel (India) Pvt. Ltd. iv. ACIT v/s. N.K.V. Krishna (2014) 41 taxmann.com 306 (Chennai). 6. Learned Departmental Representative relied upon the observations the Commissioner (Appeals) and Assess…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Oriental Bank of Commerce, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed and that of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes, as indicated above

ITA 5200/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 14ASection 2

…y India Enterprises Vs. DCIT [2008] 301 ITR (AT.) 0001 ITAT (Del.) (SB), CIT Vs. G.R Capital Services Ltd. [2008] 300 ITR 420 (Delhi), Business Information Processing Services Vs. ACIT [1999] 239 ITR (AT) 19 ITAT (Jai) and CIT Vs. Southern Roadways Ltd [2008] 304 ITR 84 (Mad.) are not of any ITA No. 4566 & 5200/Del./2014 13 help because all the decisions are pertaining to assessment years prior to amendment brought in w.e.f. April 1, 2003 where computer software was also included along with computer as a different class of asset within Machinery and Plant. In view of the above factual and legal position the AMC…

Oriental Bank of Commerce, Gurgaon vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed and that of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes, as indicated above

ITA 4566/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 14ASection 2

…y India Enterprises Vs. DCIT [2008] 301 ITR (AT.) 0001 ITAT (Del.) (SB), CIT Vs. G.R Capital Services Ltd. [2008] 300 ITR 420 (Delhi), Business Information Processing Services Vs. ACIT [1999] 239 ITR (AT) 19 ITAT (Jai) and CIT Vs. Southern Roadways Ltd [2008] 304 ITR 84 (Mad.) are not of any ITA No. 4566 & 5200/Del./2014 13 help because all the decisions are pertaining to assessment years prior to amendment brought in w.e.f. April 1, 2003 where computer software was also included along with computer as a different class of asset within Machinery and Plant. In view of the above factual and legal position the AMC…

Smt. Abhadevi Narendra Agrawal, Burhanpur vs. The ACIT, Khandwa

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 58/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./ I.T.A. No.58/Ind/2015 "नधा"रणवष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11

Section 14ASection 41(1)

…an be made only if the trading liability ceased to exist. In support of his contention the Ld. AR also relied in the case of Dr. Pallab Ghosh v/s ITO in ITA No. 659/Kol/2013, Unison Hotels Ltd v/s ACIT ITA No. 2113/Del/2012, CIT v/s Southern Roadways Ltd. 282 ITR 379 , New Commercial Mills Co. Ltd. v/s Dy. CIT (2001) 73 TTJ (Ahd) 893, CIT v/s Sugauli Sugar Works (P) LTD. (1999) 152 CTR (SC) 46; (1999) 236 ITR 518 (SC): ((1999) 102 TAXMAN 713 (SC), Shri Vardhman Overseas Ltd. v/s Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (2008) 24 SOT 393 (Del), Smt. Abhadevi Agarwal/ I.T.A. No.58/Ind/2015/A.Y.:10-11 Page 10 o…

M/S. Oriental Bank of Commerce, Gurgaon vs. Addl.CIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of

ITA 6795/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. KVSR Krishna, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anupama Anand, CIT/DR
Section 14A

…y India Enterprises Vs. DCIT [2008] 301 ITR (AT.) 0001 ITAT (Del.) (SB), CIT Vs. G.R Capital Services Ltd. [2008] 300 ITR 420 (Delhi), Business Information Processing Services Vs. ACIT [1999] 239 ITR (AT) 19 ITAT (Jai) and CIT Vs. Southern Roadways Ltd [2008] 304 ITR 84 (Mad.) are not of any help because all the decisions are pertaining to assessment years prior to amendment brought in w.e.f. April 1, 2003 where computer software was also included along with computer as a different class of asset within Machinery and Plant. In view of the above factual and legal position the AMC expenses Rs. 74,95,483/- mentioned…

Tevapharm India P.Ltd ( Formelry Known As Ratiopharm India P.Ltd), Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 7584/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R C Sharma & Shri Amit Shuklait(Tp)A No. : 7584/Mum/2012 (Assessment Year: 2008-09) तेवाफाम" इं"डया "ाइवेट "ल"मटेड Vs Asst. Cit -Circle-10(3), Aayakar Bhavan, M/S Tevapharm India Pvt. Ltd. M K Road, (Formerly Known As Mumbai -400 020 Ratiopharm India P Ltd), 402, Omega Harinandani Gardens, Powai Mumbai -400 076 Pan:Aabcr 7561 F ""यथ" (Respondent) अपीलाथ" (Appellant) Appellant By "ी धनेश बाफना : "मस चाँदनी शाह "ी हर"श अरोरा Shri Dhanesh Bafna Ms. Chandni Shah Shri Harish Arora Respondent By "ी एन के चाँद : Shri N K Chand सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 09-06-2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25-08-2016

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C(2)Section 92D

…d from time to time, hence same cannot be reckoned as ‘giving enduring benefit’. In support, he relied upon the following decisions:- i) CIT vs Varinder Agro Chemicals Ltd, reported in [2009] 309 ITR 272 (P&H); ii) CIT v Southern Roadways, reported in [2008] 304 ITR 84 (Mad) CIT vs Ashahi India Safety Glasses [2011] 61 DTR iii) 63 (DEL). 17. On the other hand, Ld. DR submitted that assessee was using unofficial software earlier and whenever A computer is bought there is already preloaded software. The software license fee is not an annual payment, it is a onetime payment and the advantage runs into number of ye…