CIT v. Star Resorts (P) Ltd (P&H

335 ITR 587High Court#9718 most cited
11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 32Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154

Issues it is cited on

construction peproject completion methodrule of consistencypenalty u/s 271(1)(c)section 32revenue expendituresection 37(1)double taxationsection 37section 154salaryincome from other sources

Judgments citing CIT v. Star Resorts (P) Ltd (P&H

ITO, WARD-6(1), MOHALI vs. QUARKCITY INDIA PVT. LTD., MOHALI

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

ITA 266/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Thakral Advocate And Shri Raman Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

…As the items on which depreciation was claimed are part of finished building, being used or are ready to be used by the appellant, there is no basis for a summary disallowance of 50% by the assessing officer. In the case of CIT v. Star Resorts (P) Ltd (P&H, 335 ITR 587, 2009) it was held by the jurisdictional High Court that depreciation cannot be determined on the basis of estimate. Hence ground no 7 being raised in appeal by the assessee is allowed. 8. Grounds No. 8, 9 and 10 are against disallowance of expenses Rs. 5,04,556, Rs. 1,16,92,374/- and Rs.47,75,667 on account of miscellaneous expenses, administra…

ITO, WARD-6(1), MOHALI vs. QUARKCITY INDIA PVT. LTD., MOHALI

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

ITA 265/CHANDI/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Thakral Advocate And Shri Raman Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

…As the items on which depreciation was claimed are part of finished building, being used or are ready to be used by the appellant, there is no basis for a summary disallowance of 50% by the assessing officer. In the case of CIT v. Star Resorts (P) Ltd (P&H, 335 ITR 587, 2009) it was held by the jurisdictional High Court that depreciation cannot be determined on the basis of estimate. Hence ground no 7 being raised in appeal by the assessee is allowed. 8. Grounds No. 8, 9 and 10 are against disallowance of expenses Rs. 5,04,556, Rs. 1,16,92,374/- and Rs.47,75,667 on account of miscellaneous expenses, administra…

ITO, WARD-6(1), MOHALI vs. QUARKCITY INDIA PVT. LTD., MOHALI

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

ITA 264/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Thakral Advocate And Shri Raman Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

…As the items on which depreciation was claimed are part of finished building, being used or are ready to be used by the appellant, there is no basis for a summary disallowance of 50% by the assessing officer. In the case of CIT v. Star Resorts (P) Ltd (P&H, 335 ITR 587, 2009) it was held by the jurisdictional High Court that depreciation cannot be determined on the basis of estimate. Hence ground no 7 being raised in appeal by the assessee is allowed. 8. Grounds No. 8, 9 and 10 are against disallowance of expenses Rs. 5,04,556, Rs. 1,16,92,374/- and Rs.47,75,667 on account of miscellaneous expenses, administra…

ITO, WARD-6(1), MOHALI vs. QUARKCITY INDIA PVT. LTD., MOHALI

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

ITA 263/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Thakral Advocate And Shri Raman Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

…As the items on which depreciation was claimed are part of finished building, being used or are ready to be used by the appellant, there is no basis for a summary disallowance of 50% by the assessing officer. In the case of CIT v. Star Resorts (P) Ltd (P&H, 335 ITR 587, 2009) it was held by the jurisdictional High Court that depreciation cannot be determined on the basis of estimate. Hence ground no 7 being raised in appeal by the assessee is allowed. 8. Grounds No. 8, 9 and 10 are against disallowance of expenses Rs. 5,04,556, Rs. 1,16,92,374/- and Rs.47,75,667 on account of miscellaneous expenses, administra…

ITO, WARD-6(1), MOHALI vs. QUARKCITY INDIA PVT. LTD., MPHALI

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

ITA 262/CHANDI/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Thakral Advocate And Shri Raman Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

…As the items on which depreciation was claimed are part of finished building, being used or are ready to be used by the appellant, there is no basis for a summary disallowance of 50% by the assessing officer. In the case of CIT v. Star Resorts (P) Ltd (P&H, 335 ITR 587, 2009) it was held by the jurisdictional High Court that depreciation cannot be determined on the basis of estimate. Hence ground no 7 being raised in appeal by the assessee is allowed. 8. Grounds No. 8, 9 and 10 are against disallowance of expenses Rs. 5,04,556, Rs. 1,16,92,374/- and Rs.47,75,667 on account of miscellaneous expenses, administra…

ITO, WARD-6(1), MOHALI vs. QUARKCITY INDIA PVT. LTD., MPHALI

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

ITA 261/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Thakral Advocate And Shri Raman Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

…As the items on which depreciation was claimed are part of finished building, being used or are ready to be used by the appellant, there is no basis for a summary disallowance of 50% by the assessing officer. In the case of CIT v. Star Resorts (P) Ltd (P&H, 335 ITR 587, 2009) it was held by the jurisdictional High Court that depreciation cannot be determined on the basis of estimate. Hence ground no 7 being raised in appeal by the assessee is allowed. 8. Grounds No. 8, 9 and 10 are against disallowance of expenses Rs. 5,04,556, Rs. 1,16,92,374/- and Rs.47,75,667 on account of miscellaneous expenses, administra…

ITO, WARD-6(1), MOHALI vs. QUARKCITY INDIA PVT. LTD., MPHALI

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

ITA 260/CHANDI/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Thakral Advocate And Shri Raman Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

…As the items on which depreciation was claimed are part of finished building, being used or are ready to be used by the appellant, there is no basis for a summary disallowance of 50% by the assessing officer. In the case of CIT v. Star Resorts (P) Ltd (P&H, 335 ITR 587, 2009) it was held by the jurisdictional High Court that depreciation cannot be determined on the basis of estimate. Hence ground no 7 being raised in appeal by the assessee is allowed. 8. Grounds No. 8, 9 and 10 are against disallowance of expenses Rs. 5,04,556, Rs. 1,16,92,374/- and Rs.47,75,667 on account of miscellaneous expenses, administra…

ITO, WARD-6(1), MOHALI vs. QUARKCITY INDIA PVT. LTD., MPHALI

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

ITA 259/CHANDI/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Feb 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Thakral Advocate And Shri Raman Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

…As the items on which depreciation was claimed are part of finished building, being used or are ready to be used by the appellant, there is no basis for a summary disallowance of 50% by the assessing officer. In the case of CIT v. Star Resorts (P) Ltd (P&H, 335 ITR 587, 2009) it was held by the jurisdictional High Court that depreciation cannot be determined on the basis of estimate. Hence ground no 7 being raised in appeal by the assessee is allowed. 8. Grounds No. 8, 9 and 10 are against disallowance of expenses Rs. 5,04,556, Rs. 1,16,92,374/- and Rs.47,75,667 on account of miscellaneous expenses, administra…

ITO, WARD-6(1), MOHALI vs. QUARKCITY INDIA PVT. LTD., MOHALI

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

ITA 258/CHANDI/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Thakral Advocate And Shri Raman Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

…As the items on which depreciation was claimed are part of finished building, being used or are ready to be used by the appellant, there is no basis for a summary disallowance of 50% by the assessing officer. In the case of CIT v. Star Resorts (P) Ltd (P&H, 335 ITR 587, 2009) it was held by the jurisdictional High Court that depreciation cannot be determined on the basis of estimate. Hence ground no 7 being raised in appeal by the assessee is allowed. 8. Grounds No. 8, 9 and 10 are against disallowance of expenses Rs. 5,04,556, Rs. 1,16,92,374/- and Rs.47,75,667 on account of miscellaneous expenses, administra…

DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. EXL SERVICE.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 615/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Piyush Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 92D

…allowable on the cost as evidenced through documentary evidence in respect of that specific asset. The AO accordingly, disallowed the claim of the depreciation on the goodwill. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Star Resorts P. Ltd. 335 ITR 587 (P&H) " Chowgule & Co. Vs ACIT (2011) 137 TTJ 596 (Panaji ITAT) 67. Being aggrieved the assessee raised objection before the ld. DRP and submitted as under: “That applying the principle of ejusdem generis and considering the use of words ‘similar nature’, depreciation under section 32(1) of the Act would be admissible on other intangible assets a…

EXL SERVICE.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 302/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Piyush Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 92D

…allowable on the cost as evidenced through documentary evidence in respect of that specific asset. The AO accordingly, disallowed the claim of the depreciation on the goodwill. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Star Resorts P. Ltd. 335 ITR 587 (P&H) " Chowgule & Co. Vs ACIT (2011) 137 TTJ 596 (Panaji ITAT) 67. Being aggrieved the assessee raised objection before the ld. DRP and submitted as under: “That applying the principle of ejusdem generis and considering the use of words ‘similar nature’, depreciation under section 32(1) of the Act would be admissible on other intangible assets a…

CIT v. Star Resorts (P) Ltd (P&H (335 ITR 587) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax