What is CIT v. Sundaram Industries Ltd. authority for?

Expenditure incurred for obtaining club membership and its annual subscription is allowable as a deduction if it is for the purpose of business, even if there are incidental personal benefits to directors. The primary purpose must be to promote the company's business interests through networking and enhancing social status.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Sundaram Industries Ltd.?

58 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (240 ITR 335), spanning 2016 to 2025.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 37(1), Section 14A, Section 250, Section 69C, Section 10(38), Section 115-BBE(2).

CIT v. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (240 ITR 335)

ACIT, CC-1(2), Kolkata vs. R T Fashion Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2180/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2180/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR)For Respondent: Shri D.S.Damle, FCA

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…(351 ITR 196) (P&H HC) CIT vs. Lubrizol India Ltd. (37 taxmann.com 294) (Bom HC) Gujrat State Export Corpn. (209 ITR 649) (Guj HC) Attention was further invited to the decision of the Hon`ble Madras High court in the case of CIT vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (240 ITR 335). In that case the assessee company had paid subscription amounts to Rotary Club, Gymkhana Club and Mylapore Club which was claimed as business expenditure. The Tribunal held that the expenditure was not incurred for personal benefit of director but in order to promote business, The High Court concurred with the view of the Tribunal and held the…

ACIT, Central Circle - 1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Orissa Manganese & Minerals Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 2153/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Dec 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

…ious people to make them the prospective customers of the business. I also find that various courts have held that membership fees /Club expenses are business expenditure. The Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (1999) 240 ITR 335 (Mad), has held that club membership fees of director incurred to promote and foster the company's business are allowable as business expenditure. Similar view has been held by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Nestle India Ltd. (2008) 296 ITR 682 and Hon'ble Jurisdictional ITAT, in the case of ACIT vs. Britannia Industries L…

ACIT, Central Circle - 1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Orissa Manganese & Minerals Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 2152/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

…ious people to make them the prospective customers of the business. I also find that various courts have held that membership fees /Club expenses are business expenditure. The Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (1999) 240 ITR 335 (Mad), has held that club membership fees of director incurred to promote and foster the company's business are allowable as business expenditure. Similar view has been held by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Nestle India Ltd. (2008) 296 ITR 682 and Hon'ble Jurisdictional ITAT, in the case of ACIT vs. Britannia Industries L…

ACIT, Central Circle - 1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Orissa Manganese & Minerals Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 2150/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

…ious people to make them the prospective customers of the business. I also find that various courts have held that membership fees /Club expenses are business expenditure. The Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (1999) 240 ITR 335 (Mad), has held that club membership fees of director incurred to promote and foster the company's business are allowable as business expenditure. Similar view has been held by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Nestle India Ltd. (2008) 296 ITR 682 and Hon'ble Jurisdictional ITAT, in the case of ACIT vs. Britannia Industries L…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 467/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 467/Del/2014 (A.Y 2009-10)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

…ITR 425 (Del.) - SLP filed by the Revenue dismissed in C.A No.6449/2012 • Otis Elevators Co. (India) Ltd v. CIT 195 ITR 682 (Bom) • CIT v. Citibank N.A.: 264 ITR 18 (Bom) • CIT v. Force Motors Ltd.: ITA No. 5296 of 2010 (Bom) • CIT v. Sundaram Industries Ltd 240 ITR 335 (Mad) • Gujarat State Export Corporation Ltd. v. CIT: 209 ITR 649 (Guj.) • CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd.: 205 Taxman 59 (Kar) 162 • Assam Brook Ltd. v CIT: 267 ITR 121 (Cal) • DCIT v. Max India Ltd (2007) 112 TTJ (Asr.) 726 (Bom); • American Express International Banking Corporation v CIT 258 ITR 601. The Ld. AR further submitted that the af…

DCIT, Cir-5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Spencer'S Retail Ltd., Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1939/KOL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2009-10 Dcit, Circle-5(1) V/S. M/S Spencer’S Retail Ltd., P-7, Chowringhee 31, Netaji Subhas Road, Duncan House, 1St Floor, Square, Kolkata- 700069 Kolkakta-700001 [Pan No.Aabcg 3443 R] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri D.S. Damle, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 10-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 25-07-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2009-10 Arises Against Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Kolkata’S Order Dated 25.07.2016, Passed In Case No.981/Cit(A)-2/14-15, Reversing The Assessing Officer’S Action Inter Alia Disallowing / Adding Assessee’S Club Expenditure Claim, Esop, Section 36(1)(Va) Disallowance On Account Of Late Payment Of Employees’ Contribution To Esi/Pf & Section 14A R.W. Rule 8D Disallowance Of ₹20,32,700/-; Respectively Involving Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. This Assessee Is A Company Engaged In Retail Trading Of Food Items, Non-Food Items, Music, Books Etc. It Claimed Its Club Expenditure Of ₹17,39,624/- In Its Books Of Account. Its Case Therein Was To Have Incurred The

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member and Dr. A.L. Saini, Accountant Member Assessment Year :2009-10 DCIT, Circle-5(1) V/s. M/s Spencer’s Retail Ltd., P-7, Chowringhee 31, Netaji Subhas Road, Duncan House, 1st Floor, Square, Kolkata- 700069 Kolkakta-700001 [PAN No.AABCG 3443 R] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT-DR अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri D.S. Damle, AR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 10-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 25-07-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pro…

M/S. Marubeni India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1444/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhu & Sh. R. K Pandaassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Marubeni India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit 5Th Floor, Lotus Tower Vs Circle – 16 (1) Community Centre, New Delhi New Friends Colony, New Delhi – 110017 (Pan Aaacm6413A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Rajesh Malhotra, Advocate Respondent By Sh. Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 05/06/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 06/06/2018 Order

Section 143Section 144Section 37

…Ltd. (2013) 351 ITR 196 ( P&H) (FB) in which it has been held that payment of corporate membership fee has to be allowed as a revenue expenditure in the hands of the company. The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (1999) 240 ITR 335 (Madras) has also held that the amount spent on club membership fee of company’s directors is deductible as business expenditure. Earlier, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court Otis Elevator Co. (India.) Ltd. Vs. CIT (1992) 195 ITR 682 has also taken similar view. In view of this overwhelmingly position in favour of the assessee, we order for the deletio…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purposes

ITA 6021/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri K.N. Charry

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35DSection 43BSection 92C

…tis Elevators Co. (India) Ltd v. CIT 195 ITR 682 (Bom);, American Express International Banking Corporation v CIT 258 ITR 601 (Bom);, CIT v. Citibank N.A.: 264 ITR 18 (Bom), CIT v. Force Motors Ltd.: ITA No. 5296 of 2010 (Bom), CIT v. Sundharam Industries Ltd 240 ITR 335 (Mad);, Gujarat State Export Corporation Ltd. v. CIT: 209 ITR 649 (Guj.), CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd.: 205 Taxman 59 (Kar), Assam Brook Ltd. v CIT: 267 ITR 121 (Cal), DCIT v. Max India Ltd (2007) 112 TTJ (Asr.) 726, this issue is also covered in favour of the assessee by the decisions of the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the assess…

ITO, WD-5(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Elbee Securities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 456/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jul 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम. बालगनेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

…1 Elbee Securities Pvt. Ltd.. AY 2008-09 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम")Before "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/and "ी एम. बालगनेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Shri M. Balaganesh, AM] आयकर अपील सं"या / I.T.A No. 456/Kol/2014 "नधॉरण वषॅ/Assessment Year: 2008-09 Income-tax Officer, Wd-5(3), Kolkata Vs. M/s. Elbee Securities Pvt. Ltd. (PAN: AAACE5633N) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Date of Hearing 22.05.2017 Date of Pronouncement 14.07.2017 Shri Tanuj Neogi, JCIT, Sr. DR For the Appellant/ अपीलाथ" Shri D. S. Damle, AR…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Capital Advertising Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

Accordingly appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4774/DEL/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. S. Syal & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv

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

…decision of my predecessor and on the decisions in the cases of 20 I.T.A.Nos.4774, 4775/Del/2012 I.T.A.No.1892/Del/2011 C.O. No.436/Del/2012 the Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd. v. CIT [1992] 195 ITR 682 and Gujarat State Export Corporation Ltd. v. CIT [1994] 209 ITR 649, the A.O. is directed to delete the addition of Rs.7,51,885/- made on account of club expenses.” 14. We do not find any infirmity in the findings given by the Ld. CIT (A). Respectfully following the decision in the case of Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd. vs. CIT (supra), we dismiss this ground of appeal raised by the Revenue. 15. Accordingly appe…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5720/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs. Additional Cit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Range-6, Vasant Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacm0829Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Neeraj Jain, Rohit Jain, Adv. Romit Katyal & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Cas Department By:Shri Amrendra Kumar, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. NeerajFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT(DR)

…Elevators Co. (India) Ltd v CIT 195 ITR 682 (Bom);  American Express International Banking Corporation v CIT 258 ITR  601 (Bom); CIT vs Citibank N.A.: 264 ITR 18 (Bom)   CIT vs Force Motors Ltd.: ITA No. 5296 of 2010 (Bom)  CIT v Sundharam Industries Ltd 240 ITR 335 (Mad);  Gujarat State Export Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT: 209 ITR 649 (Guj.)  CIT vs Infosys Technologies Ltd.: 205 Taxman 59 (Kar) Assam Brook Ltd. vs CIT: 267 ITR 121 (Cal) DCIT v Max India Ltd (2007) 112 TTJ (Asr.) 726  The aforesaid issue is also covered in favour of the assessee by the decisions of the Tribunal in the appellant’s own case fo…

M/S. Ici India Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 852/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)

…personal benefit to the company and as such, the absence of ownership more supports the contention of the assessee. So, Tribunal was not justified in disallowing this payment of Rs. 5,00,000.—CIT vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (2000) 158 CTR (Mad) 437 : (1999) 240 ITR 335 (Mad), CIT vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 148 CTR (SC) 398 : (1998) 233 ITR 468 (SC) and CIT vs. Engineers India Ltd. (1999) 155 CTR (Del) 394 : (1999) 239 ITR 237 (Del) applied. Respectfully following the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court we allow the assessee’s ground. ITA No.2613/Kol/05,488/Kol/06, 1019 & 852/Kol/07 AYs 02-03…

DCIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata vs. M/S. Ici India Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1019/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)

…personal benefit to the company and as such, the absence of ownership more supports the contention of the assessee. So, Tribunal was not justified in disallowing this payment of Rs. 5,00,000.—CIT vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (2000) 158 CTR (Mad) 437 : (1999) 240 ITR 335 (Mad), CIT vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 148 CTR (SC) 398 : (1998) 233 ITR 468 (SC) and CIT vs. Engineers India Ltd. (1999) 155 CTR (Del) 394 : (1999) 239 ITR 237 (Del) applied. Respectfully following the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court we allow the assessee’s ground. ITA No.2613/Kol/05,488/Kol/06, 1019 & 852/Kol/07 AYs 02-03…

M/S. Ici India Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 488/KOL/2006[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)

…personal benefit to the company and as such, the absence of ownership more supports the contention of the assessee. So, Tribunal was not justified in disallowing this payment of Rs. 5,00,000.—CIT vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (2000) 158 CTR (Mad) 437 : (1999) 240 ITR 335 (Mad), CIT vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 148 CTR (SC) 398 : (1998) 233 ITR 468 (SC) and CIT vs. Engineers India Ltd. (1999) 155 CTR (Del) 394 : (1999) 239 ITR 237 (Del) applied. Respectfully following the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court we allow the assessee’s ground. ITA No.2613/Kol/05,488/Kol/06, 1019 & 852/Kol/07 AYs 02-03…

ACIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata vs. M/S. Ici India Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2613/KOL/2005[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)

…personal benefit to the company and as such, the absence of ownership more supports the contention of the assessee. So, Tribunal was not justified in disallowing this payment of Rs. 5,00,000.—CIT vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. (2000) 158 CTR (Mad) 437 : (1999) 240 ITR 335 (Mad), CIT vs. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. (1998) 148 CTR (SC) 398 : (1998) 233 ITR 468 (SC) and CIT vs. Engineers India Ltd. (1999) 155 CTR (Del) 394 : (1999) 239 ITR 237 (Del) applied. Respectfully following the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court we allow the assessee’s ground. ITA No.2613/Kol/05,488/Kol/06, 1019 & 852/Kol/07 AYs 02-03…

Allahabad Bank, Kolkata vs. Add.CIT, Range-6, Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1199/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Barun Kumar Ghosh & Shri Piyush Dey, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Subhra Biswas, CIT(DR)

Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

…penditure 2. CIT VS. THE SANDUR MANGANESE & IRON ORES LTD. ITA NO. 13 TO 24 /2002 DATED 21.3.2005; in which the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court agreed with the view expressed by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat State Corporation Ltd. Vs. CIT 209 ITR 649 (Guj.) that getting membership of sports club cannot be termed as capital expenditure but is allowable as revenue expenditure. ITA No.1199/Kol/2012 &1282/Kol/2012- Allahabad Bank A.Y.2008-09 3. CIT VS. UNITED GLASS MGF CO. LTD. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6448 & 6449/2012; Hon’ble Supreme Court order dated 12.9.2012; wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held…

Idea Cellular Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, Department’s appeal for A

ITA 4445/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri B.C.S. Naik

Section 43B

…y infirmity in the order of ld. CIT(A) for allowing club fees by following the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Otis Elevators and the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat Estate Export Corporation Ltd. reported in 209 ITR 649 (supra). As the expenditure was incurred was revenue in nature as held by the Hon’ble High Court, we do not find any infirmity in the order of ld. CIT(A) deleting the disallowance of Club fees paid by the assessee company.” As there is no difference in fact, respectfully following the decision of the co–ordinate bench in assessee’s own case, we u…

Price Waterhouse Coppers Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Addl C.I.T RG - 2, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2034/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 May 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: S/Shri K. M. Gupta, AR, B.K. Jain & Alpesh GuptaFor Respondent: Shri T. K. Neogi, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 37(3)

…in the case of Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd vs. Addl CIT 6 SOT 497 wherein the Hon'ble Tribunal relied on the decisions of the Otis Elevators Co (India) Ltd. (supra) and that of the Gujarat High court in the case of Gujarat State Export Corpn. Ltd vs. CIT 209 ITR 649 (Guj) and observed that aforesaid Courts had laid down the principle that payment of club fees is to be considered for the promotion of the business interest and hence is an allowable expenditure. Relying on the said principle the Tribunal held that payment to health clubs as membership subscription is allowable business expenditure. He also argu…

CIT v. Sundaram Industries Ltd.

What is CIT v. Sundaram Industries Ltd. authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Sundaram Industries Ltd.

ACIT, CC-1(2), Kolkata vs. R T Fashion Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ACIT, Central Circle - 1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Orissa Manganese & Minerals Ltd., Kolkata

ACIT, Central Circle - 1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Orissa Manganese & Minerals Ltd., Kolkata

ACIT, Central Circle - 1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Orissa Manganese & Minerals Ltd., Kolkata

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

DCIT, Cir-5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Spencer'S Retail Ltd., Kolkata

M/S. Marubeni India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITO, WD-5(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Elbee Securities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Capital Advertising Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

M/S. Ici India Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata

DCIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata vs. M/S. Ici India Ltd., Kolkata

M/S. Ici India Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata

ACIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata vs. M/S. Ici India Ltd., Kolkata

Allahabad Bank, Kolkata vs. Add.CIT, Range-6, Kolkata

Idea Cellular Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 3(2), Mumbai

Price Waterhouse Coppers Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Addl C.I.T RG - 2, Kolkata