CIT v. Talathi & Panthaki Associates (P.) Ltd.

TATA CONSULTING ENGINEERING LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE ADDL. CIT, RANGE-7(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bletata Consulting Engineering Ltd., V. Addl. Cit-7(3) Empire Tower, Cloud City Campus Room No. 614, 6Th Floor Thane-Belapur Road, Airoli Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road New Mumbai - 400708 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aabct0772E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ketan Ved Ms. Urvi Mehta Department By : Shri B.K. Bagchi

…was confirmed by the CIT(A) by virtue of order in question. The learned representative of the assessee has argued that the expenditure on lease hold is revenue in nature and also relied upon the law settled in CIT Vs. Talathi & Panthaki Associates (P.) Ltd. (343 ITR 309) (Bom.) and CIT Vs. HEDE Consultancy (P.) Ltd. (258 ITR 380) (Bom.) and CIT Vs. Hi Line Pens (P.) Ltd. (175 Taxman 132) (Delhi) and Urban Infrastructure Venture Capital Ltd. Vs. DCIT (48 taxmann.com 156) (ITAT Mumbai) and Peri India (P.) Ltd. Vs. JCIT (71 taxmann.com 79)(ITAT Mumbai). On the other hand Ld representative of the department has plac…

TOSHVIN ANALYTICAL PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT CIRCLE-1 (3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘E‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. Toshvin Analytical Pvt. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Ltd., Income Tax Circle – 1(3)(2) 103, S.J. House Room No.540, Aayakar Sitaram Mill Compound, Bhavan, Maharshi Karve N.M. Joshi Marg Marg, Lower Parel Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 011 PAN/GIR No.AABCT4482D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Ruturaj Gurjar Revenue by Shri Vijay Kumar Menon Date of Hearing 16/08/2021 Date of Pronouncement 30/08/2021 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): This appeal in…

ADDL CIT -- 10(1), MUMBAI vs. AGC NETWORK LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS AVAYA GLOBAL CONNECT LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.5157/Mum./2012 (Assessment Year : 2008–09) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–10(1), Mumbai v/s AGC Network Ltd. (Formerly known as Avaya Global Connect Ltd.) Equinox Business Park, Tower–1 ……………. Respondent (Peninsula Techno Park) Off. Bandra Kurla Complex LBS Marg, Kurla (West) Mumbai 400 070 PAN – AAACT3992M ITA no.5434/Mum./2012 (Assessment Year : 2008–09) AGC Network Ltd. (Formerly known as Avaya Global Connect Ltd.) Equinox Business…

ITO 3(3)(3), MUMBAI vs. THEBROMA FOODS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.765/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-13) बिाम/ Ito 3(3)(3) M/S. Theobroma Foods R.No. 672, Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 101, Jamuna Sagar, V. M.K. Road, 59/60, Shahid Bhagat New Marine Lines, Singh Road, Mumbai-400020 Colaba, Mumbai 400005 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aacct0588K (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri. D.G Pansari (Dr) Assessee By: Shri. Rohan Deshpande सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 28.01.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.04.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Revenue, Being Ita No. 765/Mum/2017, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 28.10.2016 In Appeal No. Cit(A)-8/It-344/15-16, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called ―The Cit(A)‖), For Assessment Year(Ay) 2012-13, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From The Assessment Order Dated 31.03.2015 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called ―The Ao‖) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ―The Act‖) For Ay 2012-13. I.T.A. No.765/Mum/2017

…igh Courts have also taken a similar view, including the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the cases of CIT v. Hede Consultancy Pvt. Ltd., [(2002) 258 ITR 380 (Bom)], and the landmark case of CIT v. Talathi and Panthaky Associated Pvt. Ltd., [(2012) 343 ITR 309 (Bom)]. A copy of the judgement in Talathi and Panthaky Associated Pvt. Ltd. is hereto annexed for Your Honour's perusal as Annexure H. I) The Hon'ble Delhi High Court has also taken a similar view inter alia in Instalment Supply P. Ltd. v. CIT, [(1984) 149 ITR 52 (Del)] and CIT v. Hi Line Pens Pvt. Ltd., [306 ITR 182 (Del)]. m) Based on the abov…

ITO 21(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. PRITAMLAL J DOSHI, MUMBAI

The appeal is disposed of in the above terms

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2010-11

…enditure of Rs. 31.32 lakhs claimed on account of repairs and maintenance of the said premises is allowable as revenue expenditure. This is no longer res integra in view of the decisions of this Court in CIT v. Talathi and Panthaky Associated (P.) Ltd. [2012] 343 ITR 309/205 Taxman 309/18 taxmann.com 367 (Bom.) and CIT v. Hede Consultancy (P.) Ltd. [2002] 258 ITR 380/[2003] 127 Taxman 597 (Bom.). In the above cases, it is submitted that on an identical factual situation the expenditure on renovation of tenanted premises has been allowed as revenue expenditure under Section 37 of the Act; (b) The expenditure of R…

PRITAMLAL J DOSHI,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 21(2)(2), MUMBAI

The appeal is disposed of in the above terms

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2010-11

…enditure of Rs. 31.32 lakhs claimed on account of repairs and maintenance of the said premises is allowable as revenue expenditure. This is no longer res integra in view of the decisions of this Court in CIT v. Talathi and Panthaky Associated (P.) Ltd. [2012] 343 ITR 309/205 Taxman 309/18 taxmann.com 367 (Bom.) and CIT v. Hede Consultancy (P.) Ltd. [2002] 258 ITR 380/[2003] 127 Taxman 597 (Bom.). In the above cases, it is submitted that on an identical factual situation the expenditure on renovation of tenanted premises has been allowed as revenue expenditure under Section 37 of the Act; (b) The expenditure of R…

NAGPUR POWER & INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 3(2), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…n nature except the expenses of Rs.1,38,694/- which had already capitalized by the company specifically in view of the law A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12 settled by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs/ Talathi and Panthaky Associated Pvt. Ltd. reported in 343 ITR 309 and CIT Vs. Hede Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. and another reported in 258 ITR 380 and Hon’ble ITAT, Chandigarh bench in the case of M/s. IDS Infotech Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle 4(1), Chandigarh in ITA No.52/Chd/2016 for A.Y.2009-10 dated 24.05.2016. However, on the other hand the learned departmental representative has strongly relied upon the order passed b…

NAGPUR POWER & INDUSTRIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-3(2), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…n nature except the expenses of Rs.1,38,694/- which had already capitalized by the company specifically in view of the law A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12 settled by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs/ Talathi and Panthaky Associated Pvt. Ltd. reported in 343 ITR 309 and CIT Vs. Hede Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. and another reported in 258 ITR 380 and Hon’ble ITAT, Chandigarh bench in the case of M/s. IDS Infotech Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle 4(1), Chandigarh in ITA No.52/Chd/2016 for A.Y.2009-10 dated 24.05.2016. However, on the other hand the learned departmental representative has strongly relied upon the order passed b…

TATA CONDULTING ENGINEERS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 7(3), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby ordered to be Allowed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. No.3595/Mum/2013 & 6786/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) बनाम/ Tata Consulting Engineers The Additional Limited (Formerly Known As Commissioner Of Income Vs. Tce Consulting Engineers Tax Range 7(3) Limited) Matulya Aayakar Bhavan, Centre A, 249, Senapati M. Karve Road, Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400013 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabct0772E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Dinesh Vyas & Srihari Iyer Assessee By: Capt. Pradeep Arya सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21.09.2016 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25.11.2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Above Mentioned Two Appeals Against The Order Dated 15.02.2013 & 09.08.2012 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 13, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The Assessment Year 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively. Since Common Question Of Law & Facts

…was confirmed by the CIT(A) by virtue of order in question. The learned representative of the assessee has argued that the expenditure on lease hold is revenue in nature and also relied upon the law settled in CIT Vs. Talathi & Panthaki Associates (P.) Ltd. (343 ITR 309) (Bom.) and CIT Vs. HEDE Consultancy (P.) Ltd. (258 ITR 380) (Bom.) and CIT Vs. Hi Line Pens (P.) Ltd. (175 Taxman 132) (Delhi) and Urban Infrastructure Venture Capital Ltd. Vs. DCIT (48 taxmann.com 156) (ITAT Mumbai) and Peri India (P.) Ltd. Vs. JCIT (71 taxmann.com 79)(ITAT Mumbai). On the other hand Ld representative of the department has plac…

TATA CONSULTING ENGINEERS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT RG OSD (7), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby ordered to be Allowed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. No.3595/Mum/2013 & 6786/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) बनाम/ Tata Consulting Engineers The Additional Limited (Formerly Known As Commissioner Of Income Vs. Tce Consulting Engineers Tax Range 7(3) Limited) Matulya Aayakar Bhavan, Centre A, 249, Senapati M. Karve Road, Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400013 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabct0772E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Dinesh Vyas & Srihari Iyer Assessee By: Capt. Pradeep Arya सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21.09.2016 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25.11.2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Above Mentioned Two Appeals Against The Order Dated 15.02.2013 & 09.08.2012 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 13, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The Assessment Year 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively. Since Common Question Of Law & Facts

…was confirmed by the CIT(A) by virtue of order in question. The learned representative of the assessee has argued that the expenditure on lease hold is revenue in nature and also relied upon the law settled in CIT Vs. Talathi & Panthaki Associates (P.) Ltd. (343 ITR 309) (Bom.) and CIT Vs. HEDE Consultancy (P.) Ltd. (258 ITR 380) (Bom.) and CIT Vs. Hi Line Pens (P.) Ltd. (175 Taxman 132) (Delhi) and Urban Infrastructure Venture Capital Ltd. Vs. DCIT (48 taxmann.com 156) (ITAT Mumbai) and Peri India (P.) Ltd. Vs. JCIT (71 taxmann.com 79)(ITAT Mumbai). On the other hand Ld representative of the department has plac…