CIT v. Television Eighteen India Limited

364 ITR 597High Court2014#9244 most cited

What is CIT v. Television Eighteen India Limited authority for?

Expenditure incurred on the production of TV serials and programmes can be treated as revenue expenditure. The distinction between 'news content' with no repeat telecast value and TV serials/programmes with repeat telecast value is relevant in determining the nature of expenditure.

12

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v Television Eighteen India Limited · 364 ITR 597 · TV serials production expenditure · revenue expenditure · capitalization · repeat telecast value · news content · film rights

Also reported as

46 Taxmann.com 283

Sections most often in play

Section 10BSection 10CSection 115JBSection 14ASection 250Section 40A(2)(a)Section 92CSection 8D(2)(ii)

Issues it is cited on

depreciation on non-compete feesection 8d(2)(ii)section 8dsection 92f(ii)section 92anon-compete feepreliminary expensessection 40a(2)(a)section 14a(1)opening wdvtransferee companysection 142a

Judgments citing CIT v. Television Eighteen India Limited

D.C.I.T Cir - 10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Eureka Forbs Ltd, Kolkata

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 2037/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C' BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.: 1246, 1247, 1248 & 2037/KOL/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 D.C.I.T Cir-10(1), Kolkata Vs. M/s. Eureka Forbes Ltd. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAACE5767F Appearances: Department represented by Assessee represented by Date of concluding the hearing Date of pronouncing the order : Praveen Kishore, CIT (DR). : Dr. Samir Chakrborty, AR and Abhijit Biswash, AR. : 15-October-2025 : 12-January-2026 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUN…

D.C.I.T Cir - 10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Eureka Forbs Ltd, Kolkata

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1248/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA 'C' BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.: 1246, 1247, 1248 & 2037/KOL/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 D.C.I.T Cir-10(1), Kolkata Vs. M/s. Eureka Forbes Ltd. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAACE5767F Appearances: Department represented by Assessee represented by Date of concluding the hearing Date of pronouncing the order : Praveen Kishore, CIT (DR). : Dr. Samir Chakrborty, AR and Abhijit Biswash, AR. : 15-October-2025 : 12-January-2026 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUN…

D.C.I.T Cir - 10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Eureka Forbs Ltd, Kolkata

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1247/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C' BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.: 1246, 1247, 1248 & 2037/KOL/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 D.C.I.T Cir-10(1), Kolkata Vs. M/s. Eureka Forbes Ltd. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAACE5767F Appearances: Department represented by Assessee represented by Date of concluding the hearing Date of pronouncing the order : Praveen Kishore, CIT (DR). : Dr. Samir Chakrborty, AR and Abhijit Biswash, AR. : 15-October-2025 : 12-January-2026 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUN…

D.C.I.T Cir - 10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Eureka Forbs Ltd, Kolkata

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1246/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C' BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.: 1246, 1247, 1248 & 2037/KOL/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 D.C.I.T Cir-10(1), Kolkata Vs. M/s. Eureka Forbes Ltd. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAACE5767F Appearances: Department represented by : Praveen Kishore, CIT (DR). Assessee represented by : Dr. Samir Chakrborty, AR and Abhijit Biswash, AR. Date of concluding the hearing : 15-October-2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 12-January-2026 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUN…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-16(1), Mumbai vs. Viacom18 Media Private Limited, Mumbai

ITA 5658/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Respondent: Shri Nimesh Vora, Ld. Adv
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

…e News Limited), Mumbai v DCIT, Circle 7(3), Mumbai in ITA No. 1590/Mum/2015 In coming to the conclusions drawn in above cases, the Hon'ble ITAT has followed the judgement of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v Television Eighteen India Limited (364 ITR 597) (Del) 1. Considering that the issue is squarely covered by Hon'ble ITAT's order in Appellant's own case for AYs 2011-12 and AY 2012-13 and there has been no change in the facts, I decide this issue in favour of the Appellant and allow the cost of production / purchase of TV serials and programme as revenue expenditure.” 27. The Learned DR, thus…

ACIT., Circle-5(1), Hyderabad vs. Eenadu Television Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal ITA

ITA 648/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri V. Siva Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR

…cts and in law?. 5. Whether, on the facts in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in following the directions of the ITAT in allowing the claim of the assessee following the decision of Delhi High Court in Television Eighteen India Ltd (364 ITR 597) in which the subject matter was 'news content’ which does not have repeat telecast value as against expenses incurred towards TV serials and programmes and film rights having repeat telecast value? 6. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) was right and justified in following the directions of the ITAT…

Eenadu Television Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle-5(1), Hyderabad

ITA 563/HYD/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 May 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri V. Siva Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR

…acts and in law?. 5. Whether, on the facts in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in following the directions of the ITAT in allowing the claim of the assessee following the decision of Delhi High Court in Television Eighteen India Ltd (364 ITR 597) in which the subject matter was 'news content' which does not have repeat telecast value as against expenses incurred towards TV serials and programmes and film rights having repeat telecast value? 6. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) was right and justified in following the directions of the ITAT…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad vs. Eenadu Television Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal ITA

ITA 665/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri V. Siva Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR

…cts and in law?. 5. Whether, on the facts in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in following the directions of the ITAT in allowing the claim of the assessee following the decision of Delhi High Court in Television Eighteen India Ltd (364 ITR 597) in which the subject matter was 'news content’ which does not have repeat telecast value as against expenses incurred towards TV serials and programmes and film rights having repeat telecast value? 6. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) was right and justified in following the directions of the ITAT…

ACIT, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad vs. Eenadu Television Private Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 654/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri V. Siva Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR

…acts and in law?. 5. Whether, on the facts in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in following the directions of the ITAT in allowing the claim of the assessee following the decision of Delhi High Court in Television Eighteen India Ltd (364 ITR 597) in which the subject matter was 'news content' which does not have repeat telecast value as against expenses incurred towards TV serials and programmes and film rights having repeat telecast value? 6. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) was right and justified in following the directions of the ITAT…

Manju Dudala, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(3), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal ITA

ITA 665/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri V. Siva Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR

…acts and in law?. 5. Whether, on the facts in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in following the directions of the ITAT in allowing the claim of the assessee following the decision of Delhi High Court in Television Eighteen India Ltd (364 ITR 597) in which the subject matter was 'news content' which does not have repeat telecast value as against expenses incurred towards TV serials and programmes and film rights having repeat telecast value? 6. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) was right and justified in following the directions of the ITAT…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad vs. Eenadu Television Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2244/HYD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Siva KumarFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 251(1)

…eversed. Accordingly, Ground nos. 2 and 3 raised by the assessee are allowed. 9.2. In coming to this conclusion, the Tribunal has followed the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Television Eighteen India Limited reported in (2014) 364 ITR 597 ITA No. 1806/Hyd/17 Eenadu Television Pvt. Ltd. (Del.). The relevant portion of the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court is reproduced as under : "The revenue has preferred this appeal claiming to be aggrieved by an order of the Income Tax Appellant Tribunal (ITAT) dated 17.03.2006. The question of law framed in this case is:- (i) Whether the…

A.C.I.T. Circle 6(1), Mumbai vs. Inx Media Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 7216/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sandeep Gosainacit, Circle 6(1), फनाभ/ M/S. Inx Media Pvt Ltd., R.No.506, 5 Th Floor, 3Rd Floor, Inx House, Apsara Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Complex, Dr. Dadasaheb C Mumbai – 20. Bhadmarkar Marg, Grand Road (E), Mumbai – 400 007. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aabc15594D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. M/S. Inx Media Pvt Ltd., फनाभ/ Acit, Circle 6(1), 3Rd Floor, Inx House, Apsara R.No.506, 5 Th Floor, Vs. Complex, Dr. Dadasaheb C Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Bhadmarkar Marg, Grand Road Mumbai – 20. (E), Mumbai – 400 007. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aabc15594D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Shishir Dhamija, CIT-DR
Section 32Section 68

…d therefore, the decisions of the AO and the CIT (A) are required to be reversed on these claims relating to the News / non-fiction items. Ld AR relied on the judgment of the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of Television Eighteen India Ltd (supra) [2014] 364 ITR 597 (Delhi). 21. Similarly, on the TV Programs and Film Rights, Ld Counsel for the assessee submitted that they were amortized as per the Notes 7 to the financial statements, which is extracted and placed above. This method of accounting has been consistently followed by the assessee and the same was accepted by the AO in earlier assessment years wit…

CIT v. Television Eighteen India Limited (364 ITR 597) — Cited in 12 Judgments | BharatTax