CIT v. Travancore Cochin

143 ITR 284Reported decision#22555 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 40A(9)Section 41(4)

Issues it is cited on

section 80msection 18withholding taxinterest on securitiessection 41section 260section 260amercantile system of accountingmiscellaneous applicationchilddisallowance under section 14asection 145

Judgments citing CIT v. Travancore Cochin

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

ITA 4105/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

…ansfer. As the expenditure was incurred under the head staff welfare scheme, it should be treated as part of the normal business expenditure. The assessee relied on the ratio of Kerala High Court decision in the case of CIT versus Travancore Cochin chemicals [143 ITR 284] wherein it was held that the payment to school for children of employees is allowable as deduction under section 37 (1) and section 40 A (10) of the income tax act. The bank also relied on the ratio of the honourable Bombay High Court in the case of Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd [261 ITR 501], decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of Venk…

DCIT 2(2), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and 2007 – 08 is partly allowed

ITA 4952/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm A.Y.2006-07 [ By Assessee] &

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

…ansfer. As the expenditure was incurred under the head staff welfare scheme, it should be treated as part of the normal business expenditure. The assessee relied on the ratio of Kerala High Court decision in the case of CIT versus Travancore Cochin chemicals [143 ITR 284] wherein it was held that the payment to school for children of employees is allowable as deduction under section 37 (1) and section 40 A (10) of the income tax act. The bank also relied on the ratio of the honourable Bombay High Court in the case of Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd [261 ITR 501], decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of Venk…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 3868/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

…r. As the expenditure was incurred under the head staff welfare scheme, it should be treated as part of the normal business expenditure. The assessee relied on the ratio of Kerala High Court decision in the case of CIT versus Travancore Cochin chemicals [143 ITR 284] wherein it was held that the payment to school for children of employees is allowable as deduction under section 37 (1) and section 40 A (10) of the income tax act. The bank also relied on the ratio of the honourable Bombay High Court in the case of Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd [261 ITR 501], decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case…

CIT v. Travancore Cochin (143 ITR 284) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax