Commissioner of Income-tax v. Delhi Automobiles

272 ITR 381High Court2005#13903 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 41(1)

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income-tax v. Delhi Automobiles

Saket Agarwal, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 2(3) Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 646/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Satwika Jhan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam (CIT) a

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 41(1)

…e assessee came to the conclusion and rightly so when the amount changed its character in the assessment year 2006-07 and not during the previous year relevant to the year under appeal. 22. The Delhi High Court, in the case of CIT v. Delhi Automobiles: (2005) 272 ITR 381 (Del), after referring to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Sugauli Sugar Works (P.) Ltd. [reported at: (1999) 152 CTR (SC) 46--Ed.] and of Bombay High Court in the case of J.K. Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT (1966) 62 ITR 34 (Bom) has observed as under : "The transfer of an entry is a unilateral act of the assessee, who is a d…

Icici Home Finance Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1325/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: R.A. Dhyani

Section 14ASection 201Section 250Section 36(1)(viii)Section 36(1)(viil)Section 37(1)

…Lachmandas Mathuradas v CIT, 254 ITR 799 (SC)- interest on arrears of sales tax CIT v Kaypee Mechanical India (P) Ltd. [2014] 45 taxmann.com 363 (Guj) -interest under Service Tax provisions allowed M/s. ICICI Home Finance Company Ltd., CIT v Delhi Automobiles 272 ITR 381 (Del) — sales tax penalty for delayed payment allowed” 25. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, the payment of interest on the delayed payment of Service tax and work contract taxes are considered as compensatory in nature and these are settled issue. Hence such payments are deductible and revenue in nature as held in…

M/S Inflow Technologies Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, ground Nos

ITA 3339/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Nitish Ranjan, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR

…ax v. Ishwari Khetan Sugar Mills (Pvt.) Ltd.,272 ITR 224(All) have held that interest on delayed payment of provident fund is an allowable deduction u/s.37(1) of the Act. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Delhi Automobiles, 272 ITR 381 (Del) has held that interest payments on delayed sales tax is an allowable deduction u/s.37(1) of the Act. In view of above and respectfully following the judicial pronouncements (supra), we are of the view that interest on late 3 payment of MVAT to the extent of Rs.6,41,348/- is an allowable deduction u/s.37(1). Hence, we reverse the orders of a…

M/S Inflow Technologies Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, ground Nos

ITA 3338/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Nitish Ranjan, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR

Cineyug Worldwide, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4225/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ram Lal Negi: A.Y : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Rathi &For Respondent: Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37Section 43B

…nt of statutory dues were allowed by various courts :- i) Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. vs CIT, 123 ITR 429 (SC) ii) Lachmandas Mathurdas vs CIT, 254 ITR 799 (SC) iii) CIT vs Ishwari Khetan Sugar Mills Pvt. Ltd., 272 ITR 224 (All) iv) CIT vs Delhi Automobiles, 272 ITR 381 (Delhi) v) Euro RSCG Advertising (P.) Ltd. vs ACIT, (2012) 53 SOT 90 (Mumbai) vi) Chander K. Raichandani vs ACIT, ITA No. 799/Mum/2012 dated 08.02.2013 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the order of the ld. CIT(A). 6. Considering the rival submissions and the material on record, we notice that the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court allowed the…

Bharatbhai Narshibhai Patel, Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Rajkot-Gujarat

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

ITA 47/RJT/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.47/Rjt/2014 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2009-10) Bharatbhai Narsibhai Patel The Acit बनाम/ Prop Of M/S.Pushpam Circle-2 Vs. Creation Rajkot Mehul Textile Nagar Sant Kabir Road, Rajkot "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adppp 6615 C .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Pravin Verma, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Verma, Sr.DR

Section 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT [ Conducted through E-Court at Ahmedabad ] BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.47/RJT/2014 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2009-10) Bharatbhai Narsibhai Patel The ACIT बनाम/ Prop of M/s.Pushpam Circle-2 Vs. Creation Rajkot Mehul textile Nagar Sant Kabir Road, Rajkot "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ADPPP 6615 C .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant by : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by: Shri Pravin Verma, Sr.DR 29/01/2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date…

M.J. Exports Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. D.C.I.T.3(2), Mumbai

ITA 4874/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaita Nos.4874 & 4937/Mum/2012 Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S M.J. Exports Pvt. Ltd. Dcit-3(2), C/O- H.N. Motiwalla & Co. Mumbai बनाम/ 508 Sharda Chambers, Vs. 33, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue ) Pan. No.Aadcm7712M

Section 158A(1)Section 269USection 37Section 43B

…be made to Triveni Engineering Works Ltd. vs. CIT (1983) 144 ITR 732 (Allahabad) (FB); CIT vs. Laxmidevi Sugar Mills Pvt. Ltd. (2000) 241 ITR 131, 132 (Allahabad); Raj Narayan Agarwal vs. CIT (2003) 259 ITR 720, 722 (Del); CIT vs. Delhi Automobiles (2005) 272 ITR 381, 382 (Del) wherein interest paid on delay in paying sales tax was held to be deductible. Admittedly, there are contrary decisions also wherein it was held that interest on delayed payments is not an allowable deduction. The ratio laid down in CIT vs. J K Synthetics Ltd. (2009) 309 ITR 371 (Del) further supports the case of the assessee. 8. If…