Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT

124 ITR 1Supreme Court of India1980#95 most cited

What is Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Expenditure is classified as revenue or capital based on its practical business effect, necessity, or expediency, rather than solely on the juristic classification of rights; an enduring benefit does not automatically make an expenditure capital if it facilitates trading operations or business efficiency.

622

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,369 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT · Section 37(1) · Section 37 · revenue expenditure · capital expenditure · enduring benefit test · test of enduring benefit not conclusive · business necessity · commercial expediency · practical business point of view · facilitation of trading operations · business efficiency

Also reported as

3 Taxmann 69

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 37Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 234ASection 234BSection 115P

Issues it is cited on

test of enduring benefitenduring benefitrevenue expenditurecapital expenditurecomputer softwaresection 35commercial expediencysection 37section 37(1)section 80isection 40(a)disallowance u/s 14a

Judgments citing Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Oxigen Services India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

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

ITA 5467/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2007-08

Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36

…on glow sign and neon sign are expenditure on advertisement and publicity allowable as deduction u/s 37 (1) of the IT Act. While holding so the Hon’ble High Court Has relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Vs. CIT reported 124 ITR 1. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Orient Ceramics and Industries Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 49 (Del) has held that expenditure incurred by the assessee on Glow Sign Boards is revenue expenditure allowable as deduction u/s 37 (1) of the IT Act. Since the genuiness of the expenditure is not in dispute and the dispute is only regarding cap…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-6(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Axis Asset Management Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 5380/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 5380 & 5381/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16) बिधम/ Dcit-6(1)(2) M/S. Axis Asset Management Room No.506, 5Th Floor, Co. Ltd. Vs. Axis House, 1St Floor, C-2, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai- Wadala International Centre, 400020. Panduranga Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400025. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahca5892 (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Brajendra Kumar (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Fenil Bhatt (Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/08/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/09/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Different Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -12, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys.2014-15 & 2015-16. Ita. No.5380/Mum/2019 2. The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 23.04.2019 Passed By The Cit(A)-12, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2014-15. Ita Nos. 5380 & 5381/Mum/2019 A.Ys.2014-15 & 2015-16 3. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Fenil Bhatt (AR)For Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar (DR)
Section 143(2)

…gard, it is also noted that the implied view of the AO that the expenditure results in a benefits of enduring nature isalso not sustainable. It will also be apt to refer to the decision of the Hon‟ble Apex Court in the case of the Empire Jute Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 124 ITR 1 wherein it was observed that "there may be cases where expenditure, even if incurred for obtaining an advantage of enduring benefit, may, none the less, be on revenue account and the test of enduring benefit may break down. It is not every advantage of enduring nature acquired by an assessee that brings the case within the principles laid down in t…

Viacom 18 Media P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 11(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee‟s appeal for A

ITA 8754/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Sept 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

…relied upon the following decisions:– i) CIT v/s Finlay Mills Ltd., 20 ITR 475 (SC); ii) PCIT v. Zydus Wellness Ltd., 247 Taxman 397 (Guj); iii) Cadia Healthcare Ltd (Ahd.); iv) Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd., 177 ITR 377 (SC); v) Empire Jute Co Ltd v/s CIT 124 ITR 1 (SC); and vi) USV Ltd v/s DCIT, 24 Taxmann.com 218 (Mum. Trib.). 140. The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the observations of the authorities below. 141. Considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record in the light of the decisions relied upon. We find that the issue for our adjudication is covered by the decis…

ACIT 3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Experian Credit Information Co. P.Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 805/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

…s revenue in nature. In the virtual world of data analysis, similar repair, maintenance or modification has to be done to computer hardware and software platform/architecture. Applying the ratio of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Empire Jute Company Ltd (124 ITR 1) cited by the-appellant, in my opinion, the impugned expenses cannot be considered as capital in nature. Perhaps, the Assessing Officer did because he did not fully understand the difference between a bricks and mortar business and a business that uses computers and software platform/architecture as machinery that requires regular upkeep, repair an…

M/S. Sogefi Engine Systems India Private Limited (Formerly Known As Sogefi- Mnr Engine Systems India Private Limited), Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 6(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 2089/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jul 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Venkatesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)

…l depend on the provision of law relating thereto and not on the view which the assessee might taken of its right nor can the existence or absence of entries in the books of account be decisive or conclusive in the matter. • Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1980) 124 ITR 1 (SC) What is material to consider is the nature of the advantage in a, commercial sense and it is only where the advantage is in the capital field that the expenditure would be disallowable on an application of this test. If the advantage consists merely in facilitating the assessee's trading operations or enabling the management and conduct of the…

M/S. Sogefi Engine Systems India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 6(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1698/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Venkatesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)

…l depend on the provision of law relating thereto and not on the view which the assessee might taken of its right nor can the existence or absence of entries in the books of account be decisive or conclusive in the matter. • Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1980) 124 ITR 1 (SC) What is material to consider is the nature of the advantage in a, commercial sense and it is only where the advantage is in the capital field that the expenditure would be disallowable on an application of this test. If the advantage consists merely in facilitating the assessee's trading operations or enabling the management and conduct of the…

M/S. Sogefi Engine Systems India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 6(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1697/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Venkatesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)

…l depend on the provision of law relating thereto and not on the view which the assessee might taken of its right nor can the existence or absence of entries in the books of account be decisive or conclusive in the matter. • Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1980) 124 ITR 1 (SC) What is material to consider is the nature of the advantage in a, commercial sense and it is only where the advantage is in the capital field that the expenditure would be disallowable on an application of this test. If the advantage consists merely in facilitating the assessee's trading operations or enabling the management and conduct of the…

M/S. Sogefi Engine Systems India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 6(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1696/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Venkatesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)

…l depend on the provision of law relating thereto and not on the view which the assessee might taken of its right nor can the existence or absence of entries in the books of account be decisive or conclusive in the matter. • Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1980) 124 ITR 1 (SC) What is material to consider is the nature of the advantage in a, commercial sense and it is only where the advantage is in the capital field that the expenditure would be disallowable on an application of this test. If the advantage consists merely in facilitating the assessee's trading operations or enabling the management and conduct of the…

M/S Sogefi Mnr Filtration India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 757/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Venkatesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)

…l depend on the provision of law relating thereto and not on the view which the assessee might taken of its right nor can the existence or absence of entries in the books of account be decisive or conclusive in the matter. • Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1980) 124 ITR 1 (SC) What is material to consider is the nature of the advantage in a, commercial sense and it is only where the advantage is in the capital field that the expenditure would be disallowable on an application of this test. If the advantage consists merely in facilitating the assessee's trading operations or enabling the management and conduct of the…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-6(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Axis Asset Management Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5379/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

…mplied view of the AO that the expenditure results in a benefits of enduring nature is 7 Axis Asset Management Co.Ltd. also not sustainable. It will also be apt to refer to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of the Empire Jute Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 124 ITR 1 wherein it was observed that "there may be cases where expenditure, even if incurred for obtaining an advantage of enduring benefit, may, none the less, be on revenue account and the test of enduring benefit may break down. It is not every advantage of enduring nature acquired by an assessee that brings the case within the principles laid down in t…

Technologies Ltd) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

ITA/214/2020HC Delhi05 Jul 2021
For Appellant: -.................................................................... 8For Respondent: - .................................................................. 10
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 254Section 35D

…issue in dispute is only in respect of the commuted one timely lease rent. 9.8 The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the decisions on the issue of when a particular expenditure has to be considered as capital expenditure, in the case of Empire Jute Co. Vs CIT 124 ITR 1 (SC); Lakshmiji Sugar Mills Co P Ltd Vs CIT 82 ITR 376 (SC) and Madras Auto Services (P) Ltd 233 ITR 468 (SC) allowed the claim of the assessee observing as under: “8.5.2 The appellant submitted that it had claimed deduction of Rs.77,98,042 on account of payment of commuted lease rentals to Greater Noida Authority for Plot No. 2A taken on leas…

Technologies Ltd) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

ITA/215/2020HC Delhi05 Jul 2021
For Appellant: -.................................................................... 8For Respondent: - .................................................................. 10
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 254Section 35D

…issue in dispute is only in respect of the commuted one timely lease rent. 9.8 The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the decisions on the issue of when a particular expenditure has to be considered as capital expenditure, in the case of Empire Jute Co. Vs CIT 124 ITR 1 (SC); Lakshmiji Sugar Mills Co P Ltd Vs CIT 82 ITR 376 (SC) and Madras Auto Services (P) Ltd 233 ITR 468 (SC) allowed the claim of the assessee observing as under: “8.5.2 The appellant submitted that it had claimed deduction of Rs.77,98,042 on account of payment of commuted lease rentals to Greater Noida Authority for Plot No. 2A taken on leas…

Technologies Ltd) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

ITA/213/2020HC Delhi05 Jul 2021
For Appellant: -.................................................................... 8For Respondent: - .................................................................. 10
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 254Section 35D

…issue in dispute is only in respect of the commuted one timely lease rent. 9.8 The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the decisions on the issue of when a particular expenditure has to be considered as capital expenditure, in the case of Empire Jute Co. Vs CIT 124 ITR 1 (SC); Lakshmiji Sugar Mills Co P Ltd Vs CIT 82 ITR 376 (SC) and Madras Auto Services (P) Ltd 233 ITR 468 (SC) allowed the claim of the assessee observing as under: “8.5.2 The appellant submitted that it had claimed deduction of Rs.77,98,042 on account of payment of commuted lease rentals to Greater Noida Authority for Plot No. 2A taken on leas…

Roop Kumar Bansal, Gurgaon vs. Pr, CIT (Central), Gurgaon

In the result, ITA.No.383/Del

ITA 386/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P.Kant

For Appellant: And Shri Lalit Mohan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153B(1)(b)Section 263

…earned 108 ITA.Nos.383, 384, 385 & 386/Del./2021 Smt. Abha Bansal, Sh Pankaj Bansal, Sh Basant Bansal And Sh Roop Kumar Bansal, Gurgaon. Counsel for the Assessee relied upon Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd., vs., CIT 124 ITR 1 No adverse inference can be drawn with respect to (i) Arbitration Proceedings. The agreement was between the assessee and MIPL. (j) Therefore, Mangalam was not party to the Arbitration Proceedings is not relevant consideration. It is wrong to say that no compensation was ever paid to any allottee by MIPL. It was submitted that assessee (k) received…

Shri Basant Bansal, Gurgaon vs. Pr, CIT (Central), Gurgaon

In the result, ITA.No.383/Del

ITA 385/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P.Kant

For Appellant: And Shri Lalit Mohan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153B(1)(b)Section 263

…earned 108 ITA.Nos.383, 384, 385 & 386/Del./2021 Smt. Abha Bansal, Sh Pankaj Bansal, Sh Basant Bansal And Sh Roop Kumar Bansal, Gurgaon. Counsel for the Assessee relied upon Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd., vs., CIT 124 ITR 1 No adverse inference can be drawn with respect to (i) Arbitration Proceedings. The agreement was between the assessee and MIPL. (j) Therefore, Mangalam was not party to the Arbitration Proceedings is not relevant consideration. It is wrong to say that no compensation was ever paid to any allottee by MIPL. It was submitted that assessee (k) received…

Pankaj Bansal, Gurgaon vs. Pr, CIT (Central), Gurgaon

In the result, ITA.No.383/Del

ITA 384/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P.Kant

For Appellant: And Shri Lalit Mohan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153B(1)(b)Section 263

…earned 108 ITA.Nos.383, 384, 385 & 386/Del./2021 Smt. Abha Bansal, Sh Pankaj Bansal, Sh Basant Bansal And Sh Roop Kumar Bansal, Gurgaon. Counsel for the Assessee relied upon Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd., vs., CIT 124 ITR 1 No adverse inference can be drawn with respect to (i) Arbitration Proceedings. The agreement was between the assessee and MIPL. (j) Therefore, Mangalam was not party to the Arbitration Proceedings is not relevant consideration. It is wrong to say that no compensation was ever paid to any allottee by MIPL. It was submitted that assessee (k) received…

Abha Bansal, Gurgaon vs. PCIT, Central, Gurgaon

In the result, ITA.No.383/Del

ITA 383/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P.Kant

For Appellant: And Shri Lalit Mohan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153B(1)(b)Section 263

…earned 108 ITA.Nos.383, 384, 385 & 386/Del./2021 Smt. Abha Bansal, Sh Pankaj Bansal, Sh Basant Bansal And Sh Roop Kumar Bansal, Gurgaon. Counsel for the Assessee relied upon Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd., vs., CIT 124 ITR 1 No adverse inference can be drawn with respect to (i) Arbitration Proceedings. The agreement was between the assessee and MIPL. (j) Therefore, Mangalam was not party to the Arbitration Proceedings is not relevant consideration. It is wrong to say that no compensation was ever paid to any allottee by MIPL. It was submitted that assessee (k) received…

Uniliver India Export Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD) 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5413/MUM/2016[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2021AY 1996-97

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 5413/Mum/2016 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Years 1996-97) Unilever India Export Limited The Dy. Commissioner Of (Formerly- Indexport Limited) Income Tax, Circle 1(3)(2), फनाभ/ Unilever House, B.D. Savant Mumbai -400 020 Marg, Chakala, Andheri (East) Vs. Mumbai 400 099 (अऩीराथी / Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामी रेखा िं./Pan No. Aaaci0991D अऩीराथी की ओय े/ Appellant By : Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Ar प्रत्मथी की ओय े/ Respondent By : Shri Prabhat Kumar Gupta, Dr ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2021 घोर्णा की तायीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 10.05.2021 आदेश / O R D E R भहावीय स िंह, उऩाध्मक्ष के द्वाया / Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: This Appeal Of Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)]-2, Mumbai, [In Short Cit(A)], In Appeal No. Cit(A)-2/It/598/2009-10 Dated 02.05.2016. The Assessment Was Framed By The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax (In Short Acit/ Ito/ Unilever India Export Limited; Ay 96-97 Ao), Osd 1(1), Mumbai For The A.Y. 1996-97 Vide Order Dated Nil Under Section 254 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’).

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prabhat Kumar Gupta, Dr
Section 143(3)Section 254Section 37(1)

…not been uniformaly reducing the expenses and also considering the sales increased, which is not study in the calendar years 1995 to 2000. 12. We have also considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Company Ltd. Vs. CIT (1980) 124 ITR 1 (SC), wherein, Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed as under:- “There may be cases where expenditure, even if incurred for obtaining advantage of Unilever India Export Limited; AY 96-97 enduring benefit, may, none-the-less, be on revenue account and the test of enduring benefit may break down. lt is not every advantage of enduring nature acquired by…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Interarch Building Products Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4986/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 3259/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 4986/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs M/S Interarch Building Products (P) Circle-11(1), Ltd., Farm No. 8, Khasra No. 56/2, New Delhi Dera Mandi Road, Mandi Village, Mehrauli, New Delhi-110047 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaci0106J Assessee By : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Vanita R. Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.04.2021

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Vanita R. Sharma, CIT DR

…dition of the carrying on of the business, the expenditure may be regarded as revenue expenditure.” 5 Interarch Building Products (P) Ltd. 8. Relying on the above propositions considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Empire Jute Company Ltd. 124 ITR 1, we hold that the ld. CIT (A) has rightly allowed the deduction. Long Term Capital Gains: 9. In the instant case, the AO doubted the sale value of the flat sold by the assessee and referred the matter to the DVO to determine the share market value. The DVO determined the value of Rs.2,06,46,000/- against the sale value shown by the assessee of Rs…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Interarch Building Products (P) Ltd., New Delhi

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3259/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 3259/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 4986/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs M/S Interarch Building Products (P) Circle-11(1), Ltd., Farm No. 8, Khasra No. 56/2, New Delhi Dera Mandi Road, Mandi Village, Mehrauli, New Delhi-110047 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaci0106J Assessee By : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Vanita R. Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.04.2021

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Vanita R. Sharma, CIT DR

…dition of the carrying on of the business, the expenditure may be regarded as revenue expenditure.” 5 Interarch Building Products (P) Ltd. 8. Relying on the above propositions considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Empire Jute Company Ltd. 124 ITR 1, we hold that the ld. CIT (A) has rightly allowed the deduction. Long Term Capital Gains: 9. In the instant case, the AO doubted the sale value of the flat sold by the assessee and referred the matter to the DVO to determine the share market value. The DVO determined the value of Rs.2,06,46,000/- against the sale value shown by the assessee of Rs…