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 366,339 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

Hospira Healthcare India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

ITA 821/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 821/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-2012

For Appellant: Shri. Ashik Shah and Shri. Sriram Seshadri, C.A
Section 144C

…supply of the intermediary drugs Meropenem and Imipenem. This only improved the business chain of the assessee but did not add to any of its capital asset. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd vs. CIT 124 ITR 1 and L.H. Sugar Factory and Oil Mills (P) Ltd vs. CIT 125 ITR 293. 17. Per contra, ld. Departmental Representative submitted that when assessee ensured a continuous supply of essential raw material through a lumpsum payment to a supplier and when such payment were in addition to the cost it had to pay for such rawmaterials, then such payment cou…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Vatika Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2331/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, Vatika Hospitality Central Circle-20, Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Room No. 333, E- 621A, Devika Tower, 2, Ara Centre, 6, Nehru Tower, New Jhandewalan Extn, Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacv0695D (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vatika Hospitality Central Circle-20, Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Room No. 333, E- 621A, Devika Tower, 2, Ara Centre, 6, Nehru Tower, New Jhandewalan Extn, Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacv0695D (Appellant) (Respondent) Vatika Hospitality Dcit, Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-20, Vs. 621A, Devika Tower, Room No. 333, 6, Nehru Tower, New E-2, Ara Centre, Delhi Jhandewalan Pan:Aaacv0695D Extn, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. SS Rana, CIT DRFor Respondent: Sh. CS Agarwal, Sr. Adv
Section 271

…iture is not revenue expenditure. For this reason he also referred to the gross revenue earned by the assessee from the business to Rs. 147819997/–. He further referred to the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in case of Empire Jute company Ltd versus CIT 124 ITR 1 to submit that the expenditure incurred enured for a longer period does not and cannot make it a capital expenditure. He further submitted that the assessee has got its account audited after obtaining copies of the books of accounts and documents, which were impounded by the revenue therefore the assessing officer, cannot say that the expenditure i…

M/S Hero Honda Motors Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2148/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh C.M.Garg & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Honda Motors Ltd, Dcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, Circle-12(1), Vs. New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacg0812J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. AK Saroha, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 263Section 32Section 37(1)Section 40Section 9

…y making that technical knowledge available (he Swiss company did no! pan with tiny asset of its business, nor did the appellant acquire any asset or advantage of an enduring nature for the benefit of its business. In the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd Vs. CIT : 124 ITR 1. in which the Supreme Court laid down the teat for determining as to who! constitutes capital expenditure in the following terms: it is not every advantage of enduring nature acquired by an assessee that brings the case within the principle laid down in this test. What is material to Hero Honda Motors Ltd V DCIT 2148/del/2009 A Y 2004-05 Appeal Ag…

Jm Financial Consultants P. Ltd ( Now Known As Jm Financial Institutional Securities P. Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT 3(2), Mumbai

ITA 1600/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg: (A.Y : 2006-07) Jm Financial Institutional Securities Vs. Dcit-3(2), Mumbai Ltd. (Formerly Known As Jm (Respondent) Financial Consultants Pvt. Ltd.,) 7Th Floor, Cnergy, Appasaheb Marathe Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai 400 025 (Appellant) Pan : Aaacm7079C

For Appellant: Shri Vispi T. PatelFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…under consideration is of no significance so long as it is clear that such benefit is in the revenue field and not in the capital field. The aforesaid legal premise has been duly approved even by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd., 124 ITR 1 (SC). In fact, the action of Assessing Officer in accepting that part of expenditure is in revenue field itself demonstrates that the ratio of judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd. (supra) is fully attracted inasmuch as the expenditure which results in benefits over a period of time is allowed as revenue expenditure…

DCIT 10(1), Mumbai vs. Music Broadcast P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the revenue is hereby Dismissed

ITA 3532/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.3532/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dcit 10(1) बनाम/ M/S. Music Broadcast Pvt. 455, Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd. Vs. 4Th Floor, M. K. Marg, 5Th Floor, Mumbai - 400020 Rna Corporate Park, Opp. Western Express Highway, Kalanagar, Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400051 C.O. No.143/Mum/2014 (I.T.A. No. 3532/Mum/2013) (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Music Broadcast Pvt. बनाम/ Dcit 10(1) Ltd. 455, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 5Th Floor, 4Th Floor, M. K. Marg, Rna Corporate Park, Mumbai - 400020 Opp. Western Express Highway, Kalanagar, Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400051 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccm4036H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) .. (""थ" /Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri L.N. MalikFor Respondent: Shri N. P. Singh (CIT-DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 28

…आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, मुंबई"ायपीठ‘बी’मुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL“B” BENCH, MUMBAI "ीजी.एस.प"ू,लेखा सद", एवं"ी अमरजीत िसंह, "ाियक सद", के सम" BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.3532/Mum/2013 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) DCIT 10(1) बनाम/ M/s. Music Broadcast Pvt. 455, Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd. Vs. 4th Floor, M. K. Marg, 5th Floor, Mumbai - 400020 RNA Corporate Park, Opp. Western Express Highway, Kalanagar, Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400051 C.O. No.143/Mum/2014 (I.T.A. No. 3532/Mum/2013) (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/s. Music Broadcast Pvt. बनाम/ DCIT 10(…

DCIT Cir 7(1) vs. M/S Novartis India Ltd

ITA 5258/MUM/2003[1997 - 98]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2017
For Appellant: S/Shri J.D. Mistry & Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: S/Shri P.R. Ghosh & K.V. Vispute- DR

…tains to allowance of advertising and publicity expenses. The Commissioner (Appeals) held in favour of the assessee . In appeal preferred by revenue, learned Tribunal relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd., reported in 124 ITR 1. 2. In the light of the above, question as framed would not arise and consequently, appeal dismissed.” 9 ITA.s/5238/03;5258/03;6224/04;5979/04;6225/04 ; C.O.s249/04 & 112/05-Novartis Respectfully, following the above order, of the Hon’ble High Court,we dismiss Ground No.3. 12.Fourth ground of appeal is with regard to expenditure incurred on compu…

DCIT RG. - 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4374/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2017AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Gujarat Ambuja Cements Limited, The Dy. Commissioner Of 122, Maker Chambers, Iii, Income-Tax- Range 3(1), फनधभ/ Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400021. M K Marg, Mumbai-400020 Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Gujarat Ambuja Cements Tax-Range 3(1), Limited, 122, Maker फनधभ/ Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Chambers, Iii, Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400021 Vs. M K Marg, Mumbai-400020 स्थधमी रेखध सं./ Pan : Aaacg0569P (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: S/Shri Soumen Adak & HarishFor Respondent: Shri K B Shukla

…ms are covered by following decisions:- a) ITA No. 2690/M/93 vide its order dated 20.12.2002 for assessment year 1989-90. b) ITA No. 2419/M/94 vide its order dated 4.8.2003 for assessment year 90-91. 27 and 4374/Mum/2005 c) Empire Jute Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1980) 124 ITR 1 (SC). d) CIT Vs. Ananda Bazar Patrika (P) Ltd. (1990) 184 ITR 542 (cal). e) CIT vs. Berger Paints (India) Ltd. (No.s 2) (2002) 254 ITR 503 (cal). Vide para 17.3 of its order dated 20.12.2002, the Tribunal for the assessment year 89-90 in ITA No. 2690/M/93heldas under: “17.3 We have considered the rival submissions in the light of material placed be…

M/S. Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT RG. 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3360/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2017AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Gujarat Ambuja Cements Limited, The Dy. Commissioner Of 122, Maker Chambers, Iii, Income-Tax- Range 3(1), फनधभ/ Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400021. M K Marg, Mumbai-400020 Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Gujarat Ambuja Cements Tax-Range 3(1), Limited, 122, Maker फनधभ/ Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Chambers, Iii, Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400021 Vs. M K Marg, Mumbai-400020 स्थधमी रेखध सं./ Pan : Aaacg0569P (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: S/Shri Soumen Adak & HarishFor Respondent: Shri K B Shukla

…ms are covered by following decisions:- a) ITA No. 2690/M/93 vide its order dated 20.12.2002 for assessment year 1989-90. b) ITA No. 2419/M/94 vide its order dated 4.8.2003 for assessment year 90-91. 27 and 4374/Mum/2005 c) Empire Jute Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1980) 124 ITR 1 (SC). d) CIT Vs. Ananda Bazar Patrika (P) Ltd. (1990) 184 ITR 542 (cal). e) CIT vs. Berger Paints (India) Ltd. (No.s 2) (2002) 254 ITR 503 (cal). Vide para 17.3 of its order dated 20.12.2002, the Tribunal for the assessment year 89-90 in ITA No. 2690/M/93heldas under: “17.3 We have considered the rival submissions in the light of material placed be…

Sh Chand Rattan Bagri, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result ground No. 5

ITA 2125/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jan 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishichand Rattan Bagri, Acit, 4318/3, Ansari Road, Circle-3(1), Vs. Darya Ganj, New Delhi Cr Building, Ip Estate, Pan:Aagpb1216K New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Chand Rattan Bagri, Acit, 4318/3, Ansari Road, Circle-3(1), Vs. Darya Ganj, New Delhi Cr Building, Ip Estate, Pan:Aagpb1216K New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. CS Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anil Kr. Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…laced reliance on the several case laws as under- - CIT vs. Chand Ratan Bagri reported in 36 DTR 244 (Del.) ITA NO. 3756/Del/2010 - Sunita Gupta Share Borkers Limited vs. ACIT in ITA No. 4188/Del/2010 vide order dated 7.12.2011. - Empire Jute Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 124 ITR 1 - TI Diamond Chain Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 151 Taxman 69. - Privy Council in Ralli Estates Ltd. vs. CIT (1961) 1 WLR 329 (PC). Page 11 of 17 7. We have carefully considered the submissions and perused the records. In this case it is undisputed that the amount of Rs. 5,75,00,000/- had been received by the assessee on account of forfeiture of opt…

Sanofi Pasteur India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 8(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 769/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

Section 143(3)

…and proceeded to draw an adverse inference without considering the nature of the impugned expenditure as its aIlowability of the same under the provisions of the Income-tax Act. 11. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CUT (1980) 124 ITR 1 has observed as under: 'There may be cases Where expenditure, even if incurred for obtaining an advantage of enduring benefit, may" nonetheless 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 principle laid down in this test.…

DCIT 8(3), Mumbai vs. Sanofi Pasteur India P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 647/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

Section 143(3)

…and proceeded to draw an adverse inference without considering the nature of the impugned expenditure as its aIlowability of the same under the provisions of the Income-tax Act. 11. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CUT (1980) 124 ITR 1 has observed as under: 'There may be cases Where expenditure, even if incurred for obtaining an advantage of enduring benefit, may" nonetheless 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 principle laid down in this test.…

Asst CIT 14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Godrej Industries Ltd, Mumbai

In the results, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of revenue stands dismissed

ITA 164/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Godrej Industries Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of Kalyaniwlla & Mistry, Income-Tax-10(2), फनधभ/ Room No.475, 4Th Floor, Army & Navi Building, 148, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, M K Marg, Mumbai-400001 Mumbai-400020 Asst. Commissioner Of Income- Godrej Industries Ltd., Tax-14(1)(2), Pirojsha Nagar, Eastern फनधभ/ Room No.460, 4Th Floor, Express Highway, Aayakar Bhavan, Vikhroli, Vs. M K Marg, Mumbai-400079 Mumbai-400020 स्थधमी रेखध सं./ Pan : Aaacg2953R (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri F V IraniFor Respondent: Ms.Vidisha Kalra
Section 37(1)

…at there was some improvements in the looks and appearance of the brand. Under these circumstances, it cannot be contend that there was creation of a 'new capital asset. It was settled way back by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co Ltd vs CIT 124 ITR 1 that for the purpose of treating an expenditure as capital expenditure, twin conditions are must, viz. (i) there should be benefit of enduring nature; (ii) the expenditure must give rise to creation of new capital asset. The observations of Hon’ble Supreme Court were reiterated in subsequent judgment in the case of Alembic Chemical Works ltd vs CIT…

Godrej Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 10(2), Mumbai

In the results, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of revenue stands dismissed

ITA 151/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Godrej Industries Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of Kalyaniwlla & Mistry, Income-Tax-10(2), फनधभ/ Room No.475, 4Th Floor, Army & Navi Building, 148, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, M K Marg, Mumbai-400001 Mumbai-400020 Asst. Commissioner Of Income- Godrej Industries Ltd., Tax-14(1)(2), Pirojsha Nagar, Eastern फनधभ/ Room No.460, 4Th Floor, Express Highway, Aayakar Bhavan, Vikhroli, Vs. M K Marg, Mumbai-400079 Mumbai-400020 स्थधमी रेखध सं./ Pan : Aaacg2953R (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri F V IraniFor Respondent: Ms.Vidisha Kalra
Section 37(1)

…at there was some improvements in the looks and appearance of the brand. Under these circumstances, it cannot be contend that there was creation of a 'new capital asset. It was settled way back by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co Ltd vs CIT 124 ITR 1 that for the purpose of treating an expenditure as capital expenditure, twin conditions are must, viz. (i) there should be benefit of enduring nature; (ii) the expenditure must give rise to creation of new capital asset. The observations of Hon’ble Supreme Court were reiterated in subsequent judgment in the case of Alembic Chemical Works ltd vs CIT…

Hindustan Ice Cold Storage Co Ltd, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T, Cir- 8, Kolkata.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 203/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Dec 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.203/Kol/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2006-2007) Hindusthan Ice & Cold Vs. Dcit, Circle-8, Kolkata Storage Limited, Aayakar Bhavan, P-7, C/O D.J.Shah & Co., Chowringhee Square, Kalyan Bhavan, Kolkata-69 2 Elgin Road, Kolkata-20 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaach 6265 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R Revenue By : Md. Ghayas Uddin, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 07/12/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 21/12/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2006-2007, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxxii, Kolkata In Appeal No.32/Xxxii/11-12/R&T/Cir-8/Kol, Dated 07.11.2012, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated 28.11.2008. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Filed Its The Return Of Income On 27.11.2006 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.16,45,711/- For The Assessment Year 2006-07. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny U/S. 143(3) Of The Act & The Ao Has Completed The Assessment By Making The Addition On Account Of Revenue Expenditure Claimed By The Assessee In Respect Of Repairs & Replacement Of Block Hindusthan Ice & Cold Storage Co. Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/RFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…lowing judgments :- Hindusthan Ice & Cold Storage Co. Ltd. i) Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd., [1989] 177 ITR 377; ii) Assam Bengal Cement Companies Ltd. [1955] 27 ITR 34 iii) Associated Cement Companies ltd. [1988] 172 ITR 257 iv) Empire Jute Co. Ltd. [1980] 124 ITR 1(SC) v) Tea Estate P. Ltd. [1992] 198 ITR 535 (Cal) Saravana Spt. Mills (P) Ltd. 293 ITR 201 vi) 5.2 On the other hand, Ld. DR for the revenue has primarily reiterated the stand taken by the AO, which we have already noted in our earlier paragraphs and the same is not being repeated for the sake of brevity. 5.3. Having heard the rival submission…

Sai Om Developers P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 10(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal for A

ITA 1962/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

Section 143(3)

…urt of Delhi in the case of CIT v.Indian Visit.com (P) Ltd - 219 CTR 603 5. Decision of High Court of Delhi in the case of International Airports Authority of India v. CIT - 303 ITR 433 6. Decision of Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT - 124 ITR 1 7. Decision of ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of Honda Siel Cars India Ltd. V. ACIT - 109 ITD 1" Ld. CIT(A) did not agree with the submissions of the assessee on the ground that these expenses were required for bringing capital asset into existence. Thus, he upheld the action of the AO. 12. During the course of hearing before us, the Ld. Counsel rei…

Sanofi Synthelabo India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 8(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6302/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ashwani Taneja, Am Sanofi Synthelabo India Ltd. Addl. Commissioner Of Income 54-A, Sir M.V. Rd Andheri (E), Tax Vs. 8(3), Aayakar Bhavan, 2 Nd Floor, Mumbai-400093 Pan No.Aaccs1421J M.K. Rd, Mumbai-400020 Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By .. Shri. Sanjiv M Shah, Ar Revenue By .. Shri. B.S. Bist, Dr Date Of Hearing .. 15-12-2016 Date Of Pronouncement .. 15-12-2016 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI ASHWANI TANEJA, AM Sanofi Synthelabo India Ltd. Addl. Commissioner of Income 54-A, SIR M.V. RD Andheri (E), Tax Vs. 8(3), Aayakar Bhavan, 2 nd Floor, Mumbai-400093 PAN No.AACCS1421J M.K. Rd, Mumbai-400020 Appellant .. Respondent Assessee by .. Shri. Sanjiv M Shah, AR Revenue by .. Shri. B.S. Bist, DR Date of hearing .. 15-12-2016 Date of pronouncement .. 15-12-2016 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of CIT(A)-18, Mumbai, in appeal No. CIT(A)-18/Addl.CIT-8(3)/IT-296/20…

D.C.I.T.RG.8(3), Mumbai vs. Sanofi Synthelabo (I) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7592/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Ashwani Taneja, Am

Section 143(3)

…siness realities In a given case, the test of ‘enduring benefit’ might break down In CIT Vs Associated Cement Companies Ltd [1988] 172 ITR 257 (SC) at p 262, this court said: As observed by the Supreme Court in the decision in Empire Jute Co Ltd Vs CIT [1980] 124 ITR 1 (SC) 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 this test What is mate…

D.C.I.T. 8(3), Mumbai vs. Sanofi Syntheabo (India) Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6755/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Ashwani Taneja, Am

Section 143(3)

…siness realities In a given case, the test of ‘enduring benefit’ might break down In CIT Vs Associated Cement Companies Ltd [1988] 172 ITR 257 (SC) at p 262, this court said: As observed by the Supreme Court in the decision in Empire Jute Co Ltd Vs CIT [1980] 124 ITR 1 (SC) 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 this test What is mate…

ACIT RG 8(3), Mumbai vs. Sanofi Synthellabo (I) Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6720/MUM/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Ashwani Taneja, Am

Section 143(3)

…siness realities In a given case, the test of ‘enduring benefit’ might break down In CIT Vs Associated Cement Companies Ltd [1988] 172 ITR 257 (SC) at p 262, this court said: As observed by the Supreme Court in the decision in Empire Jute Co Ltd Vs CIT [1980] 124 ITR 1 (SC) 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 this test What is mate…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 7 vs. M/S Rohde & Schwarz India Pvt. Ltd

ITA/701/2016HC Delhi07 Nov 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

Section 40Section 9

…form of capital expenditure for which depreciation can be granted only to the extent of 25%. This Court notices that the ITAT had applied the ratio and various decisions to say the decision of the Supreme Court such as Empire Jute Co Ltd vs CIT [1980] 124 ITR 1, etc. to hold that the expenditure was, in fact, revenue. Besides, the amounts are insignificant and both cumulative and for each year, its effect is well below the tax prescribed limit both cumulative and for each year. ii. The second question urged is that the payment towards ―Frame Relay Charges‖ falls within the mischief of Section 9 (1)…