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

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

ITA/700/2016HC 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)…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Minda Stoneridge Instuments Ltd., Delhi

In the result ground No. 5 and 6 of the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 5896/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, Minda Stoneridge Instruments Ltd., Circle-6(1), Room No.413, C. R. 36-A, Rajasthan Udyog Nagar, Delhi Vs. Building, Ip Estate, New Delhi Pan:Aaacm5600R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P Damvanunjna, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 35Section 40

…nce of Rs.75,000/- made by the AO by treating the expenditure on market research study for evaluation of Customer Satisfaction Measurement as Capital expenditure by holding that the Hon'ble Supreme Court had held in the case of Empire Jute Ltd. vs. CIT (1980) 124 ITR 1 if there is benefit of enduring nature without creation of Capital Asset cannot be termed as Capital Expenditure as it is an incorrect interpretation of the above judgment? 8. The order of the learned CIT(APPEALS) is erroneous & contrary to facts & law. 9. That the grounds of appeal are without prejudice to each other.” 2. The brief facts of the c…

ACIT, Gurgaon vs. M/S. Honda Motorcycles & Scooter India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal stands allowed

ITA 3460/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha, CIT-DR

…plant and were not incurred on purchase of any capital asset, such expenses were not incurred in capital and were allowable revenue expenses as per the test laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Company Limited VS. CIT reported at 124 ITR 1. 20. The ld. AR lastly contended that the assessee incurred trial run expenses on the activity of indigenisation of software and consequently this activity boosted Indian economy. Therefore, the same has to be allowed as Revenue expenditure instead of capital expenditure as wrongly and incorrectly observed by the authorities below. 21. Per contr…

ACIT, Gurgaon vs. M/S Honda Motorcycle and Scooter India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal stands allowed

ITA 3237/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha, CIT-DR

…plant and were not incurred on purchase of any capital asset, such expenses were not incurred in capital and were allowable revenue expenses as per the test laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Company Limited VS. CIT reported at 124 ITR 1. 20. The ld. AR lastly contended that the assessee incurred trial run expenses on the activity of indigenisation of software and consequently this activity boosted Indian economy. Therefore, the same has to be allowed as Revenue expenditure instead of capital expenditure as wrongly and incorrectly observed by the authorities below. 21. Per contr…

Honda Motorcycle & Scooters India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addl. CIT, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal stands allowed

ITA 3074/DEL/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha, CIT-DR

…plant and were not incurred on purchase of any capital asset, such expenses were not incurred in capital and were allowable revenue expenses as per the test laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Company Limited VS. CIT reported at 124 ITR 1. 20. The ld. AR lastly contended that the assessee incurred trial run expenses on the activity of indigenisation of software and consequently this activity boosted Indian economy. Therefore, the same has to be allowed as Revenue expenditure instead of capital expenditure as wrongly and incorrectly observed by the authorities below. 21. Per contr…

Honda Motorcycle & Scooters India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addl. CIT, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal stands allowed

ITA 3073/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha, CIT-DR

…plant and were not incurred on purchase of any capital asset, such expenses were not incurred in capital and were allowable revenue expenses as per the test laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Company Limited VS. CIT reported at 124 ITR 1. 20. The ld. AR lastly contended that the assessee incurred trial run expenses on the activity of indigenisation of software and consequently this activity boosted Indian economy. Therefore, the same has to be allowed as Revenue expenditure instead of capital expenditure as wrongly and incorrectly observed by the authorities below. 21. Per contr…

Godrej & Boyce Mfg Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 10(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the AO is dismissed

ITA 8488/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2016AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Josh (AR)For Respondent: S/Shri A.G. Bhatkar-(CIT-DR) and K.V. Vispute- (DR)
Section 254(1)Section 43(6)

…enovation, created a new intangible asset. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Baliwala Nand Kishore vs. CIT 224 ITR 414 held that renewal or renovation of asset is in capital nature. The appellant had relied on the decision of Empire Jute Co. Ltd. vs. CIT - 124 ITR 1 and Alembic-Chemical Works Ltd. vs. CIT - 177 ITR 377. Depreciation of the intangible asset in Income-tax Act was not in existence. This came into operation from the year 1998. Moreover those two decisions can be distinguished as no new asset was created. For the aforesaid reasons, as the expenditure incurred and paid to interbrand (Consultant) is…

The DCIT 3(1) vs. M/S. Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd

ITA 2654/MUM/2005[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2016AY 1998-1999

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 2524/Mum/2005 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1998-99) Gujarat Ambuja Cements Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of 122, Maker Chambers Iii, Income Tax, Range 3(1), बनाम/ Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhawan, Vs. Mumbai-400 021. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaapj 8040P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri P.R. Ghosh

…learned counsel, these items 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 c) Empire Jute co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1980) 124 ITR 1(SC) d) CIT vs. Ananda Bazar Patnika (P) Ltd. 91990) 184 ITR 542 (cal) e) CIT vs. Berger Paints (India) Ltd. (No.s2) (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/93 held as under:- “17.3 We have considered the rival submissions in the light of material placed befor…

M/S. Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd vs. The Dy CIT RG3(1)

ITA 2524/MUM/2005[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2016AY 1998-1999

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 2524/Mum/2005 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1998-99) Gujarat Ambuja Cements Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of 122, Maker Chambers Iii, Income Tax, Range 3(1), बनाम/ Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhawan, Vs. Mumbai-400 021. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaapj 8040P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri P.R. Ghosh

…learned counsel, these items 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 c) Empire Jute co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1980) 124 ITR 1(SC) d) CIT vs. Ananda Bazar Patnika (P) Ltd. 91990) 184 ITR 542 (cal) e) CIT vs. Berger Paints (India) Ltd. (No.s2) (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/93 held as under:- “17.3 We have considered the rival submissions in the light of material placed befor…

ACIT Cir 12(3), Mumbai vs. Lake View Developers, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4495/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3409/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Lake View Developers Addl. Cit, Range 12(3), बनाम/ 514, Dalamal Towers, Mumbai 211 F.P.J. Marg, Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai-400 021 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafl 0589 R (Assessee) : (Revenue) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4495/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) बनाम/ Addl. Cit, Range 12(3), Lake View Developers Mumbai Mumbai-400 021 Vs. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafl 0589 R (Revenue) (Assessee) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4496/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Addl. Cit, Range 12(3), Omega Associates, बनाम/ Mumbai 514, Dalamal Tower, 211-F.P.J. Marg, Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai-400 021 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafl 0589 R (Revenue) : (Assessee) : Shri Chetan Karia Revenue By Assessee By : Shri R. P. Rastogi सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 03.5.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 28.7.2016 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R. P. Rastogi
Section 143(3)Section 22

…‘revenue’ and ‘capital’, applying the same to the facts of the case. The said principles represent trite law, reiterated by it time and again, i.e., as and when the issue has come before the Hon’ble Court, as for example in Empire Jute Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [1980] 124 ITR 1 (SC). Its reference to the character of the income arising, i.e., business or otherwise – which was not in issue, also forms part of the well settled law (by it). The Apex Court, it needs to be borne in mind, referred to the ownership of the property therein in the context of the question before it. Further, the property under reference was not ‘ho…

Indiawin Sports P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 35, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 5290/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.5290&5291/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2009-2010 & 2010-2011) Indianwin Sports Private Vs. Acit, Cc-35, Room Limited, Court House, 3Rd No.104, Aayakar Bhavan, Floor, Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Mumbai-400020 Dhobi Talao, Mumbai- 400002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcr 8195 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Arvind Sonde राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri B.C.S.Naik सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 25/05/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 22/07/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2009-2010 & 2010-2011, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of The I.T.Act. 2. In Both These Appeals The Assessee Is Aggrieved For Decline Of Annual Payment Being Franchise Fees Paid To Bcci To Participate In The Indian Premier League (Ipl) By Holding The Same As Capital In Nature For Both The Assessment Years Under Consideration. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Owning, Managing & Operating 'Mumbai Indian' Team Of Indian Premier League (Ipl). The Assessee Has Been Granted Perpetual Franchisee For The 'Mumbai Indian' Team. The Assessee Is Franchise Holder Of Ipl I.E. Indian

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri B.C.S.Naik
Section 139Section 143(3)

…s held that even though lump sum amount paid as premium in connection with lease of property as long as it is towards rent for the use of the property, it is allowable as revenue expenditure. (v) The Supreme Court in the case of Empire Jute Manufacturing Co, [124 ITR 1 (SC)] has held that even if the payment gives benefits for a period of time it will be in the revenue field only, if it is incurred in connection with day to day operation and does not affect the capital structure of the assessee. (vi) Expenditure on technical know-how, even if of enduring character is revenue expenditure if its impact is on the ru…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Baxter (India) Pvt. Ltd., Haryana

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5323/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 5323 & 2798/Del/2012 (Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2007-08) ACIT vs Baxter (India) Pvt. Ltd. Circle 2(1), Room No. 398D, Plot No. 183, Sector 5, C.R. Building, IMT Manesar, New Delhi. Haryana. AAACB3906F & DCIT vs Baxter (India) Pvt. Ltd. Circle 2(1), Room No. 398D, Plot No. 183, Sector 5, C.R. Building, IMT Manesar, New Delhi. Haryana. AAACB3906F Cross Objection No. 399/Del/2010 (In ITA No. 4785/Del/2010) (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Baxter (India…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Baxter (India) Pvt. Ltd., Haryana

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2798/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 5323 & 2798/Del/2012 (Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2007-08) ACIT vs Baxter (India) Pvt. Ltd. Circle 2(1), Room No. 398D, Plot No. 183, Sector 5, C.R. Building, IMT Manesar, New Delhi. Haryana. AAACB3906F & DCIT vs Baxter (India) Pvt. Ltd. Circle 2(1), Room No. 398D, Plot No. 183, Sector 5, C.R. Building, IMT Manesar, New Delhi. Haryana. AAACB3906F Cross Objection No. 399/Del/2010 (In ITA No. 4785/Del/2010) (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Baxter (India…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Baxter India (P) Ltd., Haryana

Appeal is allowed

ITA 4785/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jul 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 5323 & 2798/Del/2012 (Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2007-08) ACIT vs Baxter (India) Pvt. Ltd. Circle 2(1), Room No. 398D, Plot No. 183, Sector 5, C.R. Building, IMT Manesar, New Delhi. Haryana. AAACB3906F & DCIT vs Baxter (India) Pvt. Ltd. Circle 2(1), Room No. 398D, Plot No. 183, Sector 5, C.R. Building, IMT Manesar, New Delhi. Haryana. AAACB3906F Cross Objection No. 399/Del/2010 (In ITA No. 4785/Del/2010) (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Baxter (India…

Price Waterhouse Coppers Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Addl C.I.T RG - 2, Kolkata

In the result, to sum up, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 2033/KOL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jul 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Pandey, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…recruitment of staff is an allowable revenue expenditure u/s 37(1) of the Act. In support of which, the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions :- Assam Bengal Cement Co. Ltd vs CIT reported in 27 ITR 34 (SC) Empire Jute Co. Ltd vs CIT reported in 124 ITR 1 (SC) Hindustan Commercial Bank Ltd in RE reported in 21 ITR 353 (All HC) U.M. Cables Ltd vs ITO in ITA No. 2442/Kol/2007 rendered by Kolkata Tribunal The ld CITA taking into account the aforesaid submissions and by placing reliance on the aforesaid decisions deleted the disallowance made by the ld AO. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us…

D.C.I.T, Cir-2, Kolkata vs. M/S Price Water House Coopers Pvt., Kolkata

In the result, to sum up, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1523/KOL/2013[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jul 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Pandey, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…recruitment of staff is an allowable revenue expenditure u/s 37(1) of the Act. In support of which, the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions :- Assam Bengal Cement Co. Ltd vs CIT reported in 27 ITR 34 (SC) Empire Jute Co. Ltd vs CIT reported in 124 ITR 1 (SC) Hindustan Commercial Bank Ltd in RE reported in 21 ITR 353 (All HC) U.M. Cables Ltd vs ITO in ITA No. 2442/Kol/2007 rendered by Kolkata Tribunal The ld CITA taking into account the aforesaid submissions and by placing reliance on the aforesaid decisions deleted the disallowance made by the ld AO. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us…

D.C.I.T, Cir-2, Kolkata vs. M/S Pricewaterhouse Coopers Pvt, Kolkata

In the result, to sum up, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1521/KOL/2013[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jul 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Pandey, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…recruitment of staff is an allowable revenue expenditure u/s 37(1) of the Act. In support of which, the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions :- Assam Bengal Cement Co. Ltd vs CIT reported in 27 ITR 34 (SC) Empire Jute Co. Ltd vs CIT reported in 124 ITR 1 (SC) Hindustan Commercial Bank Ltd in RE reported in 21 ITR 353 (All HC) U.M. Cables Ltd vs ITO in ITA No. 2442/Kol/2007 rendered by Kolkata Tribunal The ld CITA taking into account the aforesaid submissions and by placing reliance on the aforesaid decisions deleted the disallowance made by the ld AO. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Spice Distribution Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Revenue’s Appeal and Assessee’s Cross

ITA 4281/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit, Vs. M/S Spice Distribution Ltd. Circle 9(1), Room No. 163, 60-D, Street No. C-5, Cr Building, New Delhi Sainik Farms, New Delhi - 62 (Pan: Aabch8481N) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Cross Objection No. 12/Del/2014 (In Ita No. 4281/Del/2013) Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Spice Distribution Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle 9(1), S Global Knowledge Park Room No. 163, Cr Bldg.,New Delhi 191 & 19B, Sector-125, Noida (Up) (Appellant) (Respondent) Department By : Smt. Anima Bernwal, Sr. Dr Respondent By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate & Sh. Rohit Garg, Advocate

For Respondent: SMT. ANIMA BERNWAL, SR. DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 DCIT, vs. M/S SPICE DISTRIBUTION LTD. CIRCLE 9(1), ROOM NO. 163, 60-D, STREET NO. C-5, CR BUILDING, NEW DELHI SAINIK FARMS, NEW DELHI - 62 (PAN: AABCH8481N) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) AND CROSS OBJECTION NO. 12/Del/2014 (IN ITA NO. 4281/DEL/2013) Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S SPICE DISTRIBUTION LTD., VS. DCIT, CIRCLE 9(1), S GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE PARK ROOM NO. 163, CR BLDG.,NEW DELHI 191 & 19B, SECTOR-125, NOIDA (UP) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Depa…

Saic India Pvt. Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 6464/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri N.K. Saini

For Appellant: S/Shri S.D. Kapila, R.R. MauryaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Jain, CIT DR
Section 40Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘I-1’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.6464/Del./2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) M/s. SAIC India Private Limited, vs. DCIT, (formerly known as Scicom Technologies Circle 7 (1), Private Limited), New Delhi. (Now known as Wipro Energy IT Services India Private Limited), C/o Wipro Energy IT Services India Private Limited, A – 67, Sector 57, NOIDA. (PAN : AAACI6192A) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : S/Shri S.D. Kapila, R.R. Maurya, Sanjay Kumar, Advocates and Shri Pankaj, CA REVENUE BY : Sh…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Hero Corporate Services Ltd., Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2050/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, M/S. Hero Corporate Services Ltd., Circle-12(1), E-1, Qutab Hotel Complex, Vs. New Delhi Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, New Delhi Pan:Aaach1277P (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Hero Corporate Services Ltd., Dcit, E-1, Qutab Hotel Complex, Circle-12(1), Vs. Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaach1277P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Prabhakant, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32Section 37

…ered by that party are on the periodic basis and are not of enduring nature. He submitted that merely there being an exclusivity clause it does not become capital expenditure. He relied on decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Empire Youth Company Ltd. 124 ITR 1 (SC). He further relied on several other decisions wherein brand promotion expenses, market development expenses are held to be revenue in nature. He further submitted that according to the rule of consistency also ld Assessing Officer has wrongly disallowed this expenditure. He referred to copy of the agreement as well as break up of such expendit…