Gwalior Road Lines v. CIT

234 ITR 230High Court1998#15384 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3A)Section 143(3B)Section 37(1)

Judgments citing Gwalior Road Lines v. CIT

Diosma Lifesciences Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 4(1) Thane, Thane

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4271/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Prabhash Shankardiosma Lifesciences Private V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward – Limited बनाम 4(1), Qureshi Mansion, Shop No. 77, C-Wing, Gokhale Road, Naupada, Harmony Mall Commercial Thane West, Thane - 400 Premises, Bhagat Singh Nagar 602, Maharashtra No.1, Link Road, Goregaon(West), Mumbai - 400 104, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aafcd0525R Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Aadesh Rai, Addl. CIT, (Virtually appeared)
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…n Pharmaceutical Industry (SSI) v. Central Board of Direct Taxes held that the P a g e | 16 A.Y. 2018-19 Diosma Lifesciences Private Limited impugned is in consonance with section 37(1) of the Act. It is relevant to refer to Gwalior Road Lines v. CIT, [1998] 234 ITR 230 (MP) wherein the hon’ble Court dealt with the amount illegally paid to the police authorities for running their business. The Court categorically held that after insertion of the Explanation to section 37(1) by the Finance Act, 1998, with effect from April 1, 1962, the assessee could not claim such payment as expended for commercial exigency and,…

M/S Ilc Industries Ltd., Hospet vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1009/BANG/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Zain Ahmed Khan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40aSection 80Section 80H

…egal or in accordance with public policy. 35.3 The issue with regard to the amount illegally paid to the police authorities for running their business came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in Gwalior Road Lines v. CIT [1998] 234 ITR 230 wherein it was held that after insertion of the Explanation to section 37(1) by the Finance Act, 1998, with effect from April 1, 1962, the assessee could not claim such payment as expended for commercial exigency and, therefore, the same was not an allowable deduction. 35.4 The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in CIT vs. Pt. Vishwanath Sharma (316 I…

M/S Ilc Industries Ltd., Hospet vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1008/BANG/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Zain Ahmed Khan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40aSection 80Section 80H

…egal or in accordance with public policy. 35.3 The issue with regard to the amount illegally paid to the police authorities for running their business came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in Gwalior Road Lines v. CIT [1998] 234 ITR 230 wherein it was held that after insertion of the Explanation to section 37(1) by the Finance Act, 1998, with effect from April 1, 1962, the assessee could not claim such payment as expended for commercial exigency and, therefore, the same was not an allowable deduction. 35.4 The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in CIT vs. Pt. Vishwanath Sharma (316 I…

M/S Ilc Industries Ltd., Hospet vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 767/BANG/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Zain Ahmed Khan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40aSection 80Section 80H

…egal or in accordance with public policy. 35.3 The issue with regard to the amount illegally paid to the police authorities for running their business came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in Gwalior Road Lines v. CIT [1998] 234 ITR 230 wherein it was held that after insertion of the Explanation to section 37(1) by the Finance Act, 1998, with effect from April 1, 1962, the assessee could not claim such payment as expended for commercial exigency and, therefore, the same was not an allowable deduction. 35.4 The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in CIT vs. Pt. Vishwanath Sharma (316 I…

Liva Healthcare Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 945/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 904/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) The Assistant Commissioner Liva Healthcare Limited बनाम/ Of Income Tax, Circle 6(3), Shivsagar Estate, V. Room No. 522, 5 Th Floor, ‘A’ Block, Aayakar Bhavan, M K Road, Dr. Annie Basant Road Mumbai-400020 Worli, Mumbai-400 018 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaafw0040N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri B.V.Jhaveri
Section 143(3)Section 37

…is distinguishable and does not help the assessee. 22. The issue with regard to the amount illegally paid to the police authorities for running their business came up for consideration before the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Gwalior Road Lines v. CIT [1998] 234 ITR 230 wherein it was held that after insertion of the Explanation to section 37(1) by the Finance Act, 1998, with effect from April 1, 1962, the assessee could not claim such payment as expended for commercial exigency and, therefore, the same was not an allowable deduction. 23. The Allahabad High Court in Pt. Vishwanath Sharma's case (supra) while co…

ACIT Cir 6(3), Mumbai vs. Liva Healthcare Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 904/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 904/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) The Assistant Commissioner Liva Healthcare Limited बनाम/ Of Income Tax, Circle 6(3), Shivsagar Estate, V. Room No. 522, 5 Th Floor, ‘A’ Block, Aayakar Bhavan, M K Road, Dr. Annie Basant Road Mumbai-400020 Worli, Mumbai-400 018 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaafw0040N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri B.V.Jhaveri
Section 143(3)Section 37

…is distinguishable and does not help the assessee. 22. The issue with regard to the amount illegally paid to the police authorities for running their business came up for consideration before the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Gwalior Road Lines v. CIT [1998] 234 ITR 230 wherein it was held that after insertion of the Explanation to section 37(1) by the Finance Act, 1998, with effect from April 1, 1962, the assessee could not claim such payment as expended for commercial exigency and, therefore, the same was not an allowable deduction. 23. The Allahabad High Court in Pt. Vishwanath Sharma's case (supra) while co…

Gwalior Road Lines v. CIT (234 ITR 230) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax