HEDE Consultancy (P.) Ltd. v. CIT

DCIT-14(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. MICHAEL PAGE INTERNATIONAL RECRUITMENT P LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, Appeal and CO filed by the Revenue and Assessee respectively, stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year: 2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Michael Page Income Tax -14(1)(1), International Room No.432, 4Th Floor, Recruitment Pvt. Ltd., 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. M.K. Road, 2 North Avenue Maker Mumbai - 400020 Maxity, Bandra (East) Mumbai – 400 051 Pan: Aagcm8425N (Appellant) (Respondent)

…for leasehold improvements should be considered as an allowable expenditure. The assessee also relied on various judgments including by the Jurisdictional Hon’ble High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Hede Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. and another (258 ITR 380) (Bom-HC) wherein the Hon’ble High Court has allowed the expenses incurred on interior decoration which resulted in replacement existing roof of bathroom etc., as expenditure revenue in nature. 3. The AO, though considered the claim and the judgments relied upon by the assessee, however, not being satisfied, ultimately disallowed the amount of R…

M/S. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT (IT)1(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blestandard Chartered Bank V. Acit – Range-1(3) Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3Rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Adit (It)– 2(3) V. Standard Chartered Bank Room No. 120, 1St Floor Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3Rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri P.J. Pardiwala & Assessee Represented By : Shri Fenil Bhatt Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash Department Represented By :

…tion - 126 ITR 645 (P&H) (x). Girdhari Dass & Sons - 105 ITR 339 (All) (xi). Assam Bengal Cement Co Ltd. - 27 ITR 34 (SC) (xii). Ooty Dasaprakash - 237 ITR 902 (Mad) (xiii). B and A Plantation and Industries - 242 ITR 22 (Gau) (xiv). HEDE Consultancy P Ltd. - 258 ITR 380 (Bom) Software: (xv). CIT vs. Raychem RPG Ltd. 346 ITR 138 (Bom) 12. Ld.DR relied on the orders of the Assessing Officer. 13. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observed that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Auto Services Pvt. Ltd., (supra) on similar issue adjudicated in favour of the assessee. While…

TATA CONSULTING ENGINEERING LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE ADDL. CIT, RANGE-7(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bletata Consulting Engineering Ltd., V. Addl. Cit-7(3) Empire Tower, Cloud City Campus Room No. 614, 6Th Floor Thane-Belapur Road, Airoli Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road New Mumbai - 400708 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aabct0772E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ketan Ved Ms. Urvi Mehta Department By : Shri B.K. Bagchi

…The learned representative of the assessee has argued that the expenditure on lease hold is revenue in nature and also relied upon the law settled in CIT Vs. Talathi & Panthaki Associates (P.) Ltd. (343 ITR 309) (Bom.) and CIT Vs. HEDE Consultancy (P.) Ltd. (258 ITR 380) (Bom.) and CIT Vs. Hi Line Pens (P.) Ltd. (175 Taxman 132) (Delhi) and Urban Infrastructure Venture Capital Ltd. Vs. DCIT (48 taxmann.com 156) (ITAT Mumbai) and Peri India (P.) Ltd. Vs. JCIT (71 taxmann.com 79)(ITAT Mumbai). On the other hand Ld representative of the department has placed reliance upon the order passed by the CIT(A) in question.…

DCIT 2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. TAL MANUFACTURING SOLUTIONS LTD, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

…in assessee’s own case for the Asst Year 2009-10 had been deleted by this Tribunal in ITA Nos. 3847 & 4083/Mum/2014 dated 28/12/2017 by placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs HEDE Consultancy Ltd reportedin 258 ITR 380 (Bom). In view of the aforesaid observations and also by placing reliance on the judicial precedent relied upon hereinabove, we direct the ld AO to delete the disallowance made towards repairs to buildings at Rs 47,45,546/- . Though the correct figure is Rs 17,76,404/-, since the ld AO had already disallowed Rs 47,45,546/-, this specific directio…

PROSALES FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 10 (1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6614/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Prosales Financial Services बिधम/ Ito 10(1)(3) Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Vs. 158, Dani Corporate Park, 1St Road, Mumbai-400020. Floor, Cst Road, Kalina, Santacruze (E), Mumbai. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaecp2576K (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rashmikant C. Modi & Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke Revenue By: Shri Somnath M. Wajale (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 08/01/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/01/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 24.08.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 22, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2009- 10. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

…eliance is placed on CIT Vs. Andavar Calendering Mills - 210 ITR 815 (Mad.), Haridas Bhagat & Co. - 240 ITR 169 (Mad.), Kisenchand Chellaram India Pvt. Ltd. - 130 ITR 385 (Mad.). The Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hede Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. - (2002) 258 ITR 380 has held that expenditure incurred on converting godown premises taken by assessee on hire into office premises was revenue expenditure, since the assets created by spending the amount did not belong to the assessee but the assessee got business advantage by using modern business premises and hence allowable as a revenue expenditure u/s.37(1) of…

ADDL CIT -- 10(1), MUMBAI vs. AGC NETWORK LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS AVAYA GLOBAL CONNECT LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

…assessee but holds lease hold rights, however, it will only apply if the expenditure is capital in nature. In support of his contention, the learned Authorised Representative relied upon the following decisions:– i) CIT v/s HEDE Consultancy Pvt. Ltd., [2002] 258 ITR 380 (Bom.); ii) CIT v/s Talathi and Panthaky Associated Pvt. Ltd., [2012] 343 ITR 309 (Bom.); and iii) Urban Infrastructure Venture Capital Ltd. v/s DCIT, [2014] 150 ITD 502 (Mum.). 18. He submitted, the decision of the Tribunal in Urban Infrastructure Venture Capital Ltd. (supra) was upheld by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court while dismissing…

ITO 3(3)(3), MUMBAI vs. THEBROMA FOODS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.765/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-13) बिाम/ Ito 3(3)(3) M/S. Theobroma Foods R.No. 672, Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 101, Jamuna Sagar, V. M.K. Road, 59/60, Shahid Bhagat New Marine Lines, Singh Road, Mumbai-400020 Colaba, Mumbai 400005 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aacct0588K (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri. D.G Pansari (Dr) Assessee By: Shri. Rohan Deshpande सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 28.01.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.04.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Revenue, Being Ita No. 765/Mum/2017, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 28.10.2016 In Appeal No. Cit(A)-8/It-344/15-16, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called ―The Cit(A)‖), For Assessment Year(Ay) 2012-13, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From The Assessment Order Dated 31.03.2015 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called ―The Ao‖) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ―The Act‖) For Ay 2012-13. I.T.A. No.765/Mum/2017

…Service (P) Ltd. 233 ITR 468 (SC) which held that expenditure incurred on renovation of a leasehold building has to be treated as revenue in nature. The appellant also relied on jurisdictional High Court decisions in CIT v. Hede Consultancy Pvt. Ltd., [(2002) 258 ITR 380 (Bom)], and CIT v. Talathi and Panthaky Associated Pvt. Ltd., [(2012) 343 ITR 309 (Bom)]. 5.2.5 The relevant part of the last mentioned order is as below: "7. The issue as to whether expenditure incurred by an assessee is of a revenue or capital nature has fallen for determination in various contexts, but in all decisions particularly of the Supr…

ITO 21(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. PRITAMLAL J DOSHI, MUMBAI

The appeal is disposed of in the above terms

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2010-11

…allowable as revenue expenditure. This is no longer res integra in view of the decisions of this Court in CIT v. Talathi and Panthaky Associated (P.) Ltd. [2012] 343 ITR 309/205 Taxman 309/18 taxmann.com 367 (Bom.) and CIT v. Hede Consultancy (P.) Ltd. [2002] 258 ITR 380/[2003] 127 Taxman 597 (Bom.). In the above cases, it is submitted that on an identical factual situation the expenditure on renovation of tenanted premises has been allowed as revenue expenditure under Section 37 of the Act; (b) The expenditure of Rs. 31.32 lakhs incurred on renovation of the said premises being repairs is allowable under Sectio…

PRITAMLAL J DOSHI,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 21(2)(2), MUMBAI

The appeal is disposed of in the above terms

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2010-11

…allowable as revenue expenditure. This is no longer res integra in view of the decisions of this Court in CIT v. Talathi and Panthaky Associated (P.) Ltd. [2012] 343 ITR 309/205 Taxman 309/18 taxmann.com 367 (Bom.) and CIT v. Hede Consultancy (P.) Ltd. [2002] 258 ITR 380/[2003] 127 Taxman 597 (Bom.). In the above cases, it is submitted that on an identical factual situation the expenditure on renovation of tenanted premises has been allowed as revenue expenditure under Section 37 of the Act; (b) The expenditure of Rs. 31.32 lakhs incurred on renovation of the said premises being repairs is allowable under Sectio…

NAGPUR POWER & INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 3(2), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…by the company specifically in view of the law A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12 settled by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs/ Talathi and Panthaky Associated Pvt. Ltd. reported in 343 ITR 309 and CIT Vs. Hede Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. and another reported in 258 ITR 380 and Hon’ble ITAT, Chandigarh bench in the case of M/s. IDS Infotech Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle 4(1), Chandigarh in ITA No.52/Chd/2016 for A.Y.2009-10 dated 24.05.2016. However, on the other hand the learned departmental representative has strongly relied upon the order passed by the CIT(A) in question. 5. On appraisal of the facts and circumstances o…

NAGPUR POWER & INDUSTRIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-3(2), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…by the company specifically in view of the law A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12 settled by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs/ Talathi and Panthaky Associated Pvt. Ltd. reported in 343 ITR 309 and CIT Vs. Hede Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. and another reported in 258 ITR 380 and Hon’ble ITAT, Chandigarh bench in the case of M/s. IDS Infotech Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle 4(1), Chandigarh in ITA No.52/Chd/2016 for A.Y.2009-10 dated 24.05.2016. However, on the other hand the learned departmental representative has strongly relied upon the order passed by the CIT(A) in question. 5. On appraisal of the facts and circumstances o…