Herbalife International India (P) Ltd. v. ACIT

27 SOT 344Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2009#24131 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2019.

Judgments citing Herbalife International India (P) Ltd. v. ACIT

M/S Shivhare Roadlines, Gwalior vs. Jt. C.I.T., Range-2, Gwalior

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 313/AGR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra31 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 139(1)Section 37(1)Section 43B

…vs Haridas Bhagath and Co. (P). Ltd. (1999) 240 ITR 169 (Mad) - DCIT vs Gujarat Small Industries Corporation (2004) 84 TTJ (Ahd) 22 - Herbalife International India (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT (2006) 103 TTJ (Del.) 78 - Amway India Enterprises vs DCIT, New Delhi (2009) 27 SOT 344 (Del.) 16 The Ld. D.R. has placed Reliance on the order of Ld. CIT(A) which upheld the addition done by the Ld. A.O. He reiterated the findings of the Ld. A.O. which were duly confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A), stating that the expenditure incurred should have been capitalised and cannot be debited as office repair and maintenance as claimed in the prof…

International Tobacco Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 2(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4902/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Blem/S. International Tobacco Co. Ltd., V. A.C.I.T, Circle – 2(2)(1) C/O Godfrey Phillips India Ltd., R.No. 545, 5Th Floor, V.K.K. Menon Marg (Sahar Road), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Chakala, Andheri (East) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai – 400 099 Pan: Aaaci 3492 H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish V. Shah & Shri Ms. Vidhi Doshi Department By : Shri Abi Rama Kartikeyan

For Appellant: Shri Manish V. Shah &For Respondent: Shri Abi Rama Kartikeyan

…t. Ltd. (306 ITR 182) (Del). Further, for treating the expenditure incurred on flooring, portion, wiring, plumbing, false ceiling, roofing, electrical wiring etc. Ld Counsel relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Amway India Enterprise vs. DOT (27 SOT 344) as well as Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Escorts Ltd. Vs. AOT (104 ITD 427) (Del). As per the Ld Counsel, the Delhi Bench of the ITAT decision in the case of DOT vs. P.U.R. Ployurethene Products Pvt Ltd. (64 TD 507) (Del) supports the claim of the 6 M/s. International Tobacco Co. Ltd., assessee. Further, Ld Counsel mentioned that in…

Hdfc Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated hereinabove whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 738/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm M/S. Hdfc Securities Ltd., Vs. Dcit – 4(1) Office Floor 8 Mumbai I-Think Techno Campus Alpha Building, B Kanjurmarg (E) Mumbai – 400 042 Pan/Gir No.Aaach8215R Appellant) Respondent) .. Dcit – 4(1) (1) Vs. M/S. Hdfc Securities Ltd., Mumbai Office Floor 8 I-Think Techno Campus Alpha Building, B Kanjurmarg (E) Mumbai – 400 042 Pan/Gir No. Aaach8215R Appellant) Respondent) .. Assessee By Ms. Krupa R. Gandhi / Shri Vidhi Doshi Revenue By Shri Rajat Mittal

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 194JSection 40

…s Ltd. (250 Taxman 182) (Bom)  CIT vs. Southern Roadways Ltd. (304 ITR 84(Mad)(HC)  Commissioner of Income-tax vs. MAC Charles (India) Lid. (60 taxmann.com 68) (Kar)  M/s. Sprang & Associates v. DCIT (ITA No. 31/Mum/2016)  Am way India Enterprises v. DCIT 27 SOT 344 (Del Trib) 16. Even decision with regard to treating the expenditure incurred in a lease property to be treated as revenue expenditure is also supported by the following judicial pronouncements. HDFC Securities Ltd.,  Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Hi Line Pens (P.) Ltd. (306 ITR 182) (Delhi HC)  CIT v. Anush Shares and Securities (P) Ltd., 62 m…