Industrial Investment Corp. ( 1997) 225 ITR 802 ( SC) Taparia Tools (2015) 327 ITR 605 CIT v. Sanco Trans Ltd.

284 ITR 51High Court2006#17593 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2018.

Judgments citing Industrial Investment Corp. ( 1997) 225 ITR 802 ( SC) Taparia Tools (2015) 327 ITR 605 CIT v. Sanco Trans Ltd.

RA CHEM PHARMA LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 65/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri R. Mohan Reddy
Section 143(3)

…n Radha Soami Satsang Vs CIT (1992) 193 ITR 321 ( SC) (e) The deferred revenue expenditure was held allowable in the following cases. Madras Industrial Investment Corp. ( 1997) 225 ITR 802 ( SC) Taparia Tools (2015) 327 ITR 605 CIT Vs Sanco Trans Ltd (2006) 284 ITR 51 ( Madras) 14. The CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee, directed the AO to allow the deferred revenue expenditure of Rs. 33,85,779/- by observing as under: 6. The information on record is carefully considered. The appellant incurred the expenses towards research and development as mentioned at Para (3).the claim made in P&L a…

DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. RA CHEM PHARMA LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 49/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri R. Mohan Reddy
Section 143(3)

…n Radha Soami Satsang Vs CIT (1992) 193 ITR 321 ( SC) (e) The deferred revenue expenditure was held allowable in the following cases. Madras Industrial Investment Corp. ( 1997) 225 ITR 802 ( SC) Taparia Tools (2015) 327 ITR 605 CIT Vs Sanco Trans Ltd (2006) 284 ITR 51 ( Madras) 14. The CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee, directed the AO to allow the deferred revenue expenditure of Rs. 33,85,779/- by observing as under: 6. The information on record is carefully considered. The appellant incurred the expenses towards research and development as mentioned at Para (3).the claim made in P&L a…

DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. RA CHEM PHARMA LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 48/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri R. Mohan Reddy
Section 143(3)

…n Radha Soami Satsang Vs CIT (1992) 193 ITR 321 ( SC) (e) The deferred revenue expenditure was held allowable in the following cases. Madras Industrial Investment Corp. ( 1997) 225 ITR 802 ( SC) Taparia Tools (2015) 327 ITR 605 CIT Vs Sanco Trans Ltd (2006) 284 ITR 51 ( Madras) 14. The CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee, directed the AO to allow the deferred revenue expenditure of Rs. 33,85,779/- by observing as under: 6. The information on record is carefully considered. The appellant incurred the expenses towards research and development as mentioned at Para (3).the claim made in P&L a…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. N.RAGHUNATH, CHENNAI

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

ITA 3224/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jun 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Mrs. Pavuna Sundari, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. T.N. Seetharaman, Advocate

…ted out that the expenditure made by the assessee to make the premises more useful and enhance its functional utility will not come under the purview of capital expenditure and by following the decision of this court reported in CIT v. Sanco Trans Ltd. [2006] 284 ITR 51 (Mad) the Commissioner (Appeals) found that those expenditures areto be allowed only as a revenue expenditure…” and also held that the assessee was only a lessee in respect of the premises in which it was setting up its office at Mumbai. The lease period was 30 months. The deduction was sought in respect of the expenses made towards designing and…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. N.RAGHUNATH, CHENNAI

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

ITA 3223/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Mrs. Pavuna Sundari, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. T.N. Seetharaman, Advocate

…ted out that the expenditure made by the assessee to make the premises more useful and enhance its functional utility will not come under the purview of capital expenditure and by following the decision of this court reported in CIT v. Sanco Trans Ltd. [2006] 284 ITR 51 (Mad) the Commissioner (Appeals) found that those expenditures areto be allowed only as a revenue expenditure…” and also held that the assessee was only a lessee in respect of the premises in which it was setting up its office at Mumbai. The lease period was 30 months. The deduction was sought in respect of the expenses made towards designing and…

Industrial Investment Corp. ( 1997) 225 ITR 802 ( SC) Taparia Tools (2015) 327 ITR 605 CIT v. Sanco Trans Ltd. (284 ITR 51) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax