ITC v. Dy. CIT

86 ITD 135Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2003#18356 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2022.

Judgments citing ITC v. Dy. CIT

Goodrich Maritime Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asstt Commm of Income Tax, Circle 14(1) (2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are fully allowed

ITA 1874/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Sh. M. Subramanian, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Satyapal Kumar, Sr. DR

…by the AO is not meeting either of the method provided in the scheme of Capital Gains. 8. In addition to the above technical discussions, we have relied on following judicial pronouncements delivered by various co-ordinate benches of ITAT as under: (i) [2003] 86 ITD 135 (KOL.) (TM) IN THE ITAT KOLKATA BENCH ‘D’ (THIRD MEMBER) ITC Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Section 50 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Capital gains - Computation of, in case of depreciable assets - Assessment year 1994-95 - Commissioner (Appeals) sustained Assessing Officer’s orders holding that land and building being one composite unit…

Rosebys Interiors India Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circel-5, Ahmedabad

In the result, this Ground of appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 204/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Mukund Bakshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-D.R

Section 234ASection 271Section 37

…s resulted in any enduring benefit, so as to be treated as capital in nature. Thus, the advertisement expenses incurred by the assessee to create brand image were allowable as revenue expenditure. 13.3 Further, in various decisions viz. ITC v. Dy. CIT [2003] 86 ITD 135 (Kol.); Asstt. CIT v. Ashima Syntex Ltd. [2009] 117 ITD 1 (Ahd.) (SB); CIT v. Citi Financial Consumers Fin. Ltd. [2012] 20 taxmann.com 452/[2011] 335 ITR 29 (Delhi); and CIT v. Casio India Ltd. [2012] 20 taxmann.com 449/[2011] 335 ITR 196 (Delhi), theCourts/tribunals have held that advertisement expenditure/brand image expenditure are allowable as…

The DCIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Rosebys Interiors India Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, this Ground of appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 153/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Mukund Bakshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-D.R

Section 234ASection 271Section 37

The ACIT, Circle-5, Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Rosebys Interiors India Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 1047/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Mukund Bakshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-D.R

Section 271(1)(c)Section 37

…ss resulted in any enduring benefit, so as to be treated as capital in nature. Thus, the advertisement expenses incurred by the assessee to create brand image were allowable as revenue expenditure. 7.2 Further, in various decisions viz. ITC v. Dy. CIT [2003] 86 ITD 135 (Kol.); Asstt. CIT v. Ashima Syntex Ltd. [2009] 117 ITD 1 (Ahd.) (SB); CIT v. Citi Financial Consumers Fin. Ltd. [2012] 20 taxmann.com I.T.A. No. 1047/Ahd/2015 A.Y. 2009-10 Page No. 12 ACIT vs. M/s. Rosebys Interiors India Ltd. 452/[2011] 335 ITR 29 (Delhi); and CIT v. Casio India Ltd. [2012] 20 taxmann.com 449/[2011] 335 ITR 196 (Delhi), the Co…

Dani Shares & Stock P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 4(1)(2), Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2425/MUM/2012[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2015AY 2002-03

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosainआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2425/Mum/2012 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2002-03) M/S Dani Shares & Stocks बिधम/ Income Tax Officer, Pvt Ltd., Ward 4(1)(2), Vs. 12, Oricon House, Aayakar Bhavan, 14, K Dubash Marg, M K Road, Kala Ghoda, Fort, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aabcg1670N (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. अपीऱाथी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Sanjay Parikh प्रत्यथी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Mrt.Anu K Aggarwal सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing :3.12.2015 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement :3.12.2015 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran,Am: The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Challenging The Order Dated 11.01.2012 Passed By Ld Cit(A) For Assessment Year 2002-03 In Respect Of The Following Two Issues:- (A) Disallowance Of 10% Of Foreign Travel Expenses (B) Disallowance Of Medical Expenses Incurred On The Father Of The Director. 2. We Heard The Parties & Perused The Record. The Assessee Company Is A Member Of Bse, Engaged In The Business Of Share Trading, Broking & Investments. The First Issue Relates To The Disallowance Made

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay ParikhFor Respondent: Mrt.Anu K Aggarwal

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “डी” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI सर्वश्री बी.आर.बास्करन, ऱेखा सदस्य एवं संदीप गोसाई, न्याययक सदस्य के सभऺ BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2425/Mum/2012 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2002-03) M/s Dani Shares and Stocks बिधम/ Income Tax Officer, Pvt Ltd., Ward 4(1)(2), Vs. 12, Oricon House, Aayakar Bhavan, 14, K Dubash Marg, M K Road, Kala Ghoda, Fort, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN : AABCG1670N (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. अपी…