Kolkata in ABN Amro Bank v. JCIT

97 ITD 1Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2005#8572 most cited

What is Kolkata in ABN Amro Bank v. JCIT authority for?

Expenses incurred wholly and exclusively by an Indian branch are not allocable to other branches or the head office, and Section 44C of the Act is not applicable in such cases.

13

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

ABN Amro Bank v. JCIT · section 44c · expatriate salaries · Indian branch expenses · allocation of expenses · wholly and exclusively · head office · other branches

Sections most often in play

Section 115JBSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 195Section 44CSection 9(1)(v)

Issues it is cited on

section 153a proceedingssection 44cexplanation to section 37section 158bdgoing concernprohibited by lawbusiness expediencysection 246section 90(2)right to receivesection 246asection 30

Judgments citing Kolkata in ABN Amro Bank v. JCIT

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. the Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi Ufj Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 3756/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanasstt. Yr.: 2006-07

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 44CSection 90

…n urged concerns the payment of salaries to the expatriates. In deciding this issue in favour of the Assessee, the ITAT has in the impugned common order referred to and relied upon the decision of its coordinate bench at Kolkata in ABN Amro Bank v. JCIT (2005)97 ITD 1(ITAT (Kol). Further the ITAT followed the decision of the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Emirates Commercial Bank Ltd. (2003) 262 ITR 55 (Bom.) where the Bombay High Court approved the view taken by the ITAT. The ITAT agreed that the expenses have been incurred wholly and exclusively by the Indian branch and therefore no part of these expenses can be a…

M/S. the Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi, Ufj Ltd., New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

ITA 3708/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 44CSection 90

…n urged concerns the payment of salaries to the expatriates. In deciding this issue in favour of the Assessee, the ITAT has in the impugned common order referred to and relied upon the decision of its coordinate bench at Kolkata in ABN Amro Bank v. JCIT (2005)97 ITD 1(ITAT (Kol). Further the ITAT followed the decision of the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Emirates Commercial Bank Ltd. (2003) 262 ITR 55 (Bom.) where the Bombay High Court approved the view taken by the ITAT. The ITAT agreed that the expenses have been incurred wholly and exclusively by the Indian branch and therefore no part of these expenses can be a…

Wilfred D'Souza, Mangaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangaluru

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 328/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…C) 77 ITR 751. • Assessee received sum from its client for investment in securities – Assessee advanced it to brokers who misappropriated it – Assessee refunded money to its client – Not operational loss of assessee. ABN Amro Bank N.V. Vs. ADIT (ITAT, Kol-TM) 97 ITD 1. • Agreement by assessee company with its directors providing for payment to each of them @ 1.66% of its total collection for a period of 25 years — For services rendered by directors, they were paid salary separately. Hence these payments were not for the purpose of business — Not allowable as deduction I.D.O.R.I. (P.) Ltd': Vs Deputy Commissioner…

Wilfred D'Souza, Mangaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangaluru

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 327/BANG/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…C) 77 ITR 751. • Assessee received sum from its client for investment in securities – Assessee advanced it to brokers who misappropriated it – Assessee refunded money to its client – Not operational loss of assessee. ABN Amro Bank N.V. Vs. ADIT (ITAT, Kol-TM) 97 ITD 1. • Agreement by assessee company with its directors providing for payment to each of them @ 1.66% of its total collection for a period of 25 years — For services rendered by directors, they were paid salary separately. Hence these payments were not for the purpose of business — Not allowable as deduction I.D.O.R.I. (P.) Ltd': Vs Deputy Commissioner…

Wilfred D'Souza, Mangaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangaluru

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 326/BANG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…C) 77 ITR 751. • Assessee received sum from its client for investment in securities – Assessee advanced it to brokers who misappropriated it – Assessee refunded money to its client – Not operational loss of assessee. ABN Amro Bank N.V. Vs. ADIT (ITAT, Kol-TM) 97 ITD 1. • Agreement by assessee company with its directors providing for payment to each of them @ 1.66% of its total collection for a period of 25 years — For services rendered by directors, they were paid salary separately. Hence these payments were not for the purpose of business — Not allowable as deduction I.D.O.R.I. (P.) Ltd': Vs Deputy Commissioner…

Wilfred D'Souza, Mangaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangaluru

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 325/BANG/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…C) 77 ITR 751. • Assessee received sum from its client for investment in securities – Assessee advanced it to brokers who misappropriated it – Assessee refunded money to its client – Not operational loss of assessee. ABN Amro Bank N.V. Vs. ADIT (ITAT, Kol-TM) 97 ITD 1. • Agreement by assessee company with its directors providing for payment to each of them @ 1.66% of its total collection for a period of 25 years — For services rendered by directors, they were paid salary separately. Hence these payments were not for the purpose of business — Not allowable as deduction I.D.O.R.I. (P.) Ltd': Vs Deputy Commissioner…

Wilfred D'Souza, Mangaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangaluru

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 324/BANG/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…C) 77 ITR 751. • Assessee received sum from its client for investment in securities – Assessee advanced it to brokers who misappropriated it – Assessee refunded money to its client – Not operational loss of assessee. ABN Amro Bank N.V. Vs. ADIT (ITAT, Kol-TM) 97 ITD 1. • Agreement by assessee company with its directors providing for payment to each of them @ 1.66% of its total collection for a period of 25 years — For services rendered by directors, they were paid salary separately. Hence these payments were not for the purpose of business — Not allowable as deduction I.D.O.R.I. (P.) Ltd': Vs Deputy Commissioner…

Wilfred D'Souza, Mangaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangaluru

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 323/BANG/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…C) 77 ITR 751. • Assessee received sum from its client for investment in securities – Assessee advanced it to brokers who misappropriated it – Assessee refunded money to its client – Not operational loss of assessee. ABN Amro Bank N.V. Vs. ADIT (ITAT, Kol-TM) 97 ITD 1. • Agreement by assessee company with its directors providing for payment to each of them @ 1.66% of its total collection for a period of 25 years — For services rendered by directors, they were paid salary separately. Hence these payments were not for the purpose of business — Not allowable as deduction I.D.O.R.I. (P.) Ltd': Vs Deputy Commissioner…

DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi vs. M/S the Bank of Tokyo Mistubishi Ufj Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 283/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Takkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Meera Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143Section 144CSection 2(17)Section 9

…n urged concerns the payment of salaries to the expatriates. In deciding this issue in favour of the Assessee, the ITAT has in the impugned common order referred to and relied upon the decision of its coordinate bench at Kolkata in ABN Amro Bank v. JCIT (2005)97 ITD 1(ITAT [Kol]). Further the ITAT followed the decision of the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Emirates Commercial Bank Ltd. (2003) 262 ITR 55 (Bom.) where the Bombay High Court approved the view taken by the ITAT. The ITAT agreed that the expenses have been incurred wholly and exclusively by the Indian branch and therefore no part of these expenses can be…

Mufg Bank Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT (International Taxation) Circle-2(2)(1), New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7895/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Mufg Bank Ltd, Vs. Acit (International Taxation), 5Th Floor, Worldmark 2, Asset 8, Circle-2(2)(1), Aerocity, Nh-8, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aabct3880D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar, AdvFor Respondent: Shr Surender Pal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 244ASection 37(1)Section 44C

…urged concerns the payment of salaries to the expatriates. In deciding this issue in favour of the Assessee, the ITAT has in the impugned common order referred to and relied upon the decision of its coordinate bench at Kolkata in ABN Amro Bank vs. JCIT (2005) 97 ITD 1 (ITAT [Kol.]). Further the ITAT followed the decision of the Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Emirates Commercial Bank Ltd. (2003) 262 ITR 55 (Bom.) where the Bombay High Court approved the view taken by the ITAT. The ITAT agreed that the expenses have been incurred wholly and exclusively by the Indian branch and therefore no part of theses expenses can…

M/S. the Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi Ufj Ltd., New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1162/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, V.P. & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, A.M. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 1162/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" The Bank Of Tokyo-Mitsubishi Ufj Ltd., Jeevan Vihar Building, 3, Parliament Street, New Delhi-110001. .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan-Aabct3880D Vs The Ddit (International Taxation), Circle-1(1), …………. ""यथ" / Respondent New Delhi अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By: Sh. Percy Pardiwala, Sr.Adv & Sh. Hiteh Chande, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By: Sh. H.K.Choudhary, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Sh. Percy Pardiwala, Sr.Adv &For Respondent: Sh. H.K.Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 44CSection 9(1)(v)

…urged concerns the payment of salaries to the expatriates. In deciding this issue in favour of the Assessee, the ITAT has in the impugned common order referred to and relied upon the decision of its coordinate bench at Kolkata in ABN Amro Bank v. JCIT (2005) 97 ITD 1 (ITAT [Kol]). Further the ITAT followed the decision of the Bombay High Court in CIT vs Emirates Commercial Bank Ltd. (2003) 262 ITR 55 (Bom.) where the Bombay High Court approved the view taken by the ITAT. The ITAT agreed that the expenses have been incurred wholly and exclusively by the Indian branch and therefore no part of these expenses can be…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. the Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi Ufj Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 3755/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 115JSection 44CSection 90

…n urged concerns the payment of salaries to the expatriates. In deciding this issue in favour of the Assessee, the ITAT has in the impugned common order referred to and relied upon the decision of its coordinate bench at Kolkata in ABN Amro Bank v. JCIT (2005)97 ITD 1(ITAT (Kol). Further the ITAT followed the decision of the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Emirates Commercial Bank Ltd. (2003) 262 ITR 55 (Bom.) where the Bombay High Court approved the view taken by the ITAT. The ITAT agreed that the expenses have been incurred wholly and exclusively by the Indian branch and therefore no part of these expenses can be a…

M/S. the Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi, Ufj Ltd., New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 3707/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 115JSection 44CSection 90

…n urged concerns the payment of salaries to the expatriates. In deciding this issue in favour of the Assessee, the ITAT has in the impugned common order referred to and relied upon the decision of its coordinate bench at Kolkata in ABN Amro Bank v. JCIT (2005)97 ITD 1(ITAT (Kol). Further the ITAT followed the decision of the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Emirates Commercial Bank Ltd. (2003) 262 ITR 55 (Bom.) where the Bombay High Court approved the view taken by the ITAT. The ITAT agreed that the expenses have been incurred wholly and exclusively by the Indian branch and therefore no part of these expenses can be a…

Kolkata in ABN Amro Bank v. JCIT (97 ITD 1) — Cited in 13 Judgments | BharatTax