Kostub Investment Ltd. v. CIT

365 ITR 436High Court2014#7430 most cited

What is Kostub Investment Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Expenditure incurred out of commercial expediency, even if related to a promoter or their family, is an allowable business deduction. This applies to expenses for higher education undertaken by an employee or a director for the benefit of the company's business.

15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2023.

Also referred to as

Kostub Investment Ltd v CIT · 365 ITR 436 · business expenditure · commercial expediency · higher education · employee training · director's education · promoter's family

Read the full judgment

Judgments citing Kostub Investment Ltd. v. CIT

Rishi Chemical Works Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 542/KOL/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘‘बी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी संजय शमा" "या"यक सद"य के सम" [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member] I.T.A. Nos. 541 & 542/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Rishi Chemical Works Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata (PAN: AABCR 4746 C) Appellant / (अपीलाथ") Respondent / ( !यथ") 21.12.2022 Date of Hearing / सुनवाई क$ "त&थ Date of Pronouncement/ 17.01.2023 आदेश उ)घोषणा क$ "त&थ For the Appellant/ Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate "नधा"/रती क$ ओर से…

Rishi Chemical Works Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 541/KOL/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘‘बी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी संजय शमा" "या"यक सद"य के सम" [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member] I.T.A. Nos. 541 & 542/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Rishi Chemical Works Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata (PAN: AABCR 4746 C) Appellant / (अपीलाथ") Respondent / ( !यथ") 21.12.2022 Date of Hearing / सुनवाई क$ "त&थ Date of Pronouncement/ 17.01.2023 आदेश उ)घोषणा क$ "त&थ For the Appellant/ Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate "नधा"/रती क$ ओर से…

Snehal Mahendrakumar Shah, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 385/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt.Suchitra Kambleassessment Year :2015-16 Snehal Mahendrakumar Shah Vs. Dcit, Cir.4(2) 1-B, Avantika Society Ahmedabad. Nr.Naranpura Railway Crossing Opp: Sbi, Narangpura Ahmedabad Pan : Acps 5850 L अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/09/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Guptapresent Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals)-4, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld.Cit(A) Under Section 250(6) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act" For Short) Dated 7.1.2019 Pertaining To The Asst.Year 2015-16. 2. Sole Issue In The Present Appeals Relates To Claim Of Education Expenses Of The Daughter Of The Assessee, Which Was Denied By The Authorities Below Holding The Same To Be Personal In Nature & Alternatively Capital In Nature.

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR
Section 250(6)

…urred for the purpose of the business of the assessee, which are as under: i) Mallige Medican Centre, 375 ITR 522 (Kar) ii) Aswathanarayan & Eswara, 129 taxmann.com 111(Mad) iii) Aswathanarayana & Eswara, 97 taxamnn.com 572(Mad) 6 iv) Kostub Investment Ltd., 365 ITR 436 (Del) v) UP Asbestos Ltd., 260 CTR 194 (All) vi) Harish Narinder Salve, 178 ITD 80 (ITAT-Del) 10. Reference was also made to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Natco Exports P.Ltd. VIT, ITa No.150/2012 for the above proposition. 11. The ld.DR relied on orders of the authorities below contending that despite whatever has bee…

Mesers Hotel Grand Mumtaz, Srinagar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Srinagar

In the result, appeal of the assessee ITA441/Asr/2018 is allowed

ITA 441/ASR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 441/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s Hotel Grand Mumtaz, M.A. Vs. ACIT, Circle-3 Road, Srinagar, Kashmir. Srinagar. [PAN:AAEFH1182J] (Respendent) (Appellant) Appellant by Sh. None. (Written Submission) Respondent by Sh.S.M. Surendranath, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing 22.08.2022 Date of Pronouncement 25 .08.2022 ORDER Per:Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-…

Soujanya Color Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle-3, Mumbai

ITA 2041/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2041/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Ms. Hiral D. Sejpal, ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2041/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) DCIT Circle-3 Soujanya Color Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Room No. 2, B ‘Wing, 6th C-35/36, TTC Industrial floor, Ashar IT Park, Area, MIDC Pawane, Vs. Road, No. L6 Z, Wagle Navi Mumbai-400 705 Estate , Thane-400 604 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN No. AAMCS0859G (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant by : Ms. Hiral D. Sejpal, AR प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri V. Vinod Kumar, DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 13.01.2020…

M/S Jbm Industries Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax New Delhi

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/520/2019HC Delhi30 Sept 2019

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

Section 37

…ompany since she had gone abroad to obtain the degree of M.B.A from Boston University, USA. 9. In support of his submission, Mr. Santhanam has placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Kostub Investment Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, (2014) 365 ITR 436 (Delhi). In this case, an employee of the company, who had already served for about a year, had been sent to obtain higher education. This Court distinguished Kostub Investment Ltd. (supra) from Natco Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, (2012) 345 ITR 188 (Delhi), and held in favour of the assessee that the said expenditure was allowable. 10. Per co…

M/S Jbm Industries Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax New Delhi

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/519/2019HC Delhi30 Sept 2019

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

Section 37

…ompany since she had gone abroad to obtain the degree of M.B.A from Boston University, USA. 9. In support of his submission, Mr. Santhanam has placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Kostub Investment Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, (2014) 365 ITR 436 (Delhi). In this case, an employee of the company, who had already served for about a year, had been sent to obtain higher education. This Court distinguished Kostub Investment Ltd. (supra) from Natco Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, (2012) 345 ITR 188 (Delhi), and held in favour of the assessee that the said expenditure was allowable. 10. Per co…

M/S Jbm Industries Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax New Delhi

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/525/2019HC Delhi30 Sept 2019

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

Section 37

…ompany since she had gone abroad to obtain the degree of M.B.A from Boston University, USA. 9. In support of his submission, Mr. Santhanam has placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Kostub Investment Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, (2014) 365 ITR 436 (Delhi). In this case, an employee of the company, who had already served for about a year, had been sent to obtain higher education. This Court distinguished Kostub Investment Ltd. (supra) from Natco Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, (2012) 345 ITR 188 (Delhi), and held in favour of the assessee that the said expenditure was allowable. 10. Per co…

M/S Bansal Alloys & Metals Pvt. Ltd., Mandi Gobindgarh vs. ACIT, Mandi Gobindgarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 526/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R.Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar &For Respondent: Shri Yoginder Mittal,Addl. CIT
Section 250(6)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCHES ‘A, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr. B.R.R.KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s Bansal Alloys & Metals P.Ltd., Vs The ACIT, G.T.Road, Mandi Gobindgarh. Circle, PAN : AACB7472L Mandi Gobindgarh. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Ashwani Kumar & Ms. Kanika Gupta, C.A. Respondent by : Shri Yoginder Mittal,Addl. CIT Date of hearing : 12.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 03.10.2018 ORDER PER DIVA SINGH The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order 05.03.2018 of CI…

Geo Connect Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/797/2017HC Delhi21 May 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

Section 254(2)Section 37

…a specified period. This expenditure was disallowed concurrently by all the authorities – the A.O., and the lower appellate authorities including the ITAT. The assessee has relied upon the judgment of this Court in Kostub Investment Ltd. vs. CIT 365 ITR 436 (Del) as well as the decisions of other High Courts (CIT vs. UP Asbestos Ltd. 260 CTR 194 (all); CIT vs. Kohinoor Paper Product 226 ITR 220 (MP); CIT vs. Naidunia News and Networking (P) Ltd. 210 Taxman 73 (MP); CIT vs. Ras Information Technologies (P) Ltd. 238 CTR 76 (Kar) and Mallige Medical Centre (P) Ltd. vs. JCIT 375 ITR 522 (Kar). I…

Geo Connect Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/799/2017HC Delhi21 May 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

Section 254(2)Section 37

…a specified period. This expenditure was disallowed concurrently by all the authorities – the A.O., and the lower appellate authorities including the ITAT. The assessee has relied upon the judgment of this Court in Kostub Investment Ltd. vs. CIT 365 ITR 436 (Del) as well as the decisions of other High Courts (CIT vs. UP Asbestos Ltd. 260 CTR 194 (all); CIT vs. Kohinoor Paper Product 226 ITR 220 (MP); CIT vs. Naidunia News and Networking (P) Ltd. 210 Taxman 73 (MP); CIT vs. Ras Information Technologies (P) Ltd. 238 CTR 76 (Kar) and Mallige Medical Centre (P) Ltd. vs. JCIT 375 ITR 522 (Kar). I…

Geo Connect Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/865/2017HC Delhi21 May 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

Section 254(2)Section 37

…a specified period. This expenditure was disallowed concurrently by all the authorities – the A.O., and the lower appellate authorities including the ITAT. The assessee has relied upon the judgment of this Court in Kostub Investment Ltd. vs. CIT 365 ITR 436 (Del) as well as the decisions of other High Courts (CIT vs. UP Asbestos Ltd. 260 CTR 194 (all); CIT vs. Kohinoor Paper Product 226 ITR 220 (MP); CIT vs. Naidunia News and Networking (P) Ltd. 210 Taxman 73 (MP); CIT vs. Ras Information Technologies (P) Ltd. 238 CTR 76 (Kar) and Mallige Medical Centre (P) Ltd. vs. JCIT 375 ITR 522 (Kar). I…

M/S. Appl Industries Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3649/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

…allowed to the education expenses of Aalekh Jain which were deleted by the CIT (A) in para No. 5 of the appeal order dated 29/09/2011 in appeal No. 108/ 2010–11. This decision has also been incorporated by the ld. CIT ( A) in his order . He also relied on the 365 ITR 436. 5. The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the Lower authorities. 6. We have heard the submissions of both the sides and have gone through the entire material on record and we find no justification to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue. The ld. CIT(A) has observed as under : “From a perusal of the appeal order for the AY 2009-1…

Hero Motocorp Limited, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1545/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. NC Sawain, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…for the purpose of business out of commercial expediency, the same shall be an allowable business deduction, notwithstanding that such expenditure was incurred in relation to the promoter/ family of the promoter of the company:  Kostub Investment Ltd v CIT: 365 ITR 436 (Delhi)  CIT v Naidunia News and Networking (P.) Ltd: 210 Taxman 73 (Madhya Pradesh) Further submitted that the impugned expenditure was not incurred for the first time during the assessment year under consideration and the same has been incurred year after year in earlier assessment years as well. In the earlier assessment years, the aforesaid…

T.V.Sundaram Iyengar & Sons Limited, Madurai vs. DCIT, Madurai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2777/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2777/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh.S.A. BalasubramanyanFor Respondent: Sh. P. Radhakrishnan, JCIT
Section 14A

…cation, the company could not have grown to this level. The Ld.counsel submitted that the entire expenditure was only for the purpose of business. The Ld.counsel placed reliance on the judgment of the Delhi High Court in Kostub Investment Ltd. v. CIT (2014 365 ITR 436. According to the Ld. counsel, the judgments of Madras High Court in CIT v. RKKR Steels P. Ltd. (2002) 258 ITR 306 and in K. Subramaniam Bros v. CIT 250 ITR 769 are not applicable to the facts of the case. 4. On the contrary, Sh. P. Radhakrishnan, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that admittedly the children of the Directors we…

Kostub Investment Ltd. v. CIT (365 ITR 436) — Cited in 15 Judgments | BharatTax