How many judgments cite Liquidators of Pursa Ltd. v. CIT?

37 judgments on BharatTax cite Liquidators of Pursa Ltd. v. CIT (25 ITR 265), spanning 2008 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Liquidators of Pursa Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 144B, Section 144C(13), Section 144C(5), Section 32, Section 54.

Liquidators of Pursa Ltd. v. CIT

25 ITR 265Supreme Court of India1954#3216 most cited

What is Liquidators of Pursa Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Expenses incurred during the pre-commencement period of a business are not deductible as business expenses or losses, although such expenses may be eligible for depreciation if they can be capitalized to assets. The interpretation of 'used for the purposes of the business' regarding machinery, plant, or buildings, and whether it includes passive as well as active user, was left open.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Liquidators of Pursa Ltd. v. CIT · 25 ITR 265 · pre-commencement expenses · business loss · depreciation · passive user · active user · Section 32

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144B Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 32 Section 54 Section 92B Section 92C(1)

Issues it is cited on

business company section 143(3)

Judgments citing Liquidators of Pursa Ltd. v. CIT

SHARP BUSINESS SYSTEM THR. FINANCE DIRECTOR MR. YOSHIHISA MIZUNO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III N.D

The appeals are hereby disposed of in terms of

C.A. No.-004072-004072 - 2014Supreme Court19 Dec 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA

Section 32(1)(ii)

…on-compete fee qua declared services, relevant portion of which reads thus: S.66E. Declared Services: … Explanation (II) … (e) agreeing to the obligation to refrain from an act, or to tolerate an act or a situation, or to do an act; … 14 (1954) 25 ITR 265 15 (1999) 239 ITR 775 42 14.12. In the context of the Act, more particularly Section 32 thereof, there is no similar provision which specifically lays down that a right which is not capable of being put to use like the right acquired on payment of non-compete fee is nonetheless eligible for depreciation. 14.13. Summing up his argum…

VERMEIREN INDIA REHAB PRIVATE LIMITED,TIRUPATI vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), TIRUPATI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1315/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Sri Sandeep Bagmar R, AdvocateFor Respondent: MS. U. Mini Chandran, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 32

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.1315/Hyd./2024 Assessment Year 2021-2022 Vermeiren India Rehab The DCIT, Circle-1(1), Private Limited, TIRUPATI PIN – 517 646. vs. TIRUPATI. State of Andhra Pradesh. PAN AADCV9010H (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Sri Sandeep Bagmar R, Advocate For Revenue : MS. U. Mini Chandran, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 02.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 19.11.2025 ORDER PER MANJUNATHA G. : The above appeal has been filed by the assessee against the Final Assessment…

BAJAJ CAPITAL LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 4(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2598/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar[Assessment Year : 2017-18] Bajaj Capital Ltd., Vs Acit, 97, Bajaj House, Nehru Place, Circle-4(2), South Delhi, New Delhi-110019. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacb1006E Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri R.K.Sharma, Adv. Respondent By Shri Kanv Bali, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 16.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 31.05.2024

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “A” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER & Dr.B.R.R.KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2017-18] Bajaj Capital Ltd., vs ACIT, 97, Bajaj House, Nehru Place, Circle-4(2), South Delhi, New Delhi-110019. New Delhi. PAN-AAACB1006E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri R.K.Sharma, Adv. Respondent by Shri Kanv Bali, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 16.04.2024 Date of Pronouncement 31.05.2024 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by Ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi d…

T vs. FINANCE & SERVICES LIMITED,CHENNAIVS.ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1174/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) –Ld. DR

Section 143(3)

…of a business loan foregone. The assets so received by the assessee would assume the character of same business assets as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Cocanada Radhasoami Bank Ltd. 57 ITR 306; Express Newspapers Ltd. 53 ITR 250; Liquidators of Pursa Ltd. 25 ITR 265; United Commercial Bank Ltd. 32 ITR 688. 3.3 In all these cases, it was held by Hon’ble Supreme Court that origin of the asset would determine the nature of the asset. If the asset came into being as a capital asset of the assessee, it continues to be capital asset irrespective of how the proceeds therefrom are utilized. Similarly, if the origin o…

ITO WARD 1, PUDUCHERRY vs. LES ATELIERS PONDICHERRY (P) LTD., PONDICHERRY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 1870/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. L.Shibi, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. G.Johnson, Addl. CIT

Section 14Section 32Section 32(1)

…was ready to use; relying on the decision of Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Premier Industries Limited Vs CIT 323 ITR 672; particularly in view of the judgement of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Liquidators of Pursa Ltd., Vs CIT [1954] 25 ITR 265 quoted by the High Court of Kerala in the case of CIT, Kottayam Vs Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd., [2018] 91 taxmann.com 14? 2. Whether The CIT(A) is right in relying on the decision of Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Premier Industries Limited Vs CIT 323 ITR 672 in the light of the Honourable Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Liquidato…

ITO WARD 1, PUDUCHERRY vs. LES ATELIERS PONDICHERRY (P) LTD., PONDICHERRY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 1869/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. L.Shibi, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. G.Johnson, Addl. CIT

Section 14Section 32Section 32(1)

LES ATELIERS DE PONDICHERRY PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO WARD 1, PUDUCHERRY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 1508/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. L.Shibi, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. G.Johnson, Addl. CIT

Section 14Section 32Section 32(1)

M/S LES ATELIERS DE PONDICHERRY PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO WARD 1, PUDUCHERRY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 1483/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. L.Shibi, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. G.Johnson, Addl. CIT

Section 14Section 32Section 32(1)

DCIT, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), INTERNATIOANL TAXATION, NEW DELHI vs. WESTERN UNION FINANCIAL SERVICES, GURGAON

The appeal of the Department stands dismissed

ITA 7211/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Section 9(1)

…the leading case of Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. CEPT [1954] 26 ITR 772 the Supreme Court explained that business connotes some real, substantive and systematic course of' activity or conduct with a set purpose. In Liquidators of Pursa Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 25 ITR 265 the Supreme Court held that underlying the expression "business" is the fundamental idea of continuous exercise of an activity. In Barendra Prasad Ray v. YTO [1981] 129 ITR 295 the Supreme Court again held that the word is of wide import and means an activity carried on continuously and systematically by a person by the application of his labour a…

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-4, NEW DELHI vs. GILLETTEE DIVERSIFIED OPERATIONS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Department stands dismissed

ITA 1141/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Section 32

…, the requirement of section 32 will stand satisfied, notwithstanding non-usage of the asset itself by the assessee.” 8.1 The Hon’ble Supreme Court considered the phrase 'use for the purpose of business' in the case of Liquidators of Pursa Ltd. v. CIT (1954) 25 ITR 265 (SC). The Hon’ble Apex Court pointed out that the critical words which are essentially constituent for the purpose of considering the claim of the Addl. CIT vs. M/s Gillettee Diversified Operations Pvt. Ltd. assessee was machinery or plant "used for the purposes of business, profession or vocation". The words "used for the purposes of business" o…

M/S MANTRI DEVELOPERS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 525/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Oct 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2014 – 15 M/S Mantri Developers Private Limited, #41, Mantri House, Dcit Circle – 4 (1) (2), Vittal Malya Road, Vs. Bengaluru Bangalore – 560001 Pan : Aaacg4009N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shree V. Srinivasan, Advocate Revenue By : Shree Muzaffar Hussain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.09.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2020 O R D E R Per Arun Kumar Garodia, A. M.: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee & The Same Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Cit (A) – 4 Bengaluru Dated 30.11.2017. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shree V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shree Muzaffar Hussain, CIT DR

Section 234Section 36

…levant para is reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference from page 2 of the case law Paper Book. 8. In that case, Hon’ble Karnataka High Court followed a judgment of Hon’ble apex court rendered in the case of Liquidators of Pursa Ltd. Vs. CIT as reported in 25 ITR 265 and reproduced a relevant para of that judgment of Page 9 of 15 Hon’ble apex court and for ready reference, we also reproduce that para from page 2 of the case law Paper Book. 9. Hence, it is seen that as per this Judgment of Hon’ble apex court, “the words “used for the purpose of business” mean used for the purpose of enabling the owner to carr…

SAHAYAK ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1874/HYD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Jun 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Deviassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sri A. SrinivasFor Respondent: Sri Sandeep Kumar Mehta, DR

Section 143(3)Section 32

…n, the assessee is not eligible for depreciation @ 80% as claimed by the assessee. The AO relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Page 2 of 6 ITA 1874 of 2018 Sahayak Engg P Ltd Hyderabad. Liquidators of Pursa Ltd vs. CIT (1954) 25 ITR 265 to disallow the claim of depreciation of Rs.54.00 lakhs. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT (A) who dismissed the assessee’s appeal and the assessee is in second appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal: “1) The order of the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) is contrary to the facts of the case and…

DDIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. WESTERN UNION FINANCIAL SERVICES INC., GURGAON

ITA 4532/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2011-12 Deputy Director Of Income Tax, M/S Western Union Circle 3(1)(1), Financial Services Inc., International Taxation, C/O Kpmg, Building No. New Delhi. Vs 10, 8Th Floor, Tower-B, Dlf Cyber City, Phase-Ii, Gurgaon-122002

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Rana, C.I.T. DRFor Respondent: Shri Tarandeep Singh, CA

Section 9

…ITA No. 4532/Del/2015 Assessment year : 2011-12 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 Deputy Director of Income Tax, M/s Western Union Circle 3(1)(1), Financial Services Inc., International Taxation, C/o KPMG, Building No. New Delhi. vs 10, 8th Floor, Tower-B, DLF Cyber City, Phase-II, Gurgaon-122002 Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri S.S. Rana, C.I.T. DR Department by: Shri Tarandeep Singh, CA Date of hearing : 31.07.2018 Date of pronouncement : 28.09.2018 O R D E…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GILLETTE DIVERSIFIED PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the department stands dismissed

ITA 5736/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Dinodia, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)

…, the requirement of section 32 will stand satisfied, notwithstanding non- usage of the asset itself by the assessee.” 8.1 The Hon’ble Supreme Court considered the phrase 'use for the purpose of business' in the case of liquidators of Pursa Ltd. v. CIT(1954) 25 ITR 265 (SC). The Hon’ble Apex Court pointed out Assessment year 2008-09 to 2010-11 that the critical words which are essentially constituent for the purpose of considering the claim of the assessee was machinery or plant "used for the purposes of business, profession or vocation". The words "used for the purposes of business" obviously means used for…

M/S. GILLETTE DIVERSIFIED OPERATIONS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the department stands dismissed

ITA 5677/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Dinodia, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)

…, the requirement of section 32 will stand satisfied, notwithstanding non- usage of the asset itself by the assessee.” 8.1 The Hon’ble Supreme Court considered the phrase 'use for the purpose of business' in the case of liquidators of Pursa Ltd. v. CIT(1954) 25 ITR 265 (SC). The Hon’ble Apex Court pointed out Assessment year 2008-09 to 2010-11 that the critical words which are essentially constituent for the purpose of considering the claim of the assessee was machinery or plant "used for the purposes of business, profession or vocation". The words "used for the purposes of business" obviously means used for…

M/S. GILLETTE DIVERSIFIED OPERATIONS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the department stands dismissed

ITA 5676/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Dinodia, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)

…, the requirement of section 32 will stand satisfied, notwithstanding non- usage of the asset itself by the assessee.” 8.1 The Hon’ble Supreme Court considered the phrase 'use for the purpose of business' in the case of liquidators of Pursa Ltd. v. CIT(1954) 25 ITR 265 (SC). The Hon’ble Apex Court pointed out Assessment year 2008-09 to 2010-11 that the critical words which are essentially constituent for the purpose of considering the claim of the assessee was machinery or plant "used for the purposes of business, profession or vocation". The words "used for the purposes of business" obviously means used for…

M/S. GILLETTE DIVERSIFIED OPERATIONS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the department stands dismissed

ITA 5675/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Dinodia, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)

…, the requirement of section 32 will stand satisfied, notwithstanding non- usage of the asset itself by the assessee.” 8.1 The Hon’ble Supreme Court considered the phrase 'use for the purpose of business' in the case of liquidators of Pursa Ltd. v. CIT(1954) 25 ITR 265 (SC). The Hon’ble Apex Court pointed out Assessment year 2008-09 to 2010-11 that the critical words which are essentially constituent for the purpose of considering the claim of the assessee was machinery or plant "used for the purposes of business, profession or vocation". The words "used for the purposes of business" obviously means used for…

MANGMO TEXTILES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 8(2)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 6076/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2018AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Manjunath PrabhuFor Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar-DR

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 32Section 48Section 50Section 50(2)

…block of assets which ceased to exist due to sale of asset and because no new asset was acquired by the assessee. He referred to the cases 6076/M/14 M/s. Magmo Textiles Equipment Pvt. Ltd. of Sabah Investment (P)Ltd. (60 SOT 173), Liquidators of Pursa Ltd. (25 ITR 265) and held that there was vast distinction between the asset acquired and asset likely to be acquired, that the cases relied upon by the assessee were based on different facts and that same were not relevant to decide the issue.Confirming the order of the AO,he dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 4.During the course of hearing before us,th…

M/S. BUSINESS INDIA TELEVISION INTERNATIONAL LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as the appeal of the assessee for the Assessment Year 2002-03 is dismissed; whereas the appeal of the assessee for the Assessment

ITA 1358/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O. P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Subhakant Sahu, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri S.R. Wadhwa, Adv

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 68

…(1994) 206 ITR 682/78 Taxman 240(Cal.) it has been observed by the Hon'ble High Court that where assets were not at all used due to lock out, depreciation cannot be allowed. Reliance is also placed on the decisions in Liquidators of Pursa Ltd. vs. CIT (1954) 25 ITR 265(SC); DCIT vs. Yellamma Dasappa Hospital (2007) 159 Taxman 58/290 ITR 353 (Kar.) and CIT vs. Suhrid Geigy Ltd. (1982) 133 ITR 884 (Guj.)/CIT vs. Jiwaji Rao Sugar Co. Ltd. (1969) 71 ITR 319 (MP) (app.)” 12 I.T.A. No.4371, 4419/Del/2010 & 1358/Del/2013 16. The brief facts qua the aforesaid ground are that assessee company has claimed depreciation o…

M/S. CHENNAI PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, both the assessee’s and the Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1858/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1858/Mds/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income Refinery House, Manali, Vs. Tax, Chennai – 600 068 Company Circle-I(3), [Pan: Aaacm 4392C] Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: 07.09.2017

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 28Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH ‘B’, CHENNAI "ी संजय अरोड़ा, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी जी. जॉज" माथन, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1858/Mds/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Asst. Commissioner of Income Refinery House, Manali, Vs. Tax, Chennai – 600 068 Company Circle-I(3), [PAN: AAACM 4392C] Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1980/Mds/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 Dy. Comm…

Showing 1–20 of 37 · Page 1 of 2