Maruti Insurance Broking Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

435 ITR 34High Court2021#15856 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 10B(8)Section 139(1)Section 139(3)Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 254 Section 37(1)Section 80

Read the full judgment

Judgments citing Maruti Insurance Broking Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

DCIT Central Circle-28, New Delhi vs. Jindal Itf Limited, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1777/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…[A.Y. 2013-14] The Dy. CI.T. Vs. M/s Jindal ITF Limited cannot be the basis of treating whether the expenses are to be allowed or disallowed relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Maruti Insurance Broking (P.) Ltd. 435 ITR 34 (Del.). The ld. AR also relied on the case of Bharti Land Ltd. vs ACIT, Circle-4(2) New Delhi, the ITAT 'A' Bench (ITA No. 195/Del/2020 for A.Y 2016-17). 11. The ld. AR further submitted that the Assessing Officer himself in the immediate previous years has allowed the claim of expenditure including interest expenditure in scrutiny assessment…

Hike Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-11(2), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 4314/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmaita No. 4313/Del/2019, A.Y. 2013-14 Ita No. 4314/Del/2019, A.Y. 2014-15

Section 28Section 30Section 32

…is long gestation period for tech start-up is duly supported by contemporaneous data. It is not necessary to earn income for allowance of expenditure has been duly upheld by Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Maruti Insurance Broking (P.) Ltd. 435 ITR 34 (Del.) as under :- ITA No. 4313 & 4314/Del/2019 6 “It was held in this case that business does not conform to ‘cold start’ doctrine and most cases, there was gap between time a person or entity is ready to do business and when business is conducted and during this period, expenses are incurred towards keeping business primed up and these expens…

Hike Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-11(2), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 4313/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmaita No. 4313/Del/2019, A.Y. 2013-14 Ita No. 4314/Del/2019, A.Y. 2014-15

Section 28Section 30Section 32

Hike Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi vs. Prcit-6, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2906/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Anil Bhalla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Gupta, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28

…rt in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 243 ITR 83 and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. 332 ITR 167. He further submitted additional case laws in the case of Maruti Insurance Broking Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 435 ITR 34 with regard to allowability of expenses after setting up of business. 8. During the course of hearing, a query was raised to the ld. counsel of the assessee regarding any date of commencement of software platform. In this regard, ld. counsel has submitted as under :- “1.1 This is not a conventional technology purchase for purposes of manufactu…

ITO Corporate Ward 1(3), Chennai vs. C.S.Housing Property Development Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

Accordingly, the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is confirmed and the appeal of the Revenue in I.T.A No.2427/Chny/2018 is dismissed

ITA 2427/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Mr. R. Sivaraman, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 35D

…Tax Vs. Dhoomketu Builder and Development P. Limited (2014) 368 ITR 680 (Del.); v. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Axis Private Equity Limited (Bombay High Court), 391 ITR 370; vi. Maruti Insurance Broking Private Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, 435 ITR 34. - 9 - | P a g e I.T.A No.2427/Chny/2018 15. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) after considering the relevant facts has rightly held that the expenses claimed by the Assessee is allowable u/s.37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Thus, we do not find any merit in the case of the Revenue and accordingly, the order of the learned Commissioner o…

ACIT, Circle-30(1), New Delhi vs. Msk (Jv), New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7232/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, C. A.; &For Respondent: Shri M. N. Shete, Sr. D.R

Section 3

…ur Wc & C India P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2014) 368 ITR 692 (Del.); (iv) CIT Vs. Dhoomketu Builder And Development P Ltd. (2014) 368 ITR 680 (Del.); (v) CIT Vs. Axis Pvt. Equity Limited (Bombay High Court) 391 ITR 370; (vi) Maruti Insurance Broking Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT 435 ITR 34. 7. Thus, we do not find any merit in the case of the revenue and accordingly, the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals) is confirmed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on : 07/12/2021. ( DR. B.R.R. KUMAR ) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 07/12/2021. *MEHTA*…