Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd.: (61 TTJ 656, Delhi) 5. Comfort Living Hotels (P) Ltd. v. CIT

363 ITR 182High Court2014#10824 most cited
10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2022.

Judgments citing Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd.: (61 TTJ 656, Delhi) 5. Comfort Living Hotels (P) Ltd. v. CIT

NANU RESORTS PVT. LTD.,MARGAO vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1., MARGAO

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 394/PAN/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji30 Aug 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.393 & 394/Pan/2018 Assessment Years: 2004-05 & 2005-06 Nanu Resorts Pvt. Acit, Circle-1, Ltd. Margao Nanu House, Varde Vs. Valaulikar Road, Margao- Goa Pan: Aaacn 7114 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Two Appeals By The Assessee Arising Out Of The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Panaji-1, Panaji In Ita Nos.305 & 306/Mrg/2014-15 Dated 02.07.2018 Against The Assessment Order Passed By Dcit, Circle-1, Margao-Goa U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Dated 25.10.2011 For Both A.Y. 2004-05 & A.Y. 2005-06. 2. The Issue Involved In Both These Appeals Are Common Which Relates To Treatment Of Expenditure Incurred By The Assessee For Replacement Of Assets & Renovation As Revenue Or Capital In Nature. For Ay 2004-05, The Quantum Of Expenditure In Dispute Is Of Rs. 10,81,672/- & For Ay 2005-06 It Is Rs. 2,06,379/-. A.Ys. 2004-05 & 2005-06 3. Before Us, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Represented The Department.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…Hon’ble Court dealt with several decisions including the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT vs. Mac Charles (India) Ltd. [2015] 233 Taxman 177, Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Comfort Living Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 182, Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. CAMA Hotels Ltd. [2015] 235 Taxman 206 and also considered the decisions of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ballimal Naval Kishore [1997] 221 ITR 414 and CIT vs. Saravana Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. [2007] 293 ITR 201. The Hon’ble Court held that the expenditure A.Ys. 2004-05 & 2005-06 incurred by…

NANU RESORTS PVT. LTD.,MARGAO vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1., MARGAO

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 393/PAN/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji30 Aug 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.393 & 394/Pan/2018 Assessment Years: 2004-05 & 2005-06 Nanu Resorts Pvt. Acit, Circle-1, Ltd. Margao Nanu House, Varde Vs. Valaulikar Road, Margao- Goa Pan: Aaacn 7114 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Two Appeals By The Assessee Arising Out Of The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Panaji-1, Panaji In Ita Nos.305 & 306/Mrg/2014-15 Dated 02.07.2018 Against The Assessment Order Passed By Dcit, Circle-1, Margao-Goa U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Dated 25.10.2011 For Both A.Y. 2004-05 & A.Y. 2005-06. 2. The Issue Involved In Both These Appeals Are Common Which Relates To Treatment Of Expenditure Incurred By The Assessee For Replacement Of Assets & Renovation As Revenue Or Capital In Nature. For Ay 2004-05, The Quantum Of Expenditure In Dispute Is Of Rs. 10,81,672/- & For Ay 2005-06 It Is Rs. 2,06,379/-. A.Ys. 2004-05 & 2005-06 3. Before Us, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Represented The Department.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…Hon’ble Court dealt with several decisions including the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT vs. Mac Charles (India) Ltd. [2015] 233 Taxman 177, Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Comfort Living Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 182, Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. CAMA Hotels Ltd. [2015] 235 Taxman 206 and also considered the decisions of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ballimal Naval Kishore [1997] 221 ITR 414 and CIT vs. Saravana Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. [2007] 293 ITR 201. The Hon’ble Court held that the expenditure A.Ys. 2004-05 & 2005-06 incurred by…

M/S SANKAMTAL HOTEL PRIVATE LTD.,BELAGAVI vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 2 (1), BELAGAVI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 191/PAN/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji30 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S Sankamtal Hotel Acit, Circle-1, Pvt. Ltd. Belagavi S. Parthasarathi, Advocate, 3/1, Pranava Vs. Complex, 5Th Cross, Malleswaram, Bangalore- 560 003. Pan: Aadcs 5106 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Smt. Pratibha R., Advocate Respondent By : Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), -Belagavi In Ita No.51/Bgm/2016-17 Dated 25.02.2018 Against The Assessment Order Passed By Acit, Circle-2(1), Belagavi U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Dated 14.03.2016 For A.Y. 2008-09. 2. There Is A Delay Of Five Days In Filing The Present Appeal For Which The Petition For Condonation Of Delay & Affidavit Are Placed On Record. From The Affidavit, We Note That The Assessee Was Out Of Station When The Appeal Memo Was Sent To Him By The Counsel For Its Signature & Therefore A Short Delay Of 5 Days Occurred. Considering The Petition & In The Interest Of Justice & Fair Play, We Find It Proper To Admit The Appeal & Proceed To Adjudicate Thereon.

For Appellant: Smt. Pratibha R., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 31

…Hon’ble Court dealt with several decisions including the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT vs. Mac Charles (India) Ltd. [2015] 233 Taxman 177, Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Comfort Living Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 182, Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. CAMA Hotels Ltd. [2015] 235 Taxman 206 and also considered the decisions of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ballimal Naval Kishore [1997] 221 ITR 414 and CIT vs. Saravana Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. [2007] 293 ITR 201. The Hon’ble Court held that the expenditure incurred by the assessee is revenue…

SKE & C- KCT JOINT VENTURE ,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 23(2), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 4204/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5451/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 बनाम M/S Ske & C-Kct Joint Venture, Dcit 85A, 3Rd Floor, Vs. Circle 24(2) Rishyamook Building, New Delhi. Panchkuian Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aadas9266L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4202 To 4204/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 बनाम M/S Ske & C-Kct Joint Venture, Dcit Thapar House, Central Wing, Vs. Circle 23(2) 3Rd Floor, 124 Janpath, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C

…. Vs. DCIT: (12 SOT 406, Hyd.) 2. DCIT Vs. Win Medicare Limited: (17 taxmann.com 104, Delhi) 3. CIT Vs. Print Systems & Products: (285 ITR 337, Mad.) 4. DCIT Vs. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd.: (61 TTJ 656, Delhi) 5. Comfort Living Hotels (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT: (363 ITR 182, Delhi) 7. The Ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below. The Ld. DR further submits that similar disallowance was made while completing the assessment for the AY 2010-11 which was also accepted by the assessee. The Ld. DR submits that the claim of the assessee was I.T.A.No.5451/Del/2018 & ITA Nos.4202 to 4204/Del/Del/2019…

SKE & C- KCT JOINT VENTURE ,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 23(2), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 4203/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5451/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 बनाम M/S Ske & C-Kct Joint Venture, Dcit 85A, 3Rd Floor, Vs. Circle 24(2) Rishyamook Building, New Delhi. Panchkuian Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aadas9266L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4202 To 4204/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 बनाम M/S Ske & C-Kct Joint Venture, Dcit Thapar House, Central Wing, Vs. Circle 23(2) 3Rd Floor, 124 Janpath, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C

…. Vs. DCIT: (12 SOT 406, Hyd.) 2. DCIT Vs. Win Medicare Limited: (17 taxmann.com 104, Delhi) 3. CIT Vs. Print Systems & Products: (285 ITR 337, Mad.) 4. DCIT Vs. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd.: (61 TTJ 656, Delhi) 5. Comfort Living Hotels (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT: (363 ITR 182, Delhi) 7. The Ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below. The Ld. DR further submits that similar disallowance was made while completing the assessment for the AY 2010-11 which was also accepted by the assessee. The Ld. DR submits that the claim of the assessee was I.T.A.No.5451/Del/2018 & ITA Nos.4202 to 4204/Del/Del/2019…

SKE & C- KCT JOINT VENTURE ,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 23(2), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 4202/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5451/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 बनाम M/S Ske & C-Kct Joint Venture, Dcit 85A, 3Rd Floor, Vs. Circle 24(2) Rishyamook Building, New Delhi. Panchkuian Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aadas9266L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4202 To 4204/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 बनाम M/S Ske & C-Kct Joint Venture, Dcit Thapar House, Central Wing, Vs. Circle 23(2) 3Rd Floor, 124 Janpath, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C

…. Vs. DCIT: (12 SOT 406, Hyd.) 2. DCIT Vs. Win Medicare Limited: (17 taxmann.com 104, Delhi) 3. CIT Vs. Print Systems & Products: (285 ITR 337, Mad.) 4. DCIT Vs. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd.: (61 TTJ 656, Delhi) 5. Comfort Living Hotels (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT: (363 ITR 182, Delhi) 7. The Ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below. The Ld. DR further submits that similar disallowance was made while completing the assessment for the AY 2010-11 which was also accepted by the assessee. The Ld. DR submits that the claim of the assessee was I.T.A.No.5451/Del/2018 & ITA Nos.4202 to 4204/Del/Del/2019…

SKE & C- KCT JOINT VENTURE ,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 24(2), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 5451/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5451/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 बनाम M/S Ske & C-Kct Joint Venture, Dcit 85A, 3Rd Floor, Vs. Circle 24(2) Rishyamook Building, New Delhi. Panchkuian Road, New Delhi. Pan No. Aadas9266L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4202 To 4204/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 बनाम M/S Ske & C-Kct Joint Venture, Dcit Thapar House, Central Wing, Vs. Circle 23(2) 3Rd Floor, 124 Janpath, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C

…. Vs. DCIT: (12 SOT 406, Hyd.) 2. DCIT Vs. Win Medicare Limited: (17 taxmann.com 104, Delhi) 3. CIT Vs. Print Systems & Products: (285 ITR 337, Mad.) 4. DCIT Vs. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd.: (61 TTJ 656, Delhi) 5. Comfort Living Hotels (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT: (363 ITR 182, Delhi) 7. The Ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below. The Ld. DR further submits that similar disallowance was made while completing the assessment for the AY 2010-11 which was also accepted by the assessee. The Ld. DR submits that the claim of the assessee was I.T.A.No.5451/Del/2018 & ITA Nos.4202 to 4204/Del/Del/2019…

M/S. GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2248/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri K. Narasimha Charym/S Gujarat Guardian Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle – 10(2), 4-7/C, Dda Shopping Centre, New Delhi. New Friends Colony, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacg1622K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Kumar Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Kumar, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 234ASection 234B

…in the cases of (i) Empire Jute Co. Ltd. vs CIT, 124 ITR 1 (SC); (ii) CIT vs Mahalakshmi Textile Mills, 66 ITR 710 (SC); and (iii) CIT vs Sarvana Spinning Mills P. Ltd., 293 ITR 201 (SC) and other High Court decisions in Comfort Living Hotels (P) Ltd. vs CIT, 363 ITR 182 (Del); CIT vs Volga Restaurant, 253 ITR 405 (Del); and CIT vs Delhi Press Samachar Patra P. Ltd., 322 ITR 182 (Del). 26. There is no denial of the fact argued by the learned AR that the assessee identified the engineering fee i.e. strictly relatable to the construction of plant and capitalization of such portion of the fee in accordance with the…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. THE DUKE RETREAT LTD,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2918/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.2918/Pun/2016 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"

For Appellant: Shri Sudhendu DasFor Respondent: Shri C.H. Naniwadekar
Section 10(2)(v)Section 143(3)Section 31(1)

…any new asset so as to render such expenditure as a capital expenditure. In- fact, in this context, the Ld. Representative for the assessee referred to the judgement of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Comfort Living Hotels P. Ltd. vs. CIT, (2014) 363 ITR 182 (Delhi) wherein assessee was running a hotel and it had incurred extensive repairs which resulted in increased seating capacity of the existing bar in the hotel. The Revenue had setup a case that such increased seating resulted in enhancement of profit yielding capacity so as to render the expenditure capital in nature. The Hon'ble High Court dis…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue against the direction of the Ld

ITA 1106/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.K.Yadav & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Guajarat Guardian Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 4-7/C, Dda Shopping Centre, Circle-12(1), (Now Circle- New Friends Colony, 10(2), New Delhi Cr Building, Ip Estate, Pan: Aaacg1622K New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. M/S. Guajarat Guardian Ltd, Circle-12(1), (Now Circle-10(2), 4-7/C, Dda Shopping Cr Building, Ip Estate, Centre, New Delhi New Friends Colony, New Delhi Pan: Aaacg1622K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Meeta Singh CIT DR
Section 144Section 144CSection 14A

…placed reliance in this regard on the following decisions:  Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT: 124 ITR 1 (SC)  CIT vs. Mahalakshmi Textile Mills 66 ITR 710 (SC)  CIT v. Sarvana Spinning Mills P. Ltd. : 293 ITR 201 (SC)  Comfort Living Hotels (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT: 363 ITR 182 (Del)  CIT vs. Volga Restaurant: 253 ITR 405 (Del)  CIT vs. Delhi Press Samachar Patra P. Ltd.: 322 ITR 590  CIT v. Bharat Cinema : 121 ITR 165 (HC) (P&H)  CIT & Anr. vs. Sagar Talkies : 217 CTR 74 (HC) (Kar)  Tuticorin Spinning Mills Ltd. vs. CIT : 261 ITR 291 (HC) (Mad)  CIT vs. Ooty Dasaprakash: 237 ITR 902 (HC) (Mad)  CIT vs Lake Palac…