Nakodar Bus Service Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

179 ITR 506High Court1989#9501 most cited
11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 13(4)Section 13(4A)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 234DSection 24A

Issues it is cited on

section 37salarycompanysection 14section 143(3)total incomebusiness

Judgments citing Nakodar Bus Service Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

FULLERTON FINANCIAL HOLDINGS PTE. LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE 2(3)(1) - MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 1137/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153

…irchandSpg&Wvg. Mills vis. CIT (1971) 81 ITR 34 (Bombay) (refer to Page Nos. 658 to 668 of the legal PB); • CIT v/s. Ganga Properties Ltd. [1993] 199 ITR 94 (Cal) (refer to Page Nos. 669 to 671 of the legal PB); • Nakodar Bus Service (P.) Ltd. v/s. CIT (1989) 179 ITR 506 (P&H) (refer to Page Nos. 672 to 673 of the legal PB). • CIT v/s. Rampur Timber & Turnery Co. Ltd. (1981) 129 ITR 58 (All) (refer to Page Nos. 674 to 675 of the legal PB), • AtulBabubhai Shah v/s. JCIT [2020]116 taxmann.com 966 (Ahmedabad Trib.) (refer to Page Nos. 676 to 686 of the legal PB) 51. The only test under Article 24A(3) is whether the…

MR. SHANMUGAM RAVI,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ASSESSEMENT CIRCLE-2(1), BENGALURU

ITA 951/BANG/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 143(3)Section 234A

…enditure has to be allowed under section 37 of the Act. 3.4 In this regard, the ld. A.R. placed reliance on the following decisions in support of the contention canvassed: CIT vs. Ganga Properties Ltd., 199 ITR 94 (Cal.) Nakodar Bus Service (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT, 179 ITR 506 (P&H) 3.5 In view of the above, he submitted that even though the business was transferred, there were various litigations pertaining to income tax and labour laws which remained unresolved. In order to handle these issues, the assessee had to maintain staff and consultants. Therefore, business loss having arisen due to expenditure incurred towar…

GIRI BUILDWELL PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 10(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 2676/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh.Anubhav Sharmaita No. 2676/Del/2018, A.Y.2014-15 Giri Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, R-23 Lg-1 & 3 Nehru Enclave Circle-10(1), New Delhi- 110019 New Delhi Pan : Aabcg2921Q Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 24

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH.ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2676/Del/2018, A.Y.2014-15 Giri Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, R-23 LG-1 and 3 Nehru Enclave Circle-10(1), New Delhi- 110019 New Delhi PAN : AABCG2921Q Appellant Respondent Assessee by Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue by Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 17.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 21.08.2023 ORDER Per Anubhav Sharma, JM : The appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 09.03.2018 of CIT(A)-3…

SHREE BALAJI UMBER PROPERTIES P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-13(2)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 1497/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Ravish Sood, Hon'Bleshree Balaji Umber Properties Pvt. Ltd., V. Dcit – 13(2)(2) Unit No. 201, A Wing Mumbai - 400020 Fulcrum Sahar Road Next To Hyaat Regency, Andheri (E) Mumbai -400099 Pan: Aaacu9207C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nishit Gandhi Ms. Akshita Bhandari Department By : Shri B.K. Bagchi

For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…. Ltd., to be allowed as revenue expenditure. With regard to other regular expenditures he relied on the written submissions and the decision in the case of CIT v. Ganga properties Ltd., [(1993) 199 ITR 94 (Cal)], Nakodar Bus Service (P.) Ltd., v. CIT [(1989) 179 ITR 506 (P&H)] and ITO v. Mokul Finance P. Ltd., [(2008) 110 TTJ 445 (Del.)] where the revenue expenditure incurred by the assessee should be allowed as long as it is incurred for the purpose of business. 6. On the other hand, Ld. DR submitted that the where funds were utilized by the assessee is not clear and from the facts available on record it clear…

NEURAL DEVELOPERS P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-6(2), NEW DELHI

ITA 3978/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Abhimanyu Jhamba, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Rinku Singh, Senior DR

…the ld. AR for the assessee that when the assessee has not completely abandoned it business, such deductions cannot be disallowed and relied upon the decisions rendered by Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in Nakodar Bus Service Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT – (1989) 179 ITR 506 and the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITO vs. Mokul Finance Ltd. – 110 TTJ 445. 12. When, undisputedly, it is not the case of the AO that the assessee has completely abandoned its business, deduction on account of salary paid to Shri Kamal Karmakar and Smt. Gauri Dhawan cannot be denied on the ground that activities of sub- leasing of pre…

NEURAL DEVELOPERS (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-6(2), NEW DELHI

ITA 5807/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Abhimanyu Jhamba, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Rinku Singh, Senior DR

…the ld. AR for the assessee that when the assessee has not completely abandoned it business, such deductions cannot be disallowed and relied upon the decisions rendered by Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in Nakodar Bus Service Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT – (1989) 179 ITR 506 and the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITO vs. Mokul Finance Ltd. – 110 TTJ 445. 12. When, undisputedly, it is not the case of the AO that the assessee has completely abandoned its business, deduction on account of salary paid to Shri Kamal Karmakar and Smt. Gauri Dhawan cannot be denied on the ground that activities of sub- leasing of pre…

NEURAL DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

ITA 5641/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Abhimanyu Jhamba, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Rinku Singh, Senior DR

…the ld. AR for the assessee that when the assessee has not completely abandoned it business, such deductions cannot be disallowed and relied upon the decisions rendered by Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in Nakodar Bus Service Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT – (1989) 179 ITR 506 and the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITO vs. Mokul Finance Ltd. – 110 TTJ 445. 12. When, undisputedly, it is not the case of the AO that the assessee has completely abandoned its business, deduction on account of salary paid to Shri Kamal Karmakar and Smt. Gauri Dhawan cannot be denied on the ground that activities of sub- leasing of pre…

M/S. ELEL HOTELS AND INVESTMENTS LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue and the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 are dismissed

ITA 4654/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Elel Hotels & Vs. Dcit, Investments Ltd., Central Circle-13, New Delhi Mandlik House, Mandlik Road, Colaba, Mumbai Pan :Aaace2846D (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Years: 2012-13 M/S. Elel Hotels & Vs. Acit, Investments Ltd., Central Circle-03, R/O. Mandlik House, Mandlik Jhandewalan, New Delhi Road, Colaba, Mumbai Pan :Aaace2846D (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Years: 2010-11 Acit, Vs. M/S. Elel Hotels & Central Circle-13, Investments Ltd., New Delhi R/O. Mandlik House, Mandlik Road, Colaba, Mumbai Pan :Aaace2846D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(2)

…see submitted that expenditure incurred to maintain and preserve the corporate structure is in allowable deduction in view of the following precedents: (i) CIT Vs. Rampur Timber Company Limited, 129 ITR 58(Allahabad HC) (ii) Nakodar Bus Services Private Ltd., 179 ITR 506 (Punjab HC) (iii) Chinai & Co. Private Ltd. Vs. CIT, 206 ITR 616 (Bom HC) (iv) Hindustan Chemicals Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 124 ITR 561 (v) Birla Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT, 64 ITR 568, 584 (Cal.) 3.1 The Assessing Officer, however, noted that in earlier assessment years 2005-06 to 2009-10 also similar situation was observed. In vi…

SULKASHANA SECURITIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 1(3)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 4290/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji-ARFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 254(1)Section 57

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ एच मुंबई एच एच” खंडपीठ एच खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“H”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, राम लाल नेगी एवं राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी, "याियक राम लाल नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./4290/Mum/2016, िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-…

DCIT, CIR-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NEERAJ CONSULTANTS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 316/KOL/2014[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan,J.M. & Shri M. Balaganesh, A.M.)

For Appellant: Sri Manoj Kataruka. AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…nt company are, allowable expenditure. The A/ R of the appellant placed reliance on the following decision in support of the appellant’s contention: 1.CIT Vs Rampur Timber & Turnery Co. Ltd (1981) 129 ITR 58 (AIL) 2. Nakodar Bus Service Pvt Ltd Vs Cll (1989) 179 ITR 506 (Punj. & Har.) In view of the above, it is prayed that the disallowance made by the Assessing officer may deleted. After considering the submission of the appellant and the findings of the AO and perusing the entire facts of the case and keeping in view the principle of the judgments of the cases relied upon. I am of the view that the AO was no…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ELEL HOTELS & INVESTMENT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1080/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.L.P.Sahu

Section 153A

…for allowability of these expenses. The assessee explained that these expenses were incurred for maintaining its corporate structure, existence and preserving the assets-infrastructure. It was explained 129 ITR 58 Allahabad; Nokodar Bus Services Pvt. Ltd., 179 ITR 506 (Punj); Chennai & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT 206 ITR 616 (Bom); Hindustan Chemicals Works Ltd. V. CIT, 124 ITR 561; Birla Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. v. CIT 64 ITR 568, 584 (cal.) and affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as reported in 82 ITR 166. 2.1. The following details in respect of the expenses claimed were filed by way of a chart…

Nakodar Bus Service Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (179 ITR 506) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax