Network Ltd. v. ACIT: 108 TTJ 180 (Del. Trib.) 21) Taj Sats Air Catering Ltd. v. ACIT

116 ITD 348Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#8882 most cited
12

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2022.

Issues it is cited on

section 100profit split methodbright line testresale price methodsection 36(l)(va)amp expendituresection 92esection 92(1)cost plus methodfar analysiscorporate guaranteeright to receive

Judgments citing Network Ltd. v. ACIT: 108 TTJ 180 (Del. Trib.) 21) Taj Sats Air Catering Ltd. v. ACIT

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD vs. EENADU TELEVISION PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2244/HYD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Siva KumarFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 251(1)

…fee is eligible for depreciation. Kotak Forex Brokerage Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax • [2009] 33 SOT 237 (Mum - ITAT) • Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT [2009] 34 SOT 171 (Del - ITAT) • Skyline Caterers (P) Ltd. vs. ITO [2008] 116 ITD 348 (Mum - ITAT) • The A.P Paper Mills Ltd. vs. ACIT [2010] 33 DTR 148 (Hyd - ITAT) • CLC Global Limited [ITA No. 2288/De1/08](Del). • Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd [ITA No. 1391/2010, 1394/2010 & 1396/2010] (Del) 7 2.11 Therefore in view of the above decisions, the Appellant submits that the depreciation claimed on non-compete rights acqui…

M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6525/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…el. Trib.); 19) Cyber India Online Ltd.: 64 SOT 1/ 42 taxmann.com 108 (Del. Trib.); 20) Guruji Entertainment Network Ltd. v. ACIT: 108 TTJ 180 (Del. Trib.) 21) Taj Sats Air Catering Ltd. vs. ACIT: 146 ITD 231 (Mum Trib.); 22) Skyline Caterers (P) Ltd. v. ITO: 116 ITD 348 (Mum. Trib); 23) Just Dial Ltd. vs. ACIT: 289/Mum/2013 (Mum. Trib.); 24) The AP Paper Mills Ltd. vs. ACIT: 128 TTJ 596 (Hyd. Trib.); 25) SKS Micro Finance Ltd. vs. DCIT: 160 ITD 364 (Hyd. Trib.); 26) Shamrao Vithal Coop Bank Ltd. vs DCIT : ITA Nos. 4092/Mum/2011; and 27) DCIT vs. Ricoh India Limited : ITA No. 4700/MUM/2015 114.5 Referring to the…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6256/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…el. Trib.); 19) Cyber India Online Ltd.: 64 SOT 1/ 42 taxmann.com 108 (Del. Trib.); 20) Guruji Entertainment Network Ltd. v. ACIT: 108 TTJ 180 (Del. Trib.) 21) Taj Sats Air Catering Ltd. vs. ACIT: 146 ITD 231 (Mum Trib.); 22) Skyline Caterers (P) Ltd. v. ITO: 116 ITD 348 (Mum. Trib); 23) Just Dial Ltd. vs. ACIT: 289/Mum/2013 (Mum. Trib.); 24) The AP Paper Mills Ltd. vs. ACIT: 128 TTJ 596 (Hyd. Trib.); 25) SKS Micro Finance Ltd. vs. DCIT: 160 ITD 364 (Hyd. Trib.); 26) Shamrao Vithal Coop Bank Ltd. vs DCIT : ITA Nos. 4092/Mum/2011; and 27) DCIT vs. Ricoh India Limited : ITA No. 4700/MUM/2015 114.5 Referring to the…

M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3241/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…el. Trib.); 19) Cyber India Online Ltd.: 64 SOT 1/ 42 taxmann.com 108 (Del. Trib.); 20) Guruji Entertainment Network Ltd. v. ACIT: 108 TTJ 180 (Del. Trib.) 21) Taj Sats Air Catering Ltd. vs. ACIT: 146 ITD 231 (Mum Trib.); 22) Skyline Caterers (P) Ltd. v. ITO: 116 ITD 348 (Mum. Trib); 23) Just Dial Ltd. vs. ACIT: 289/Mum/2013 (Mum. Trib.); 24) The AP Paper Mills Ltd. vs. ACIT: 128 TTJ 596 (Hyd. Trib.); 25) SKS Micro Finance Ltd. vs. DCIT: 160 ITD 364 (Hyd. Trib.); 26) Shamrao Vithal Coop Bank Ltd. vs DCIT : ITA Nos. 4092/Mum/2011; and 27) DCIT vs. Ricoh India Limited : ITA No. 4700/MUM/2015 114.5 Referring to the…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DABUR INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3114/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80GSection 80ISection 92CSection 92E

…el. Trib.); 19) Cyber India Online Ltd.: 64 SOT 1/ 42 taxmann.com 108 (Del. Trib.); 20) Guruji Entertainment Network Ltd. v. ACIT: 108 TTJ 180 (Del. Trib.) 21) Taj Sats Air Catering Ltd. vs. ACIT: 146 ITD 231 (Mum Trib.); 22) Skyline Caterers (P) Ltd. v. ITO: 116 ITD 348 (Mum. Trib); 23) Just Dial Ltd. vs. ACIT: 289/Mum/2013 (Mum. Trib.); 24) The AP Paper Mills Ltd. vs. ACIT: 128 TTJ 596 (Hyd. Trib.); 25) SKS Micro Finance Ltd. vs. DCIT: 160 ITD 364 (Hyd. Trib.); 26) Shamrao Vithal Coop Bank Ltd. vs DCIT : ITA Nos. 4092/Mum/2011; and 27) DCIT vs. Ricoh India Limited : ITA No. 4700/MUM/2015 114.5 Referring to the…

KPIT CUMMINS GLOBAL BUSINESS SOLUTIONS LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee relating to assessment year 2008-09 is partly allowed, appeal of assessee relating to assessment year 2009-10 and appeal of Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 525/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.246/Pun/2013 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…commercial rights, business was given to the assessee. He further placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd. (supra) and Mumbai Bench of Tribunal in Skyline Caterers (P) Ltd. Vs. ITO (2008) 116 ITD 348 (Mum-Trib). 11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. The first issue which is raised in the present appeal is against claim of depreciation on payment made for acquiring right to render BPO services to Cummins Inc, USA. The assessee during the year under consideration had entered into tripartite Ltd. on one hand and the as…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. KPIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of assessee relating to assessment year 2008-09 is partly allowed, appeal of assessee relating to assessment year 2009-10 and appeal of Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 459/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.246/Pun/2013 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…commercial rights, business was given to the assessee. He further placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd. (supra) and Mumbai Bench of Tribunal in Skyline Caterers (P) Ltd. Vs. ITO (2008) 116 ITD 348 (Mum-Trib). 11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. The first issue which is raised in the present appeal is against claim of depreciation on payment made for acquiring right to render BPO services to Cummins Inc, USA. The assessee during the year under consideration had entered into tripartite Ltd. on one hand and the as…

KPIT CUMMINS GLOBAL BUSINESS SOLUTIONS LTD., (NOW MERGED WITH KPIT CUMMINS INFOSYSTEMS LTD),PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 11(1), PUNE

In the result, appeal of assessee relating to assessment year 2008-09 is partly allowed, appeal of assessee relating to assessment year 2009-10 and appeal of Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 246/PUN/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.246/Pun/2013 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…commercial rights, business was given to the assessee. He further placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd. (supra) and Mumbai Bench of Tribunal in Skyline Caterers (P) Ltd. Vs. ITO (2008) 116 ITD 348 (Mum-Trib). 11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. The first issue which is raised in the present appeal is against claim of depreciation on payment made for acquiring right to render BPO services to Cummins Inc, USA. The assessee during the year under consideration had entered into tripartite Ltd. on one hand and the as…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. LAXMI SUGAR MILLS CO. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 759/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri C.M. Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Shravan Gotru, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Mehta, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 148

…by the assessee to the farmers/cane growers. The mere fact that the assessee has wrongly classified the expenditure as ‘Cane Development Expenses’, such expenditure cannot be classified as capital expenditure. In the case of Skyline Caterers Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO 116 ITD 348, relied by assessee, the Tribunal has held that the nomenclature given to the entries in the books of account is not relevant for ascertaining the real nature of the transaction. The assessee has also given reasons for making extra payment to the farmers for purchase of sugarcane. Hon’ble Supreme Court also in Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT, 11…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - IV vs. BEVERAGES PVT. LTD

ITA/1394/2010HC Delhi14 Jan 2011
Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 263Section 32Section 32(1)(ii)

…the fact that the Commissioner had recorded a finding that such a claim is patently inadmissible and the said finding is solely based on the entry in the books of accounts. It referred to its earlier decision in Skyline Caterers Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO, [2008] 116 ITD 348 wherein it has been held by the tribunal that there is no dispute to the legal proposition that the nomenclature given to the 2011:DHC:219-DB entries in the books of accounts is not relevant for ascertaining the real nature of the transaction. The said view was expressed on the basis of the decision rendered by the Apex Court in Kedarnath…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - IV vs. BEVERAGES PVT. LTD

ITA/1391/2010HC Delhi14 Jan 2011
Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 263Section 32Section 32(1)(ii)

…the fact that the Commissioner had recorded a finding that such a claim is patently inadmissible and the said finding is solely based on the entry in the books of accounts. It referred to its earlier decision in Skyline Caterers Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO, [2008] 116 ITD 348 wherein it has been held by the tribunal that there is no dispute to the legal proposition that the nomenclature given to the 2011:DHC:219-DB entries in the books of accounts is not relevant for ascertaining the real nature of the transaction. The said view was expressed on the basis of the decision rendered by the Apex Court in Kedarnath…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - IV vs. BEVERAGES PVT. LTD

ITA/1396/2010HC Delhi14 Jan 2011
Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 263Section 32Section 32(1)(ii)

…the fact that the Commissioner had recorded a finding that such a claim is patently inadmissible and the said finding is solely based on the entry in the books of accounts. It referred to its earlier decision in Skyline Caterers Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO, [2008] 116 ITD 348 wherein it has been held by the tribunal that there is no dispute to the legal proposition that the nomenclature given to the 2011:DHC:219-DB entries in the books of accounts is not relevant for ascertaining the real nature of the transaction. The said view was expressed on the basis of the decision rendered by the Apex Court in Kedarnath…