How many judgments cite Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd. v. CIT?

131 judgments on BharatTax cite Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd. v. CIT (195 ITR 682), spanning 2009 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 115JB, Section 14A, Section 36(1)(vii), Section 37(1), Section 40(a)(ia), Section 244A.

Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd. v. CIT

195 ITR 682High Court1992#776 most cited

What is Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Club membership fees, including both entrance fees and annual subscriptions, are not considered capital expenditure if the membership's continuance depends on regular payments, and therefore are allowable as revenue expenditure under Section 37(1).

131

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd. v. CIT · 195 ITR 682 · Section 37(1) · club membership fees · entrance fees · annual subscription · capital expenditure · revenue expenditure · enduring benefit test · business expenditure

Sections most often in play

Section 115JB Section 14A Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 244A Section 36(1)(iii)Section 115U

Issues it is cited on

section 50(1)section 80ab section 80m section 10(15)section 54e section 70(2)section 40(a)(2)(b)section 10(33)new employees section 14a(1)section 54ec section 92ca(2)

Judgments citing Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd. v. CIT

Alstom India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6960/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri G. Manjnatha

For Appellant: Shri Mrunal Parekh a/wFor Respondent: Shri Anadi Verma

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 35D

…lub subscription fee is allowable as revenue expenditure in view of various judicial precedents. In support, he relied upon the following decisions:– i) United Glass Mfg. Co. Ltd. v/s CIT, 2012–TOIL–102–SC–IT; ii) Otis Elevator Co. India Ltd. v/s CIT, [2992] 195 ITR 682 (Bom.) iii) CIT v/s Lubrizol India Ltd., [2013] 37 taxmann.com 294 (Bom.); iv) Bank of America Securities India Pvt. Ltd. v/s DCIT, [2010] TIOL–630–ITAT (Mum.); 16 G.E. Power India Ltd. v) Maersk India Pvt. Ltd. v/s DCIT, [2009] TIOL–322–ITAT (Mum.); vi) Development Credit Bank Ltd. v/s DCIT, [2013] 40 taxmann. com 532 (Mum.); vii) Clariant Chem…

Giriraj Iron Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle - 2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 609/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Vora, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R

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

…e appellant for its customers Likewise the facts of the case of Reliable Cigarettes and Tobacco Co. was also not relevant for the purpose that the said decision was based upon the judgement of Mumbai High Court in the case of OTIS Elevators India Ltd. Vs. CIT 195 ITR 682 whereby the business expenditures not falling within the mischief of Section 40(a)(v) and the payment has been allowed. The issue involved in the above cited case of Otis Elevators India Ltd. (supra) was in respect of to treat the club member ship fee as perquisite in the hands of the directors or allowed as business expenditure which was not the…

Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl. CIT, Range-10(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for all assessment years are partly

ITA 3339/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood, Assessment Years: 2005-06 Addl. Commissioner Of Infrastructure Leasing & Income Tax-Range 10(1) Financial Services Limited बनाम/ Mumbai The Il&Fs Financial Center Vs. Plot No. C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra (E) Mumbai 400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaaci-0989-F Assessment Years: 2005-06 Infrastructure Leasing & Addl. Commissioner Of Financial Services Limited Income Tax-Range 10(1) बनाम/ The Il&Fs Financial Center Mumbai Vs. Plot No. C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra (E) Mumbai 400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaaci-0989-F Assessment Years: 2006-07 Addl. Commissioner Of Infrastructure Leasing & Income Tax-Range 10(1) Financial Services Limited बनाम/ Mumbai The Il&Fs Financial Center Vs. Plot No. C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra (E) Mumbai 400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaaci-0989-F

Section 10(230)Section 14A

…on of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in asessee’s own case for AY 1997-98 in Income Tax Appeal No.2402 of 2013 where under identical set of facts, the Hon’ble High Court by following its earlier decision in the case of Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd. vs CIT (1992) 195 ITR 682 40 INFRASTRUCTURE LEASING & FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED (Bom.) held that Club membership fee paid to the club is in the nature of revenue expenditure, which is allowable as deduction. 70. Having heard both sides and considered the material available on record, we find that Hon’ble Bombay High Court has considered an identical question of law i…

Gujarat Sidhee Cement Ltd., Veraval vs. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Junagadh

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 154/RJT/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT/DRFor Respondent: Shri Vimal Desai

Section 115J

…of Sundaram Industries Ltd. 240 ITR 335 wherein Hon’ble High Court has held that subscription paid to club on behalf of its Director is allowable expenditure and in that judgment a decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Otis Elevator Company (1992) (1) 195 ITR 682, held that a payment to the club was made to unable the assessee to increase its business relation and prospects and held that expenditure is allowable expenditure. Thus, respectfully following the aforesaid judgment, we hold that ld. CIT(A) has passed reasoned order and same does not require any kind of interference at out end. Therefore, this g…

ACIT, CC-1(2), Kolkata vs. R T Fashion Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2180/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2180/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR)For Respondent: Shri D.S.Damle, FCA

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…in order to promote business, The High Court concurred with the view of the Tribunal and held the subscription to club is allowable business expenditure. Similar view was expressed by the Bombay High Court in the decision of Otis Elevator Co. (India) Limited (195 ITR 682). Keeping in view facts of the case and case laws cited above, we are of the view that there is no infirmity in the order of ld CIT(A). That being so, we decline to interfere in the order passed by the ld. CIT(A), his order on this issue, is hereby upheld and the ground raised by the revenue is dismissed. R T Fashion Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year:201…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 467/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 467/Del/2014 (A.Y 2009-10)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

…bership. The Ld. AR relied upon the following judicial pronouncements: • Nestle India Limited: 296 ITR 682 (Del.) • CIT v. Samtel Color Ltd.: 326 ITR 425 (Del.) - SLP filed by the Revenue dismissed in C.A No.6449/2012 • Otis Elevators Co. (India) Ltd v. CIT 195 ITR 682 (Bom) • CIT v. Citibank N.A.: 264 ITR 18 (Bom) • CIT v. Force Motors Ltd.: ITA No. 5296 of 2010 (Bom) • CIT v. Sundaram Industries Ltd 240 ITR 335 (Mad) • Gujarat State Export Corporation Ltd. v. CIT: 209 ITR 649 (Guj.) • CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd.: 205 Taxman 59 (Kar) 162 • Assam Brook Ltd. v CIT: 267 ITR 121 (Cal) • DCIT v. Max India Lt…

ACIT, Circle-1 vs. Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 374/DEL/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2018AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Smt Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shefali Swaroop, CIT- DR

…the club amounting to Rs. 17,27,225/-. Though the assessee has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Sundaram Industries Ltd 243 ITR 335 and the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of OTIS Elevators 195 ITR 682, the AO was of the opinion that the liability of these expenses have to be decided with regard to the business expediency. The AO was of the firm belief that the assessee, during the year under consideration, has not be able to state even a single occasion where the expenditure on clubs was made towards business purposes and to promote their busi…

Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, Range-I

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 357/DEL/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2018AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Smt Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shefali Swaroop, CIT- DR

Daimler Chrysler India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Pune

In the result, the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1381/PUN/2003[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Aug 2018AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1381/Pun/2003 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 1998-09 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Pramod AchuthanFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 15ASection 35A

…84. Thus, the above expenditure are incurred purely to serve business purpose of the Appellant. 85. The appellant wishes to rely on the following decisions, where club expenses are allowed as business expenditure:  Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd vs CIT (1992) 195 ITR 682 (Bom) (Refer pages 1014 to 1017 of the Paper Book)  CIT vs. Lubrizollndia Ltd (2013) 218 taxmann 69 (Bom) (Refer pages 1018 to 1020 of the Paper Book)  Intervalve (India) Ltd vs ACIT (ITA NO.1812 & 1813/PN/13) (Pune ITAT) (Refer pages 1021 to 1032 of the Paper Book)  Thermax Limited vs. Addl. CIT (ITA No. 1245/PN/2005) (Pune ITAT) (Refer pages…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Daimler Chrysler India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1325/PUN/2003[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Aug 2018AY 1998-99

For Appellant: Shri Pramod AchuthanFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 15ASection 35A

ACIT 3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. General Insurance Corporation of India, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is treated as partly allowed

ITA 5008/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran (Am) & Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 10Section 10(38)Section 14ASection 199Section 28Section 44

…orts the order of the A.O on disallowing the club expenses. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee supports the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and further placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Otis Elevator Co (India) Ltd Vs CIT (195 ITR 682) submits that the club expenses incurred by the assessee enables to improve the relations and prospects. The Ld. Counsel submits that it is impossible to keep record of every person visiting to the club and what kind of business dealings have been made from the visits of the club. Therefore, he submits that the expenses are definitely business ex…

DCIT, Cir-5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Spencer'S Retail Ltd., Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1939/KOL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2009-10 Dcit, Circle-5(1) V/S. M/S Spencer’S Retail Ltd., P-7, Chowringhee 31, Netaji Subhas Road, Duncan House, 1St Floor, Square, Kolkata- 700069 Kolkakta-700001 [Pan No.Aabcg 3443 R] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri D.S. Damle, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 10-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 25-07-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2009-10 Arises Against Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Kolkata’S Order Dated 25.07.2016, Passed In Case No.981/Cit(A)-2/14-15, Reversing The Assessing Officer’S Action Inter Alia Disallowing / Adding Assessee’S Club Expenditure Claim, Esop, Section 36(1)(Va) Disallowance On Account Of Late Payment Of Employees’ Contribution To Esi/Pf & Section 14A R.W. Rule 8D Disallowance Of ₹20,32,700/-; Respectively Involving Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. This Assessee Is A Company Engaged In Retail Trading Of Food Items, Non-Food Items, Music, Books Etc. It Claimed Its Club Expenditure Of ₹17,39,624/- In Its Books Of Account. Its Case Therein Was To Have Incurred The

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)

…ory finding of fact that assessee’s directors had never attended or used the above club. The same has gone unrebutted at the Revenue’s behest. We find that various hon'ble courts in CIT vs. Sundaram Industries Ltd. 240 ITR 335, Otis Elevatdor Co. (India) Ltd. 195 ITR 682, CIT vs. Groz Beckert Asia Ltd 31 taxmann.com 115 hold that club expenses incurred to facilitate smooth running as allowable business expenditure. We thus affirm CIT(A)’s finding under challenge. 3. The Revenue’s next substantive ground challenges the CIT(A)’s order holding assessee’s employees’ stock option “ESOP” expenditure disallowance of ₹17…

M/S. Marubeni India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1444/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhu & Sh. R. K Pandaassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Marubeni India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit 5Th Floor, Lotus Tower Vs Circle – 16 (1) Community Centre, New Delhi New Friends Colony, New Delhi – 110017 (Pan Aaacm6413A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Rajesh Malhotra, Advocate Respondent By Sh. Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 05/06/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 06/06/2018 Order

Section 143Section 144Section 37

…Sundaram Industries Ltd. (1999) 240 ITR 335 (Madras) has also held that the amount spent on club membership fee of company’s directors is deductible as business expenditure. Earlier, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court Otis Elevator Co. (India.) Ltd. Vs. CIT (1992) 195 ITR 682 has also taken similar view. In view of this overwhelmingly position in favour of the assessee, we order for the deletion of this addition.” 8. Respectfully following the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case and in absence of any contrary material brought to our notice, we set aside the order of the Assessing Officer and direct him to…

Bayer Crop Science Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as partly allowed

ITA 7818/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Pawan Singh (JM) I.T.A. No. 7818/Mum/2011 (Assessment Year 2007-08) Bayer CropScience Limited Addl. CIT-10(3) Bayer House, Central Vs. Aayakar Bhavan Avenue, Hiranandani 4th Floor Gardens, Powai M.K. Road Mumbai-400 076. Mumbai-400 020. PAN : AAACB9651K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Paras S. Savla Department by Shri Suman Kumar Date of Hearing 8.02.2018 Date of Pronouncement 16.02.2018 O R D E R Per B.R. Baskaran (AM) :- The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 14.9.2011 pas…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 6021/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri K.N. Charry

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35DSection 43BSection 92C

…lub membership, he argued that this expenditure is allowable as deduction. He submitted that besides being covered by the decisions in Nestle India Limited:296 ITR 682 (Del.), CIT v. Samtel Color Ltd.: 326 ITR 425 (Del.), Otis Elevators Co. (India) Ltd v. CIT 195 ITR 682 (Bom);, American Express International Banking Corporation v CIT 258 ITR 601 (Bom);, CIT v. Citibank N.A.: 264 ITR 18 (Bom), CIT v. Force Motors Ltd.: ITA No. 5296 of 2010 (Bom), CIT v. Sundharam Industries Ltd 240 ITR 335 (Mad);, Gujarat State Export Corporation Ltd. v. CIT: 209 ITR 649 (Guj.), CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd.: 205 Taxman 59 (Ka…

ITO, WD-5(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Elbee Securities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 456/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jul 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम. बालगनेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

…r, it has been held by a number of judicial authorities, that payment of membership fee made to club for business exigency is allowable as deduction. Some such decisions are in the cases of Sundaram Industries Ltd. 240 ITR 335, Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd., 195 ITR 682, Gujarat State Exports Corporation Ltd. 209 ITR 649 (Guj), Groz Beckert Asia Ltd. 31 taxmann.com 155 (P&H) etc. In view of the ratio of these decisions, the claim is allowed. In the result, the disallowance of Rs.2,15,357/- is deleted.” Aggrieved by the said order of Ld. CIT(A), the revenue is before us. 2.2. We have heard rival submissions and…

DCIT vs. M/S Google India Pvt. Ltd

In the result, revenue’s appeal and C

ITA 1298/BANG/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Mar 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri S Jayaramanrevenue’S Appeal

For Appellant: Shri. S. P. Singh, CA & Shri. Ujwal Tiwari, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Renuka Devi, JCIT

Section 10ASection 260A

…by making the payment towards club membership fees, the assessee did not acquire any enduring benefit as it was obtained on account of commercial expediency. Reliance was placed upon the judgment of the Mumbai High Court in the case of Otis Elevators Vs. CIT 195 ITR 682 (Bom) and other judgments of different High Courts. 5. Having carefully examined the orders of the lower authorities, we find force in the contention of the assessee that since the assessee has obtained the club membership for commercial expediency; the same is to be allowed as business expenditure. We therefore find no infirmity in the order of…

Anand Jhawar, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-34(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1099/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: : Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravia.Y 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Saumitra Choudhury, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri H.R. Singh, JCIT, ld.DR

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 194ASection 40

…the assessee to the Madras Gymkhana Club. In so far as expenses by the assessee towards food etc., are concerned, they were subject to disallowance under section 37(2) of the Income- tax Act, 1961. We have also seen Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd. v. CIT[1992] 195 ITR 682 (Born.) where it appears that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had given a categorical finding that payments made by the assessee towards club membership fee was to promote its business. It is true that in so far as the present case is concerned, there is no specific finding that the payment was made by the assessee for improving its business…

ITO 5(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Marsh India P. Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1573/MUM/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2016AY 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri Nishant ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Chand-CIT

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ केकेकेके” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“K”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, , , , शि"जीत डे एवं शि"जीत डे शि"जीत डे, "याियक शि"जीत डे "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Saktijit Dey,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/ ITA No.1573/Mum/2011 : िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-2004-05 वष" Inc…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Capital Advertising Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

Accordingly appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4774/DEL/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. S. Syal & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37

…it has been submitted by the Ld. AR that this issue has been dealt with by Hon’ble Bombay high court in the case of Otis Elevator Company (India) 19 I.T.A.Nos.4774, 4775/Del/2012 I.T.A.No.1892/Del/2011 C.O. No.436/Del/2012 limited vs. CIT reported in (1992) 195 ITR 682. It is observed that the Ld. CIT (A) has granted relief to the assessee by following the ratio laid down by Hon'ble High Court in case of Otis Elevator Co. (I) Ltd. (supra). Hon'ble High Court observed as under: “6.3 I have carefully considered the submissions made by the Id. AR and have gone through the assessment order. It is seen that the AO…