How many judgments cite PCIT v. New Delhi Television Ltd.?

42 judgments on BharatTax cite PCIT v. New Delhi Television Ltd. (398 ITR 57), spanning 2018 to 2026.

PCIT v. New Delhi Television Ltd.

Q: Which sections of the Income Tax Act does PCIT v. New Delhi Television Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 1961, Section 1963, Section 143(3), Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, Section 14A.

398 ITR 57High Court2017#2824 most cited

What is PCIT v. New Delhi Television Ltd. authority for?

Expenditure on Employees Stock Options Plan (ESOP) compensation is an ascertained liability and is allowable as revenue expenditure.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. New Delhi Television Ltd. · ESOP · revenue expenditure · ascertained liability · Income Tax Act · Section 37

Sections most often in play

Section 1961 Section 1963 Section 143(3)Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act Section 14A of the Income Tax Act Section 14A Section 199 Section 199 of the Income Tax Act

Issues it is cited on

section 8d section 148(2)ddt section 199 foreign tax credit dividend distribution tax section 14a(2)section 90 advance tax disallowance under section 14a revenue expenditure section 30

Judgments citing PCIT v. New Delhi Television Ltd.

Trent Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1163/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin, D.R

Section 14ASection 23(1)(a)Section 37(1)

…. The Ld. A.R. relied on a series of decisions in defence of his arguments namely; “1. PVP Ventures Ltd v. CIT [2012] 23 taxmann.com 286 (Madras- 9 ITA No.1163/M/2011 & ITA No.1727/M/2011 M/s. Trent Ltd. High Court) 2. New Delhi Television Ltd. v. CIT [2017] 398 ITR 57 (Delhi High Court) 3. Biocon Ltd. v. DOT [2013] 35 taxmann.com 335 (Bangalore Tribunal) (SB) 4. M/s Accenture Services Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT [2010] ITA/4540/MUM/08 (Mumbai Tribunal) 14. The Ld. D.R., on the other hand, relied on the order of authorities below. 15. Having heard the rival submissions of both the parties and considering the facts on…

Sunil Agarwal, Haridwar vs. ITO, Ward- 1(3)(3), Haridwar

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 988/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri N.K. Billaiyaassessment Year : 2008-09 Sunil Agarwal, Vs. Ito, Ward 1(3)(3), Haridwar Laxmi Niwas, Near Post Office, Kankhal, Haridwar Uttarakhand (Pan: Aanpa0687L) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv. & Sh. Piyush KrFor Respondent: Sh. K. Tiwari, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 292CSection 69B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2008-09 SUNIL AGARWAL, Vs. ITO, WARD 1(3)(3), HARIDWAR LAXMI NIWAS, NEAR POST OFFICE, KANKHAL, HARIDWAR UTTARAKHAND (PAN: AANPA0687L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv. & Sh. Piyush Kr. Kamal, Adv. Department by : Sh. K. Tiwari, Sr. DR. ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), Hladwani on 16.11.2017 in relation to the assessment year 2008-09 on…