Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. v. CIT

225 ITR 792Supreme Court of India1997#620 most cited

What is Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Expenditure incurred for increasing a company's share capital, such as expenses related to issuing shares or an initial public offering (IPO), is capital expenditure. Such expenses are not allowable as a revenue deduction under Section 37, even if they incidentally benefit the business, because they result in an increase in capital.

158

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2006 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. v. CIT · 225 ITR 792 · Section 37 · Section 37(1) · capital expenditure · revenue expenditure · issue of shares · IPO expenses · increase in share capital · allowability of deduction · business expenditure

Also reported as

93 Taxmann 5

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 10BSection 43(5)Section 37Section 36(1)(iii)

Issues it is cited on

section 35denduring benefitsection 35revenue expendituredisallowance under section 14acapital expenditureput to usesection 45fair market valuemercantile system of accountingsection 37(1)section 37

Judgments citing Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. v. CIT

Ashok Leyland Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2834/CHNY/2014[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Sept 2016AY 1995-96

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2825, 2826 & 2827/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-2008. The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd, Income Tax, Vs. No.1, Sardar Patel Road, Large Taxpayer Unit -Ii, Guindy, Chennai 600 101. Chennai 600 032. [Pan Aaaca 4651L] (Department) (Assessee )

For Appellant: Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Arun C. Bharath, IRS, CIT
Section 35D(2)Section 35D(2)(c)

…convertible in to shares of face value of "1/- each. The issue expenses amounting to " 11,07,13,647/- is claimed as deduction. The Issue expenses are directly related to capital base of the company. Hence relying in the Supreme Court decision reported in 225 ITR 792 Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited wherein it was held that the capital expenditure although would help in the business of the company and may also help in the profit making, it still retains the character of capital expenditure since the expenditure was directly related to the expansion of the capital base of the company…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Ashok Leyland Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2827/CHNY/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2825, 2826 & 2827/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-2008. The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd, Income Tax, Vs. No.1, Sardar Patel Road, Large Taxpayer Unit -Ii, Guindy, Chennai 600 101. Chennai 600 032. [Pan Aaaca 4651L] (Department) (Assessee )

For Appellant: Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Arun C. Bharath, IRS, CIT
Section 35D(2)Section 35D(2)(c)

…convertible in to shares of face value of "1/- each. The issue expenses amounting to " 11,07,13,647/- is claimed as deduction. The Issue expenses are directly related to capital base of the company. Hence relying in the Supreme Court decision reported in 225 ITR 792 Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited wherein it was held that the capital expenditure although would help in the business of the company and may also help in the profit making, it still retains the character of capital expenditure since the expenditure was directly related to the expansion of the capital base of the company…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Ashok Leyland Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2825/CHNY/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Sept 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2825, 2826 & 2827/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-2008. The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd, Income Tax, Vs. No.1, Sardar Patel Road, Large Taxpayer Unit -Ii, Guindy, Chennai 600 101. Chennai 600 032. [Pan Aaaca 4651L] (Department) (Assessee )

For Appellant: Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Arun C. Bharath, IRS, CIT
Section 35D(2)Section 35D(2)(c)

…convertible in to shares of face value of "1/- each. The issue expenses amounting to " 11,07,13,647/- is claimed as deduction. The Issue expenses are directly related to capital base of the company. Hence relying in the Supreme Court decision reported in 225 ITR 792 Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited wherein it was held that the capital expenditure although would help in the business of the company and may also help in the profit making, it still retains the character of capital expenditure since the expenditure was directly related to the expansion of the capital base of the company…

Nuaire Engineers P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 6422/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.6422/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2005-2006) M/S Nuaire Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito-9(2)(3), Mumbai-20 47, Vikas Centre, S.V.Road, Santacruz(W), Mumbai-400054 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn 0274 G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Ms. Neelam Jadhav याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Neil Philip सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 21/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 16/09/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)- Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2005-06. 2. There Is A Marginal Delay In Filing The Appeal. As The Reasons Stated For Delay Was Found To Be Genuine, We Condone Delay Of 43 Days In Filing Appeal & Appeal Is Heard On Merit. 3. Ground No.1 Relates To Sustaining Addition Of Rs.43,726/- As Capital Expenditure On Account Of Vehicle Registration Charges.

For Appellant: Ms. Neelam JadhavFor Respondent: Shri Neil Philip

…charges as revenue expenses. 5. Ground No.2 relates to disallowance of capital expenditure for increase in share capital. 6. The issue is covered against the assessee by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Punjab State Industrial Corporation, 225 ITR 792. Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity in the order of CIT(A) for disallowance of these expenditure. 7. Ground No.3 pertains to disallowance of expenditure of Rs.2,25,000/- incurred on account of stamp duty charges paid to ROC for increase in share capital. In view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Punjab State Industria…

New Delhi Television Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result this ground is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2851/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Suchitra Kamblea.Y. 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. C.S.Aggarwal, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Amit Mohan Govil, CIT, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…a settled proposition of law that any expenditure incurred for the expansion of the capital base of a company is to be treated as a capital expenditure as has been held by the Supreme Court in the cases of Punjab State Industrial Corporation Ltd v. C1T [1997] 225 ITR 792 (SC) and Brooke Bond India Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 798 (SC). Thus the expenditure and the receipts directly relating to the share capital of a company are of capital in nature and therefore, cannot be taxed under the Act save for certain exceptions. 1.5.3 Till assessment year 2012-13 share premium received by any company was not deemed as inco…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S New Delhi Television Ltd., New Delhi

In the result this ground is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2752/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Suchitra Kamblea.Y. 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. C.S.Aggarwal, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Amit Mohan Govil, CIT, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…a settled proposition of law that any expenditure incurred for the expansion of the capital base of a company is to be treated as a capital expenditure as has been held by the Supreme Court in the cases of Punjab State Industrial Corporation Ltd v. C1T [1997] 225 ITR 792 (SC) and Brooke Bond India Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 798 (SC). Thus the expenditure and the receipts directly relating to the share capital of a company are of capital in nature and therefore, cannot be taxed under the Act save for certain exceptions. 1.5.3 Till assessment year 2012-13 share premium received by any company was not deemed as inco…

DCIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. The Seksaria Biswan Sugar Factory, Mumbai

ITA 4428/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & C.N. Prasadवष" /Assessment Years: 2006-07 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/4428/Mum/2012,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Acit-2(3) M/S. The Seksaria Biswan Sugar Room No.552, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Factory Ltd.,5Th Floor, 139, Nagindas Vs. Bhavanmk Road, Master Rd.Fort, Mumbai-1. Mumbai-400 020. Pan:Aaact 1343 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) वष" /Assessment Years: 2006-07 Co/144/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. The Seksaria Biswan Sugar Vs. Acit-2(3) Factory Ltd.Mumbai. Mumbai.

For Appellant: Shri Y.P.Trivedi & Usha DalalFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Sahu-DR
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 32

…4428/M/12-Seksaria BiswanSF आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई “ई” खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं सी सी. एन एन. "साद "साद,"याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं सी सी एन एन "साद "साद "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member वष" /Assessment Years: 2006-07 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ITA/4428/Mum/2012,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" ACIT-2(3) M/s. The Seksaria Biswan Sugar Room No.552, 5th Floor, Aayakar Factory Ltd.,5t…

Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 2(1), Mumbai

ITA 2966/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Ramlal Negi (Jm)

Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…of capital base is Capital Expenditure. In this regard, the Ld CIT(A) took support of the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the following cases:- (a) Brooke Bond India Ltd Vs. CIT (1997)(225 ITR 798) (b) Punjab State Indl. Corporation Ltd Vs. CIT (225 ITR 792) (c) CIT Vs. Kodak India Ltd (2002)(253 ITR 445) 16. The Ld A.R submitted that the assessee was constrained to increase the share capital by issuing shares in order to meet Capital adequacy Norms fixed by Reserve Bank of India. He submitted that the assessee could not have continued to carry on the business unless it fulfilled the norms of RBI.…

D.C.I.T., Circle-3, Kolkata vs. M/S Khadim India Ltd., Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2571/KOL/2013[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amitabha Chowdhury, Addl.CIT, Sr.DR

…in connection with public issue of shares. It has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that expenditure incurred for public issue of shares are capital in nature cannot be allowed as deduction. In the case of Punjab State Industrial Development Ltd. Vs. CIT 225 ITR 792 (SC) The CIT(A) has followed the aforesaid decision and confirmed the disallowance made by the AO. We do not find any ground to interfere with the order of CIT(A). Consequently ground No.2 raised by the assessee is dismissed. 14. In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. 15. In the result the appeal of t…

M/S Khadim India Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT-Circle-3, Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2368/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amitabha Chowdhury, Addl.CIT, Sr.DR

…in connection with public issue of shares. It has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that expenditure incurred for public issue of shares are capital in nature cannot be allowed as deduction. In the case of Punjab State Industrial Development Ltd. Vs. CIT 225 ITR 792 (SC) The CIT(A) has followed the aforesaid decision and confirmed the disallowance made by the AO. We do not find any ground to interfere with the order of CIT(A). Consequently ground No.2 raised by the assessee is dismissed. 14. In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. 15. In the result the appeal of t…

M/S Dayco Securites (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T.Cir - 6, Kol., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1798/KOL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Apr 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap, A.M. & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, J.M.)

For Appellant: Shri D.C.Modok, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Uday Kumar Sardar, Addl.CIT, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 37

…tal expenditure since the expenditure is directly related to the acquiring of right of carrying on of the business or to ensure the source of carrying on of the business.—Punjab State Industrial Development Corpn. Ltd. vs. CIT (1997) 140 CTR (SC) 594 : (1997) 225 ITR 792 (SC) and Brooke Bond India Ltd. vs. CIT (1982) 28 CTR (Cal) 345 : (1983) 140 ITR 272 (Cal) relied on; Atherton vs. British Insulate & Helsby Cables Ltd. 10 Tax Cases 155, Halstorm’s Property Ltd. vs. Federal Commissioner of Taxation 72 CLR 634 and Lord Clyde Robert Addie & Sons’ Colleries Ltd. vs. IRC 8 Tax Cases 671 applied; CIT vs. New India Su…

Merck Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 7(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year

ITA 1222/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2016AY 2009-10
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…rance Corpn.], the Supreme Court considered its earlier two judgments in the case of Brooke Bond India Ltd. vs. CIT (1997) 140 CTR (SC) 598 : (1997) 225 ITR 798 (SC) and Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. vs. (1997) 140 CTR (SC) 594 : (1997) 225 ITR 792 (SC). Distinguishing these two judgments, the Supreme Court pointed out that those cases related to the issue of fresh shares which led to an inflow of fresh funds into the company, which expands or adds to its capital employed in the company resulting in the expansion of its profit making apparatus. The expenditure incurred for the purpose of in…

DCIT Cir 7(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Merck Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year

ITA 1172/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2016AY 2010-11
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…rance Corpn.], the Supreme Court considered its earlier two judgments in the case of Brooke Bond India Ltd. vs. CIT (1997) 140 CTR (SC) 598 : (1997) 225 ITR 798 (SC) and Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. vs. (1997) 140 CTR (SC) 594 : (1997) 225 ITR 792 (SC). Distinguishing these two judgments, the Supreme Court pointed out that those cases related to the issue of fresh shares which led to an inflow of fresh funds into the company, which expands or adds to its capital employed in the company resulting in the expansion of its profit making apparatus. The expenditure incurred for the purpose of in…

Merck Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year

ITA 1946/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2016AY 2009-10
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…rance Corpn.], the Supreme Court considered its earlier two judgments in the case of Brooke Bond India Ltd. vs. CIT (1997) 140 CTR (SC) 598 : (1997) 225 ITR 798 (SC) and Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. vs. (1997) 140 CTR (SC) 594 : (1997) 225 ITR 792 (SC). Distinguishing these two judgments, the Supreme Court pointed out that those cases related to the issue of fresh shares which led to an inflow of fresh funds into the company, which expands or adds to its capital employed in the company resulting in the expansion of its profit making apparatus. The expenditure incurred for the purpose of in…

Ingersoll Rand (India) Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal is partly allowed

ITA 272/BANG/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. S. Praveena, Addl. CIT (D.R)
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80H

…lting in an enduring benefit, the same cannot be allowed as a deduction. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court has relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Punjab State Industrial Development Corpn. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax (1997) (225 ITR 792). In the present case also, we find that except for certain nominal amounts ,the major payments were made for procuring/retaining the corporate membership of the assessee. In the light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court, we hold it as capital in nature. Therefore, the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax(A) on this point is rever…

Jt CIT OSD Cir 6(2) vs. M/S Crompton Greaves Ltd

In the result, appeal is dismissed on this point

ITA 4394/MUM/2003[99-00]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Feb 2016

Bench: Us For Fresh Adjudication On The Following Issue :- “On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Cit(A) Erred In Allowing The Assessee’S Claim For Deduction Of Rs.53,74,474/- & Directing The Assessing Officer To Rework Out The Deduction U/S. 35D Relating To The Assessment Year: 1999-2000 Page 2 Of 4 Expenditure Incurred On Global Depository Receipts, Relying On His Order For The A.Y. 1998-99 In The Assessee’S Own Case, Which Has Not Been Accepted By The Department & Contested In Further Appeal To The Itat.”

Section 143(3)Section 35D

…e assessee to deviate from the treatment in books of accounts”. The Assessing Officer further noted that these expenses are capital in nature, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited vs. CIT (225 ITR 792) and Brooke Bond India Limited vs. CIT (225 ITR 798). The claim of deduction was, accordingly, disallowed. In appeal, however, learned CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee by observing as follows :- “Ground no.16 On the facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld. JC has erred in not allowing a deduction of Rs.53,74,474/- being amortisation u/s…

I.T.O WD - 4(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Abp Entertainment Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

Accordingly, this portion of ground no.2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 966/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: None appearedFor Respondent: Shri Soumitra Chodhury, Advocate, ld. AR
Section 143(3)Section 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)

…nue is dismissed. 15. In respect of filing fee of Rs. 2 lakhs, we find that the ld. CIT(A) wrongly had deleted the addition as the issue is settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Vs. CIT reported in (1997) 225 ITR 792 against the assessee, wherein it was held that the filing fees paid to…

Addl.CIT, Range - 7, Kolkata vs. OSD Coke Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1874/KOL/2008[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri P. B. Pramanik, JCITFor Respondent: S/Shri J. P. Khaitan & J. M. Thard, Advocates
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 31Section 32Section 37(1)

…nd no2: “2. That the Ld. CIT(A)-VII, Kolkata erred in law as well as in facts by deleting the addition of Rs.15,000/- which was added u/s. 35D of the Act in view of the judgment held in the case of Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT 225 ITR 792 (SC) and Brooke Bond (India) Ltd. Vs. CIT, 225 ITR 798 (SC).” 9. Brief facts relating to the above issue that the assessee claimed expenses of Rs.23,000/- towards amortization of share issue expenses written off. According to AO, these are not allowable in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of Punjab State Industrial Dvelo…

ITO, Ward - 7(2), Kolkata vs. OSD Coke Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1873/KOL/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri P. B. Pramanik, JCITFor Respondent: S/Shri J. P. Khaitan & J. M. Thard, Advocates
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 31Section 32Section 37(1)

…nd no2: “2. That the Ld. CIT(A)-VII, Kolkata erred in law as well as in facts by deleting the addition of Rs.15,000/- which was added u/s. 35D of the Act in view of the judgment held in the case of Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT 225 ITR 792 (SC) and Brooke Bond (India) Ltd. Vs. CIT, 225 ITR 798 (SC).” 9. Brief facts relating to the above issue that the assessee claimed expenses of Rs.23,000/- towards amortization of share issue expenses written off. According to AO, these are not allowable in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of Punjab State Industrial Dvelo…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Alcobex Metals Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5344/DEL/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jan 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.K. Jaiswal, Senior DR
Section 10(2)(xv)

….15,75,045/- on account of stamp duty charges paid for issue of debenture certificates. We notice that the Assessing Officer had made disallowance by relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation 225 ITR 792 and M/s. Brook Bond India Ltd. 225 ITR 798 and CIT(A) on appeal, further allowed the claim of deduction and as such this appeal by the revenue. 10. The learned DR contended that the CIT(A) has failed to distinguish partly convertible debentures and fully convertible debentures furnished and therefore, any expenditure incurred considering the st…