Rajshree Roadways v. Union of India

263 ITR 206High Court2003#3037 most cited

What is Rajshree Roadways v. Union of India authority for?

Lease rent paid by a lessee for assets they do not own and cannot alienate is considered revenue expenditure. The owner (lessor) is entitled to claim depreciation on such leased assets.

39

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Rajshree Roadways v. Union of India · lease rent · revenue expenditure · capital expenditure · section 37(1) · depreciation · lessor · lessee · finance lease

Also reported as

129 Taxmann 663

Sections most often in play

Section 115JBSection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 37(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143C

Issues it is cited on

icdsmercantile system of accountingsection 35section 92carevenue expendituresection 50capital expendituresection 32section 40(a)(ia)section 37(1)dispute resolution panelsection 194

Judgments citing Rajshree Roadways v. Union of India

M/S Fastway Transmission (P) Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

ITA 140/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Apr 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT (DR) on 4.12.2019
Section 250(6)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, “ए ” च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH "ी एन. के. सैनी, उपा"य" एवं "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.139/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.842/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.140/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 M/s Fastway Transmission (P) बनाम The A.C.I.T., Ltd., Plot No.17, Ind…

M/S Fastway Transmission (P) Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

ITA 139/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Apr 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT (DR) on 4.12.2019
Section 250(6)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, “ए ” च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH "ी एन. के. सैनी, उपा"य" एवं "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.139/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.842/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.140/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 M/s Fastway Transmission (P) बनाम The A.C.I.T., Ltd., Plot No.17, Ind…

M/S Fastway Transmission (P) Ltd., Chandigarh vs. ACIT, Chandigarh

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

ITA 547/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Apr 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT (DR) on 4.12.2019
Section 250(6)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, “ए ” च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH "ी एन. के. सैनी, उपा"य" एवं "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.139/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.842/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.140/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 M/s Fastway Transmission (P) बनाम The A.C.I.T., Ltd., Plot No.17, Ind…

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

In the result, ITA.No.2801/Del

ITA 2801/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri O.P. Kant, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Tejasvi Jain, C.A. &For Respondent: Shri Sankar Naskar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “E” : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. & SHRI O.P. KANT, A.M. ITA.No.376/Del./2014 Assessment Year 2009-2010 M/s. NIIT Ltd., The DCIT (LTU), 8, Balaji Estate, 1st Floor, Guru Ravi Das vs Central Circle-16(1), Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi. New Delhi – 019. PAN AAACN0085D (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.No.2801/Del./2017 Assessment Year 2009-2010 M/s. NIIT Ltd., The DCIT, 8, Balaji Estate, 1st Floor, Guru Ravi Das vs Central Circle-20, Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi. New Delhi – 019. PAN AAACN0085D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate For Assessee : Shri Te…

M/S. Niit Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.2801/Del

ITA 376/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri O.P. Kant, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Tejasvi Jain, C.A. &For Respondent: Shri Sankar Naskar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “E” : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. & SHRI O.P. KANT, A.M. ITA.No.376/Del./2014 Assessment Year 2009-2010 M/s. NIIT Ltd., The DCIT (LTU), 8, Balaji Estate, 1st Floor, Guru Ravi Das vs Central Circle-16(1), Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi. New Delhi – 019. PAN AAACN0085D (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.No.2801/Del./2017 Assessment Year 2009-2010 M/s. NIIT Ltd., The DCIT, 8, Balaji Estate, 1st Floor, Guru Ravi Das vs Central Circle-20, Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi. New Delhi – 019. PAN AAACN0085D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate For Assessee : Shri Te…

M/S. Philips India Limited (Formerly Philips Electronics India Litd.), Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 12(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as per the discussion made

ITA 2600/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2600/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15) M/S Philips India Ltd. Vs. Acit, Circle-12(2), Kolkata

For Appellant: Shri P. J. Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Ketan V. Ved& Ms. PurbaFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…had confirmed that it had claimed depreciation in the relevant Asst year on the said cars which were leased out to the assessee. He further placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Rajshree Roadways vs UOI reported in 263 ITR 206 (Raj) wherein it was held that the lessee would be entitled to the deduction of rent paid by him and the benefit of the depreciation shall be available to owner of the asset. Further the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the department against the said decision before the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been dismissed. He further placed reliance on…

Eih Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 8(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 2225/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2225/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S Eih Limited -Vs- Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaace 6898 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Ravi Sharma, Ar For The Department : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.09..2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.09.2018

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Sharma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT DR
Section 144C(5)Section 92B

…allowability of lease rentals in the hands of the assessee (lessee). We also find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench) in the case of Rajshree Roadways vs Union of India & Ors reported in (2003) 263 ITR 206 (Raj) wherein it was held that :- Held, that under the agreement there was a clause that after completion of lease period, if one per cent. of the total consideration of the trucks was paid, the lessee would be the owner of those trucks. However, the agreement dealt with the ownership of the trucks under the agreement. There was a clear provision…

Eih Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-8(1)Kol., Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 117/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13 Eih Ltd V/S. Dcit, Circle-8(1), 4, Mangoe Lane, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Kolkata-700 001 Chowringhee Square, [Pan No.Aaace 6898 B] Kolkata-69 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Ravi Sharma, Ar अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri P.K. Srihari, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 27-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 16-05-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Dispute Resolution Panel-2, (Drp For Short) Dated 17.10.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata U/S 144C(13)/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 29.11.2016 For Assessment Year 2012-13 & Grounds Raised By Assessee Read As Under:- “1.0 Determination Of Arm'S Length Price For Corporate Guarantee Fees 1.1 On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Transfer Pricing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ld, Tpo") & Accordingly Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ld. Ao") Erred In Treating The Corporate Guarantee Extended By The Appellant To Its Associated Enterprise (Ae) As International Transaction & Dispute Resolution Panel (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ld, Panel") Erred In Confirming The Same As An International Transaction Without Appreciating The Fact That It Does Not Fall Within The Ambit Of "International Transaction" U/S 92B Of The Act. 1.2 The Ld.Ao/Tpo & The Ld. Panel Failed To Appreciate The Fact That Corporate Guarantee Has Been Advanced By The Appellant As A Matter Of Commercial Prudence To Protect The Business Interest Of The Group By Fulfilling

Section 14Section 144C(13)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 92B

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA Before Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Judicial Member and Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member Assessment Year :2012-13 EIH Ltd V/s. DCIT, Circle-8(1), 4, Mangoe Lane, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Kolkata-700 001 Chowringhee Square, [PAN No.AAACE 6898 B] Kolkata-69 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Ravi Sharma, AR अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri P.K. Srihari, CIT-DR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 27-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 16-05-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R PER Waseem Ahm…

M/S. Philips India Limited (Formerly Philips Electronics India Litd.), Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 12(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 2489/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2489/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S Philips India Ltd. -Vs- Acit, Circle-12(2), Kolkata (Formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) [Pan: Aabcp 9487 A] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Sonde, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 92CSection 92D(1)

…had confirmed that it had claimed depreciation in the relevant Asst year on the said cars which were leased out to the assessee. He further placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Rajshree Roadways vs UOI reported in 263 ITR 206 (Raj) wherein it was held that the lessee would be entitled to the deduction of rent paid by him and the benefit of the depreciation shall be available to owner of the asset. Further the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the department against the said decision before the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been dismissed . He further placed reliance o…

M/S Phillips India Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-12(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 612/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 612/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S Philips India Ltd. -Vs- Acit, Circle-12(2), Kolkata (Formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) [Pan: Aabcp 9487 A] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Sonde, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 92CSection 92D(1)

…had confirmed that it had claimed depreciation in the relevant Asst year on the said cars which were leased out to the assessee. He further placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Rajshree Roadways vs UOI reported in 263 ITR 206 (Raj) wherein it was held that the lessee would be entitled to the deduction of rent paid by him and the benefit of the depreciation shall be available to owner of the asset. Further the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the department against the said decision before the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been dismissed . He further placed reliance o…

M/S Philips Electronics India Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I, .T Cir - 11, Kolkata.

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1894/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Feb 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 857/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S Philips India Limited -Vs.- A.C.I.T., Circle-12(2), (Formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcp 9487 A] (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A No. 1894/Kol/2012 Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S Philips India Limited -Vs.- A.C.I.T., Circle-12(2), (Formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcp 9487 A] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Arvind Sonde, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 10.01.2018. Date Of Pronouncement : 02.02.208. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Sonde, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 92Section 92C

…had confirmed that it had claimed depreciation in the relevant Asst year on the said cars which were leased out to the assessee. He further placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Rajshree Roadways vs UOI reported in 263 ITR 206 (Raj) wherein it was held that the lessee would be entitled to the deduction of rent paid by him and the benefit of the depreciation shall be available to owner of the asset. Further the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the department against the said decision before the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been dismissed . He further placed reliance o…

Philips Electronis India Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 11, Kolkata

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 857/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 857/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S Philips India Limited -Vs.- A.C.I.T., Circle-12(2), (Formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcp 9487 A] (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A No. 1894/Kol/2012 Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S Philips India Limited -Vs.- A.C.I.T., Circle-12(2), (Formerly Philips Electronics India Ltd.) Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcp 9487 A] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Arvind Sonde, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 10.01.2018. Date Of Pronouncement : 02.02.208. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Sonde, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 92Section 92C

…had confirmed that it had claimed depreciation in the relevant Asst year on the said cars which were leased out to the assessee. He further placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Rajshree Roadways vs UOI reported in 263 ITR 206 (Raj) wherein it was held that the lessee would be entitled to the deduction of rent paid by him and the benefit of the depreciation shall be available to owner of the asset. Further the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the department against the said decision before the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been dismissed . He further placed reliance o…

DCIT, Cir-8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Eih Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 153/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 153/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Eih Limited [Pan: Aaace 6898 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 110/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Eih Limited -Vs- Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaace 6898 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Kanchun Kaushal,Ar For The Department : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.01.2018 Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Kanchun Kaushal,ARFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…llowability of lease rentals in the hands of the assessee (lessee). We also find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench) in the case of Rajshree Roadways vs Union of India & Ors reported in (2003) 263 ITR 206 (Raj) wherein it was held that :- Held, that under the agreement there was a clause that after completion of lease period, if one per cent. of the total consideration of the trucks was paid, the lessee would be the owner of those trucks. However, the agreement dealt with the ownership of the trucks under the agreement. There was a clear provisio…

Eih Ltd., Kolkata vs. The DCIT, Cir-8(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 110/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 153/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Eih Limited [Pan: Aaace 6898 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 110/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Eih Limited -Vs- Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaace 6898 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Kanchun Kaushal,Ar For The Department : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.01.2018 Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Kanchun Kaushal,ARFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…llowability of lease rentals in the hands of the assessee (lessee). We also find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench) in the case of Rajshree Roadways vs Union of India & Ors reported in (2003) 263 ITR 206 (Raj) wherein it was held that :- Held, that under the agreement there was a clause that after completion of lease period, if one per cent. of the total consideration of the trucks was paid, the lessee would be the owner of those trucks. However, the agreement dealt with the ownership of the trucks under the agreement. There was a clear provisio…

DCIT, Cir-2, Kolkata vs. M/S Prompt Infotech (P) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1485/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 May 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1485/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2008-09 D.C.I.T., Circle-2, -Vs.- M/S Prompt Infotech P.Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcp 5237 C] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. C.I.T., Sr.Dr For The Respondent : Shri B.K.Poddar, Fca Date Of Hearing : 25.05.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 25.05.2017. Order

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. C.I.T., Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri B.K.Poddar, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 65(12)

…ind that the assessee lessor had claimed depreciation in the relevant asst year on the said computers which were leased out. We also place further reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Rajshree Roadways vs UOI reported in 263 ITR 206 (Raj) wherein it was held that the lessee would be entitled to the deduction of rent paid by him and the benefit of the depreciation shall be available to owner of the asset. Further the Special Leave Petition (SLP ) filed by the department against the said decision before the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been dismissed . We also find that the co-or…

Reliance Corporate It Park Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 3, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2748/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.2748/Mum/2015 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11) Reliance Corporate It Park Ltd., बनधम/ Principal Commissioner Of Maker Tower E, 7Th Floor, Income Tax-6, Vs. A Wing- Cuff Parade Mumbai- 612, Aayakar Bhavan, 400005 Mk Road, Mumbai-400020 स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan : Aabcd7169H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. अऩीराथी की ओय से/Appellant By : Shri Arvind Sonde प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent By : Shri Rajesh Kumar सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 14.12.2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 3.2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am : The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Dated 20.3.2015, Passed By Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax -3, Mumbai Under Section 263, Setting Aside The Order Of The Assessing Officer Dated 20.3.2013 For Passing It Afresh. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Ground No.1 (I) The Learned Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax- 3, (Hereinafter Referred To As Cit) Erred In Passing The Order Under Section 263 Of The Act, By Holding That The Assessment Order Passed By The Oy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -3(3), Mumbai (Hereinafter

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32

…which do not, has any effect under Income Tax Act. In support of his various propositions; he referred and relied upon the following decisions which are as under : i) S.B.I. Home Finance Ltd V. CIT (280 ITR 006)(CAL); ii) Rajshree Roadways V. Union of India (263 ITR 206)(RAJ); iii) KM Sugar Mills Ltd. v. CIT –(2015) 57 taxmann.com 68(SC); iv) I.C.D.5. v. CIT (2013) 29 taxmann.com 129 (SC); v) Minda Corporation Limited V DC IT (2016) 69 taxmann.com 317(Del-Trib); vi) Industrial Development Corporation of India v. CIT - 268 ITR 130 (Orissa High Court) vii) CIT V/s Zuari Finance Ltd. and Another – 271 ITR 538(Bom);…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Tesco Hindustan Service Centre Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, both the assessee's appeal as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed

ITA 191/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri S. Raghunathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (D.R)
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 92C

…pose of assessee's business. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Rajshree Roadways Vs. 23 IT(T.P)A Nos.191 & 569/Bang/2015 Tesco Hindustan Service Centre Pvt. Ltd. Union of India (2003) 263 ITR 206 (Raj), decision of Delhi Benches of the Tribunal in the case of Minda Corporation Ltd Vs. DCIT 69 Taxman 317 as well as the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron & Engg. Co. Vs. CIT 253 ITR 749 (Guj). 19. On the other hand, the ld. DR has relied upon the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the assessee h…

Abn Amro Bank N.V., Kolkata vs. DDIT, International Taxation - 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1738/KOL/2009[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Apr 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: : Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri R.N. Bajroria, Sr. Adocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjana, CIT, ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 44C

…ssee). ABN Amro Bank N.V The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V C-AM 9.2.3. We also find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench) in the case of Rajshree Roadways vs Union of India & Ors reported in (2003) 263 ITR 206 (Raj) wherein it was held that :- Held, that under the agreement there was a clause that after completion of lease period, if one per cent. of the total consideration of the trucks was paid, the lessee would be the owner of those trucks. However, the agreement dealt with the ownership of the trucks under the agreement. There was a clear provision…

Eih Limited., Kolkata vs. C.I.T Kol - III, Kolkata

In the result, the order passed by the Learned CIT u/s 263 of the Act is set aside and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 529/KOL/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: : Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri R.N Bajoria, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: G. Mallikarjun, CIT, ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 38Section 38(2)

…lowability of lease rentals in the hands of the assessee (lessee). We also find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench) in the case of Rajshree Roadways vs Union of India & Ors reported in (2003) 263 ITR 206 (Raj) wherein it was held that :- Held, that under the agreement there was a clause that after completion of lease period, if one per cent. of the total consideration of the trucks was paid, the lessee would be the owner of those trucks. However, the agreement dealt with the ownership of the trucks under the agreement. There was a clear provisio…