Rupenjuli Tea Company v. CIT

STANDARD CHARTERED GRINDLAYS BANK LTD. vs. DY. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX & ORS.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

…ITA 496/2018 Page 1 of 4 $~87 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 496/2018 STANDARD CHARTERED GRINDLAYS BANK LTD. .....Appellant Through: Ms. Shashi M. Kapila, Mr. Pravesh Sharma and Mr. Sushil Kumar, Advs. versus DY. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Indruj Singh Rai, SSC and Mr. Sanjeev Menon, Panel Counsel with Mr. Rahul Singh, JSCs, Mr. Anmol Jagga and Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Advs. for Revenue. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR O R D E R…

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. STANDARD CHARTERED GRINDALYS BANK LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

…till fully allowable. The courts of law have held that no part of head office expenses which were exclusively India - centric were disallowable in law. For this Reliance was placed on the judgement of the Calcutta High Court in Rupenjuli Tea Company v. CIT [186 ITR 301] and Mumbai High Court in the case of CIT vs Ahu Dhabi Commercial bank reported in 262 ITR 55 where the court have categorically held that 'head office' expenses which are incurred exclusively and ONLY for the Indian business were fully deductible for determining the Indian business profits. No parts of such expenses were disallowable. Reli…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ANZ GRINDLAYS BANK LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

…till fully allowable. The courts of law have held that no part of head office expenses which were exclusively India - centric were disallowable in law. For this Reliance was placed on the judgement of the Calcutta High Court in Rupenjuli Tea Company v. CIT [186 ITR 301] and Mumbai High Court in the case of CIT vs Ahu Dhabi Commercial bank reported in 262 ITR 55 where the court have categorically held that 'head office' expenses which are incurred exclusively and ONLY for the Indian business were fully deductible for determining the Indian business profits. No parts of such expenses were disallowable. Reli…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -3 vs. STANDARD CHARTERED GRINDLAYS LTD .

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

…till fully allowable. The courts of law have held that no part of head office expenses which were exclusively India - centric were disallowable in law. For this Reliance was placed on the judgement of the Calcutta High Court in Rupenjuli Tea Company v. CIT [186 ITR 301] and Mumbai High Court in the case of CIT vs Ahu Dhabi Commercial bank reported in 262 ITR 55 where the court have categorically held that 'head office' expenses which are incurred exclusively and ONLY for the Indian business were fully deductible for determining the Indian business profits. No parts of such expenses were disallowable. Reli…

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. STANDARD CHARTERED GRINDLAYS BANK LTD.

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

…till fully allowable. The courts of law have held that no part of head office expenses which were exclusively India - centric were disallowable in law. For this Reliance was placed on the judgement of the Calcutta High Court in Rupenjuli Tea Company v. CIT [186 ITR 301] and Mumbai High Court in the case of CIT vs Ahu Dhabi Commercial bank reported in 262 ITR 55 where the court have categorically held that 'head office' expenses which are incurred exclusively and ONLY for the Indian business were fully deductible for determining the Indian business profits. No parts of such expenses were disallowable. Reli…

ERNST & YOUNG LTD., INDIA BRANCH OFFICE,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…e wholly for the purpose of business in India, are fully allowable as deduction under normal provisions of the Act (i.e. section 37(1) of the Act). The decision of the Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Rupenjuli Tea Co. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 186 ITR 301 was brought to the notice of the Assessing Officer. 5. As regards the query of the Assessing Officer regarding why the markup of the ‘Head Office Expenses’ which have been incurred by the head office, be not taxed as income in the hands of the India BO, it was submitted that the assessee is compensated at arm’s length price as per the Indian tr…

ERNST & YOUNG LTD., INDIA BRANCH OFFICE,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…e wholly for the purpose of business in India, are fully allowable as deduction under normal provisions of the Act (i.e. section 37(1) of the Act). The decision of the Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Rupenjuli Tea Co. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 186 ITR 301 was brought to the notice of the Assessing Officer. 5. As regards the query of the Assessing Officer regarding why the markup of the ‘Head Office Expenses’ which have been incurred by the head office, be not taxed as income in the hands of the India BO, it was submitted that the assessee is compensated at arm’s length price as per the Indian tr…