Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

118 ITR 261Supreme Court of India1979#238 most cited

What is Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

An expense incurred by an assessee for its own business, such as advertising, marketing, and promotional (AMP) expenses, cannot be disallowed merely because it incidentally or indirectly benefits the assessee's sister concerns or associated enterprises.

323

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 372,250 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT · 118 ITR 261 · Section 37(1) disallowance · business expenditure · commercial expediency · indirect benefit sister concerns · associated enterprises · AMP expenses · related party transactions · Section 40A(2)

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 1961Section 195Section 147Section 148Section 37Section 40(a)(i)

Issues it is cited on

section 10(2)(xv)section 5(2)section 40a(2)(b)commercial expediencysection 40a(2)section 195arm's length pricesection 40(a)(i)section 37(1)section 9(1)section 37associated enterprises

Judgments citing Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed and appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5776/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: S/Shri Pradeep Dinodia & R.KFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI Dr. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.899/DEL/2013 & 1704/DEL/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Vs. DCIT, 8th Floor, Eros Corporate Tower, Central Circle-6, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AAACA1967D (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No.1348 & 1349/DEL/2013, 5776/DEL/2014 & 2083/DEL/2015 Assessment Year: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 DCIT, Vs. Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Central Circle-6, Ltd., New Delhi 8th Floor, Eros Corporate Tower, Nehru Place,…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed and appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1349/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: S/Shri Pradeep Dinodia & R.KFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI Dr. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.899/DEL/2013 & 1704/DEL/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Vs. DCIT, 8th Floor, Eros Corporate Tower, Central Circle-6, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AAACA1967D (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No.1348 & 1349/DEL/2013, 5776/DEL/2014 & 2083/DEL/2015 Assessment Year: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 & 2012-13 DCIT, Vs. Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Central Circle-6, Ltd., New Delhi 8th Floor, Eros Corporate Tower, Nehru Place,…

Jas Forwarding Worldwide Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011 – 12 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1687/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor advocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Barnwal, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 40Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ITA No. 1687/Del/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) JAS Forwarding Worldwide Pvt. Vs. DCIT, Ltd, Circle-4(1), 1st Floor, A-Wing, Commercial New Delhi Complex, Radisson Hotel, New Delhi PAN: AABCJ5564A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Salil Kapoor advocate Ms Ananya Kapoor advocate Shri Sumit Lal Chandani, Adv Revenue by: Shri M. Barnwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 21/05/2021 Date of pronouncement 26/07/2021 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARI…

Jas Forwarding Worldwide Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2011 – 12 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2484/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor advocateFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Pal [CIT] – DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 40Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ITA No. 1687/Del/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) JAS Forwarding Worldwide Pvt. Vs. DCIT, Ltd, Circle-4(1), 1st Floor, A-Wing, Commercial New Delhi Complex, Radisson Hotel, New Delhi PAN: AABCJ5564A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Salil Kapoor advocate Ms Ananya Kapoor advocate Shri Sumit Lal Chandani, Adv Revenue by: Shri Surendra Pal [CIT] – DR; Date of Hearing 21/05/2021 Date of pronouncement 26/07/2021 O R D E R PER PRASHANT…

Vijaya Bank Employees Housing Co-Operative Society Ltd., Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 603/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.V.Chandrashekhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishtra, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 251Section 251(2)

…ot necessary for earning of the income. In this context, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex 11 ITA No.603/Bang/2014. M/s.Vijaya Bank Employees Ho. Co-op.Society Ltd.. Court in the case of Sassoon J David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT reported in 118 ITR 261. Even assuming that interest income is assessed as income from other sources, whether the interest expenditure ought to be allowed as a deduction u/s 57(iii) of the I.T.Act. 12.8 As mentioned earlier, the interest paid on advances from members is chargeable on interest income earned from depositing the same with banks by the assessee because had…

Pr. Commissioner of vs. M/S the Karnataka State Co-Operative Apex

In the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal,

ITA/516/2016HC Karnataka05 Jul 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 147Section 148Section 260Section 260ASection 37Section 37(1)Section 43(1)Section 57

…ce has been placed on decisions in 'KARNTAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE APEX BANK LTD. VS. DCIT IN ITA NO.275 OF 2015 DATED 01.03.2021 (KAR.), 'MYSORE KIRLOSKAR LTD. VS. CIT', (1987) 166 ITR 836 (KARNATAKA), 'SASSOON J. 7 DAVID AND CO.P. LTD. VS. CIT', (1979) 118 ITR 261, 'CIT VS. KIRLOSKAR OIL ENGINES LTD.', (1986) 157 ITR 762 (BOM.) 6. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. The solitary issue, which arises for consideration in this appeal is whether contribution of Rs.10,86,43,782/-made to the funds is eligible as expenditure under Secti…

Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 2(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee are allowed

ITA 8700/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit E-9, Connaught Hose, Circle – 2(2), Connaught Place, New Delhi New Delhi - 110001 Pan No. Aaaca 0364 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Taran Deep Singh, Adv. Revenue By Shri Surender Pal, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 18/05/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/05/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.09.2019 Of The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Delhi Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Act Pursuant To The Direction Of Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) – 1, Delhi For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under :

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(2)Section 144C(5)Section 92BSection 92CSection 92C(3)Section 92F

…al benefit to the foreign associated enterprise, it cannot be said that the advertisement, marketing and promotion expenses incurred by the Indian entity was for promoting the brand of the foreign associated enterprise. As mentioned in Sassoon J. David [1979] 118 ITR 261, 276 (SC) 'the fact that somebody other than the assessee is also benefitted by the expenditure should not come in the way of an expenditure being allowed by way of a deduction under section 10(2)(xv) of the Act (Indian Income-tax Act, 1922) if it satisfies otherwise the tests laid down by the law'." 8.2 On a careful consideration of the facts on…

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

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2228/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2021AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 27i

…enditure is allowable as a revenue expenditure if it is not a capital expenditure, not a personal expenditure and has been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of its business. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Sassoon J. David Vs. CIT (1979) 118 ITR 261 as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. 341 ITR 241 (Del). Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that the expenditure in respect of warranty was wholly and exclusively incurred by the assessee for the purpose of its business and was not in the nature of capital or personal nature and thus entitled t…

Sri. B. Rudragouda, Bellary vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 315/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 37(1)

…v. CIT [2017] 396 ITR 244 (Bom) (13) CIT v. DLF Universal Ltd. [2017] 396 ITR 244 (Bom) (14) Karnataka State Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. v. DCIT [2017] 54 ITR (Trib) 425 (Bang. Trib) (15) Sasson J. David & Co. P. Ltd. v. CIT (1979) 118 ITR 261 (SC) (16) S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 288 ITR 1 (SC) (17) CIT v. Walchand and Co. (P) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 (SC) ITA Nos.314 & 315/Bang/2020 Page 5 of 70 (18) CIT v. Panipat Woollen & General Mills Co. Ltd. [1976] 103 ITR 66 (SC) (19) Mysore Minerals Ltd. v. CIT (ITA No.464/Bang/2014 dtd. 25.1.2019) (20) CIT v. Chandulal Keshavlal & Co. […

Sri. B. Rudragouda, Bellary vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 314/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 37(1)

…v. CIT [2017] 396 ITR 244 (Bom) (13) CIT v. DLF Universal Ltd. [2017] 396 ITR 244 (Bom) (14) Karnataka State Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. v. DCIT [2017] 54 ITR (Trib) 425 (Bang. Trib) (15) Sasson J. David & Co. P. Ltd. v. CIT (1979) 118 ITR 261 (SC) (16) S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 288 ITR 1 (SC) (17) CIT v. Walchand and Co. (P) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 (SC) ITA Nos.314 & 315/Bang/2020 Page 5 of 70 (18) CIT v. Panipat Woollen & General Mills Co. Ltd. [1976] 103 ITR 66 (SC) (19) Mysore Minerals Ltd. v. CIT (ITA No.464/Bang/2014 dtd. 25.1.2019) (20) CIT v. Chandulal Keshavlal & Co. […

M/S Vijaya Bank Employees Housing Co-Operative Society Ltd, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-4(3)(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 772/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.V.Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…at would be necessary is only that it is for the “purpose of business” and not necessary for earning of the income. In this context, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sassoon J David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT reported in 118 ITR 261. 13 ITA Nos.766-772/Bang/2018 M/s.Vijaya Bank Employees Ho.Co.op.So.Ltd. . Even assuming that interest income is assessed as income from other sources, whether the interest expenditure ought to be allowed as a deduction u/s 57(iii) of the I.T.Act. 12.8 As mentioned earlier, the interest paid on advances from members is chargeable on interest inc…

M/S Vijaya Bank Employees Housing Co-Operative Society Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistat Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 771/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.V.Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…at would be necessary is only that it is for the “purpose of business” and not necessary for earning of the income. In this context, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sassoon J David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT reported in 118 ITR 261. 13 ITA Nos.766-772/Bang/2018 M/s.Vijaya Bank Employees Ho.Co.op.So.Ltd. . Even assuming that interest income is assessed as income from other sources, whether the interest expenditure ought to be allowed as a deduction u/s 57(iii) of the I.T.Act. 12.8 As mentioned earlier, the interest paid on advances from members is chargeable on interest inc…

M/S Vijaya Bank Employees Housing Co-Operative Society Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistat Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 770/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Apr 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.V.Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…at would be necessary is only that it is for the “purpose of business” and not necessary for earning of the income. In this context, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sassoon J David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT reported in 118 ITR 261. 13 ITA Nos.766-772/Bang/2018 M/s.Vijaya Bank Employees Ho.Co.op.So.Ltd. . Even assuming that interest income is assessed as income from other sources, whether the interest expenditure ought to be allowed as a deduction u/s 57(iii) of the I.T.Act. 12.8 As mentioned earlier, the interest paid on advances from members is chargeable on interest inc…

M/S Vijaya Bank Employees Housing Tax Co-Operative Society Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-10(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 769/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.V.Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…at would be necessary is only that it is for the “purpose of business” and not necessary for earning of the income. In this context, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sassoon J David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT reported in 118 ITR 261. 13 ITA Nos.766-772/Bang/2018 M/s.Vijaya Bank Employees Ho.Co.op.So.Ltd. . Even assuming that interest income is assessed as income from other sources, whether the interest expenditure ought to be allowed as a deduction u/s 57(iii) of the I.T.Act. 12.8 As mentioned earlier, the interest paid on advances from members is chargeable on interest inc…

M/S Vijaya Bank Employees Housing Co-Operative Society Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-10(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 768/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Apr 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.V.Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…at would be necessary is only that it is for the “purpose of business” and not necessary for earning of the income. In this context, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sassoon J David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT reported in 118 ITR 261. 13 ITA Nos.766-772/Bang/2018 M/s.Vijaya Bank Employees Ho.Co.op.So.Ltd. . Even assuming that interest income is assessed as income from other sources, whether the interest expenditure ought to be allowed as a deduction u/s 57(iii) of the I.T.Act. 12.8 As mentioned earlier, the interest paid on advances from members is chargeable on interest inc…

M/S Viijaya Bank Employees Housing Co-Operative Society Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-10(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 767/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Apr 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.V.Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…at would be necessary is only that it is for the “purpose of business” and not necessary for earning of the income. In this context, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sassoon J David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT reported in 118 ITR 261. 13 ITA Nos.766-772/Bang/2018 M/s.Vijaya Bank Employees Ho.Co.op.So.Ltd. . Even assuming that interest income is assessed as income from other sources, whether the interest expenditure ought to be allowed as a deduction u/s 57(iii) of the I.T.Act. 12.8 As mentioned earlier, the interest paid on advances from members is chargeable on interest inc…

M/S Vijaya Bank Employees Housing Co-Operative Society Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-10(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 766/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Apr 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.V.Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…at would be necessary is only that it is for the “purpose of business” and not necessary for earning of the income. In this context, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sassoon J David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT reported in 118 ITR 261. 13 ITA Nos.766-772/Bang/2018 M/s.Vijaya Bank Employees Ho.Co.op.So.Ltd. . Even assuming that interest income is assessed as income from other sources, whether the interest expenditure ought to be allowed as a deduction u/s 57(iii) of the I.T.Act. 12.8 As mentioned earlier, the interest paid on advances from members is chargeable on interest inc…

Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 2(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 7376/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2014-15]

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92F

…al benefit to the foreign associated enterprise, it cannot be said that the advertisement, marketing and promotion expenses incurred by the Indian entity was for promoting the brand of the foreign associated enterprise. As mentioned in Sassoon J. David [1979] 118 ITR 261, 276 (SC) 'the fact that somebody other than the assessee is also benefitted by the expenditure should not come in the way of an expenditure being allowed by way of a deduction under section 10(2)(xv) of the Act (Indian Income-tax Act, 1922) if it satisfies otherwise the tests laid down by the law'." 8.2 On a careful consideration of the facts o…

M/S Karnataka State Co-Operative Apex Bank Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, the impugned order dated

ITA/275/2015HC Karnataka01 Mar 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,ASHOK S.KINAGI

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 260Section 260ASection 27

…'MYSORE KIRLOSKAR LTD. VS. CIT[', (1987) 166 ITR 836 (KARNATAKA), 'T.T.D. CO-OPERTIVE STORES LTD, (1998) 232 ITR 109 (AP), 'CIT VS. PANDAVAPURA SHAKARA SAKKARE KARKHANE LTD', (1988) 14 ITR 457 (KARNATAKA), 'SASSOON J. DAVID AND CO.P.LTD VS. CIT', (1979) 118 ITR 261, 'CIT VS. INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES LTD', (2012) 349 ITR 582, 'KARJAN CO-OPERATIVE COTTON SALES GINNING ANDPRESSING SOCIETY VS. CIT (1993) 199 ITR 17 (GUJARAT), 'CIT VS MALAYALAM PLANTATIONS LTD.,', (1964) 53 ITR 40 (SC), 'CIT VS. DELHI SAFE DEPOSIT CO. LTD', (1982) 133 ITR 756 (SC), 'S.A.BUILDERS VS. CIT (A)', (2007) 288 ITR 1 (SC) and K…

Huawei Telecommunications (India) Company Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle- 2(1), Gurgaon

ITA 7510/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Deepark Chopra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, CIT DR
Section 143Section 144CSection 92C(3)

…d image of the group company of Huawei Technology and disallowed the advertisement expenses to the tune 21 ITA No.7509/Del./2017 ITA No.7510/Del./2017 of 30% is also not sustainable. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Sassoon J. David and Co. P. Ltd. vs. CIT 118 ITR 261 (SC) held that, “the fact that somebody other than the assessee is also benefited by the expenditure should not come in the way of an expenditure being allowed by way of deduction under section 10(2)(xv) of the Act if it satisfied otherwise the tests laid down by law.” 34. Similarly, Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of J.J. Enterprises vs. CIT 25…