Sitalpur Sugar Works v. CIT

49 ITR 160Supreme Court of India1963#5545 most cited

What is Sitalpur Sugar Works v. CIT authority for?

Expenditure is capital in nature if it is incurred for acquiring an asset or advantage of enduring benefit, or if it forms part of the profit-earning structure of the business.

21

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Sitalpur Sugar Works v CIT · capital vs revenue expenditure · enduring benefit · profit-earning structure · acquisition of assets · expenditure classification

Issues it is cited on

section 274(1)section 43b(f)section 2(45)section 36(l)(iii)section 211section 271(l)section 32(1)(iia)house property incomesection 140full and true disclosuresection 271(l)(c)additional depreciation

Judgments citing Sitalpur Sugar Works v. CIT

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK,MUMBAI vs. DDIT(IT) 2 (1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1683/MUM/2019[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon'Bleorder Per S. Rifaur Rahman (Am) 1. These Cross Appeals Are Filled By The Assessee & Revenue Against Different Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-57, Mumbai (Hereinafter In Short "Ld.Cit(A)"] Dated 28.12.2018 For The A.Ys.2002-03 & 2003-04. 2. Since The Issues Raised In All The Appeals Are Identical, Therefore, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Are Clubbed, Heard & Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. Revenue Appeals

Section 195Section 28Section 9(1)(v)

…CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer of for disallowance of premium paid on acquisition of retail assets by holding that the same is capital in nature and not revenue relying on the decision in the case of Sitalpur Sugar Works v CIT 49 ITR 160 (SC) which was with respect to expenditure incurred in dismantling and refitting existing plant at a better site and in the case of Abdul Khayoom v CIT 44 ITR 689 (SC) wherein the issue was in respect to payment made for acquiring monopoly right over a long period of time from producer of goods. 7.2. It is respectfully submitted that both these de…

SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED, BILASPUR,BILASPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR, BILASPUR

ITA 42/RPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 271(1)(c)

…2009- 10 and the AO has been denying the expenditure as inadmissible being capital in nature every year by placing reliance on the decision of the highest fact findings authority as well as in the ratio of the case in Sitalpur Sugar Works Vs. CIT reported in 49 ITR 160 (SC); International Airport Authority of India Vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd Vs. CIT reported in 218 ITR 598 (Born); Jagmohan Rao Vs. CIT reported in 75 ITR 373 (SC). The order of the AO is being sustained by the First Appellate Authority by respectfully following the above decision of the jurisdictional Tribunal.…

SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED, BILASPUR,BILASPUR vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR, BILASPUR

ITA 41/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 271(1)(c)

…2009- 10 and the AO has been denying the expenditure as inadmissible being capital in nature every year by placing reliance on the decision of the highest fact findings authority as well as in the ratio of the case in Sitalpur Sugar Works Vs. CIT reported in 49 ITR 160 (SC); International Airport Authority of India Vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd Vs. CIT reported in 218 ITR 598 (Born); Jagmohan Rao Vs. CIT reported in 75 ITR 373 (SC). The order of the AO is being sustained by the First Appellate Authority by respectfully following the above decision of the jurisdictional Tribunal.…

SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED, BILASPUR,BILASPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR, BILASPUR

ITA 40/RPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 271(1)(c)

…2009- 10 and the AO has been denying the expenditure as inadmissible being capital in nature every year by placing reliance on the decision of the highest fact findings authority as well as in the ratio of the case in Sitalpur Sugar Works Vs. CIT reported in 49 ITR 160 (SC); International Airport Authority of India Vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd Vs. CIT reported in 218 ITR 598 (Born); Jagmohan Rao Vs. CIT reported in 75 ITR 373 (SC). The order of the AO is being sustained by the First Appellate Authority by respectfully following the above decision of the jurisdictional Tribunal.…

SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED, BILASPUR,BILASPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR, BILASPUR

ITA 39/RPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 271(1)(c)

…2009- 10 and the AO has been denying the expenditure as inadmissible being capital in nature every year by placing reliance on the decision of the highest fact findings authority as well as in the ratio of the case in Sitalpur Sugar Works Vs. CIT reported in 49 ITR 160 (SC); International Airport Authority of India Vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd Vs. CIT reported in 218 ITR 598 (Born); Jagmohan Rao Vs. CIT reported in 75 ITR 373 (SC). The order of the AO is being sustained by the First Appellate Authority by respectfully following the above decision of the jurisdictional Tribunal.…

SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED,BILASPUR vs. JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR

ITA 66/RPR/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 271(1)(c)

…2009- 10 and the AO has been denying the expenditure as inadmissible being capital in nature every year by placing reliance on the decision of the highest fact findings authority as well as in the ratio of the case in Sitalpur Sugar Works Vs. CIT reported in 49 ITR 160 (SC); International Airport Authority of India Vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd Vs. CIT reported in 218 ITR 598 (Born); Jagmohan Rao Vs. CIT reported in 75 ITR 373 (SC). The order of the AO is being sustained by the First Appellate Authority by respectfully following the above decision of the jurisdictional Tribunal.…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), BILASPUR vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED, BILASPUR

ITA 170/RPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 271(1)(c)

…2009- 10 and the AO has been denying the expenditure as inadmissible being capital in nature every year by placing reliance on the decision of the highest fact findings authority as well as in the ratio of the case in Sitalpur Sugar Works Vs. CIT reported in 49 ITR 160 (SC); International Airport Authority of India Vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd Vs. CIT reported in 218 ITR 598 (Born); Jagmohan Rao Vs. CIT reported in 75 ITR 373 (SC). The order of the AO is being sustained by the First Appellate Authority by respectfully following the above decision of the jurisdictional Tribunal.…

SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED,BILASPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), BILASPUR

ITA 167/RPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 271(1)(c)

…2009- 10 and the AO has been denying the expenditure as inadmissible being capital in nature every year by placing reliance on the decision of the highest fact findings authority as well as in the ratio of the case in Sitalpur Sugar Works Vs. CIT reported in 49 ITR 160 (SC); International Airport Authority of India Vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd Vs. CIT reported in 218 ITR 598 (Born); Jagmohan Rao Vs. CIT reported in 75 ITR 373 (SC). The order of the AO is being sustained by the First Appellate Authority by respectfully following the above decision of the jurisdictional Tribunal.…

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE 1(1)BILASPUR, BILASPUR(CG) vs. THE SOUTH EASTERN COAL FIELDS LTD., BILASPUR, BILASPUR(CG)

ITA 97/BIL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 271(1)(c)

…2009- 10 and the AO has been denying the expenditure as inadmissible being capital in nature every year by placing reliance on the decision of the highest fact findings authority as well as in the ratio of the case in Sitalpur Sugar Works Vs. CIT reported in 49 ITR 160 (SC); International Airport Authority of India Vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd Vs. CIT reported in 218 ITR 598 (Born); Jagmohan Rao Vs. CIT reported in 75 ITR 373 (SC). The order of the AO is being sustained by the First Appellate Authority by respectfully following the above decision of the jurisdictional Tribunal.…

THE SOUTH EASTERN COAL FIELDS LTD., BILASPUR,BILASPUR(CG) vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE , 1(1)BILASPUR, BILASPUR(CG)

ITA 163/BIL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 271(1)(c)

…2009- 10 and the AO has been denying the expenditure as inadmissible being capital in nature every year by placing reliance on the decision of the highest fact findings authority as well as in the ratio of the case in Sitalpur Sugar Works Vs. CIT reported in 49 ITR 160 (SC); International Airport Authority of India Vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd Vs. CIT reported in 218 ITR 598 (Born); Jagmohan Rao Vs. CIT reported in 75 ITR 373 (SC). The order of the AO is being sustained by the First Appellate Authority by respectfully following the above decision of the jurisdictional Tribunal.…

SOUTH EASTERN COAL FIELDS LTD.,,BILASPUR(CG) vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), BILASPUR(CG)

ITA 144/BIL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 271(1)(c)

…2009- 10 and the AO has been denying the expenditure as inadmissible being capital in nature every year by placing reliance on the decision of the highest fact findings authority as well as in the ratio of the case in Sitalpur Sugar Works Vs. CIT reported in 49 ITR 160 (SC); International Airport Authority of India Vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd Vs. CIT reported in 218 ITR 598 (Born); Jagmohan Rao Vs. CIT reported in 75 ITR 373 (SC). The order of the AO is being sustained by the First Appellate Authority by respectfully following the above decision of the jurisdictional Tribunal.…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COAL FIELDS LTD.,, BILASPUR(CG)

ITA 143/BIL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 271(1)(c)

…2009- 10 and the AO has been denying the expenditure as inadmissible being capital in nature every year by placing reliance on the decision of the highest fact findings authority as well as in the ratio of the case in Sitalpur Sugar Works Vs. CIT reported in 49 ITR 160 (SC); International Airport Authority of India Vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd Vs. CIT reported in 218 ITR 598 (Born); Jagmohan Rao Vs. CIT reported in 75 ITR 373 (SC). The order of the AO is being sustained by the First Appellate Authority by respectfully following the above decision of the jurisdictional Tribunal.…

SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD,BILASPUR(CG) vs. DY.. C.I.T.-1(1), BILASPUR(CG)

ITA 156/BIL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 271(1)(c)

…2009- 10 and the AO has been denying the expenditure as inadmissible being capital in nature every year by placing reliance on the decision of the highest fact findings authority as well as in the ratio of the case in Sitalpur Sugar Works Vs. CIT reported in 49 ITR 160 (SC); International Airport Authority of India Vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd Vs. CIT reported in 218 ITR 598 (Born); Jagmohan Rao Vs. CIT reported in 75 ITR 373 (SC). The order of the AO is being sustained by the First Appellate Authority by respectfully following the above decision of the jurisdictional Tribunal.…

THE DY. CIT- CIR.-1(1),, BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFILDS LTD.,, BILASPUR(CG)

ITA 152/BIL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 271(1)(c)

…2009- 10 and the AO has been denying the expenditure as inadmissible being capital in nature every year by placing reliance on the decision of the highest fact findings authority as well as in the ratio of the case in Sitalpur Sugar Works Vs. CIT reported in 49 ITR 160 (SC); International Airport Authority of India Vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd Vs. CIT reported in 218 ITR 598 (Born); Jagmohan Rao Vs. CIT reported in 75 ITR 373 (SC). The order of the AO is being sustained by the First Appellate Authority by respectfully following the above decision of the jurisdictional Tribunal.…

M/S GE T&D INDIA LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT LARGE TAX PAYER UNIT 1, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 725/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 725/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010 - 11 Ge T&D India Ltd., The Dcit, 19/1, Ioc Building, Gst Road, Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit-1, Pallavaram, Chennai Chennai – 600 043. Pan: Aaacg 2115R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Sriram Seshadhri, C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Marudhu Pandian, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 17.11.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadhri, C.A ""For Respondent: Shri S. Marudhu Pandian, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

…ory itself could be allowed as revenue expenditure. But, in the case of the assessee, the moving out expenses relates to the existing facility being located to another location for ease of administration. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sitalpur Sugar Works Ltd (49 ITR 160) held that the shifting of the factory produced an enduring advantage in the shape of transfer to a better factory site, an advantage which enabled the trade to prosper and an advantage that could be expected to last for'ever. 6.4 The ld.AR for the assessee in view of the above stated that the audit objection is the only reason and AO has nowhere…

HITACHI METGLAS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5906/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[A.Y 2010-11]

For Appellant: Shri Saleel Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar Meel, CIT- DR

…rom Gurgaon to Manesar and no new assets have been created. 10. The contention of the assessee did not find any favour with the ld. CIT(A) who was of the firm belief that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sitalpur Sugar Works Pvt Ltd 49 ITR 160 squarely applies on the facts of the case. 11. Taking a leaf out of the said decision, the ld. CIT(A) observed as under: “lt is thus observed from the above judicial precedents that the expenditure incurred by an assessee on shifting of its plant and machinery is held to be capital when the test of enduring benefit sets in - there is no externa…

M/S RAMNIKLAL S GOSALIA & CO.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT RANGE 21(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2492/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Mahazaver PatelFor Respondent: Shri Vidhyadhar V

…different. In some cases it was the issue of National Highway authority of India and the license granted for period of 20 years and the upgradation operation and maintenance of the road project etc. The other case law of Sitalpur Sugar works Ltd. vs.CIT (1963)49 ITR 160(SC). is 8 M/s. Ramniklal S. Gosalia & Co. regarding dismantling and refitting of the factory from one place to another and had treated the dismantling expenses as revenue. All these cases have very different facts and it is the facts of the each case which would be relevant to decide this issue. As the specific facts of this case have already bee…

G VIJAY PADMA ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-7(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeal is dismissed

ITA 3295/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Sept 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaismt. G Vijay Padma, No.206, 1St Floor, 10Th D Main, 5Th Cross, 1St Block, Jayanagar, Bengaluru-560 011 Pan Abcpv 8123E ….Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(2)(1), Bengaluru. ……Respondent. Assessee By: Shri P. R. Mathad, C.A. Revenue By: Smt. R. Premi, Jcit (D.R)

For Appellant: Shri P. R. Mathad, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT (D.R)
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 2(14)(iii)Section 54F

…urred for the purpose of eviction and compensation paid to take the complete possession of the property are all admissible expenditure: Mrs. June Perett Vs. ITO 298 ITR 268 (Kar) V. Jagamohan Rao & Others Vs CIT 75 ITR 373(SC) Sitalpur Sugar Works Ltd Vs CIT 49 ITR 160(SC) 9 5.10 The learned Departmental Representative relied on the order of the lower authorities. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and also considered various orders cited by the parties. The first contention of the AR is that the impugned land is an agricultural land and it is not a capital asset since it is the land covered by Section 2(14…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S WIPRO LTD

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA/133/2007HC Karnataka23 Aug 2013

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

Section 260

…as repair expenses, claimed by the assessee for removal of machinery to make way for short mix plant installation, is allowable as a revenue expenditure and that no depreciation can be allowed contrary to the judgment of the Apex Court reported in 49 ITR 160. A-2 Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the deduction of Rs.42,00,536/- u/s.80HH and the deduction of Rs.52,50,669/- u/s.80I of the Act is allowable despite the new industrial undertaking not meeting the conditions stipulated u/s 80HH and 80I of the Act? A-3. Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that provision…

AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI I

Appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms

ITA/792/2008HC Delhi16 Dec 2011

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO FULL BENCHES

…* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved On: 2.12.2011 % Judgment Pronounced On: 16.12. 2011 + IT A 792/2008 AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA ... APPELLANT Through :. Mr. O.S. Bajpai, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Manasvini Bajpai and Mr. V.N. Jha, Advocates. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ... RESPONDENT Through: Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Sr. Standing Counsel. CORAM:- HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASW AR A.K. SIKRI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE: For orders, see ITA 432/2008. DECEMBER 16, 2011 skb 1!;!':1~ ACTING CHIE; JUSTICE 7jwJ…

Showing 1–20 of 21 · Page 1 of 2

Sitalpur Sugar Works v. CIT (49 ITR 160) — Cited in 21 Judgments | BharatTax