What is Southern Switchgear Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Expenditure on technical aid fees for factory setup and rights to sell products under a collaboration agreement is capital in nature, not revenue, as it provides an enduring benefit.

How many judgments cite Southern Switchgear Ltd. v. CIT?

99 judgments on BharatTax cite Southern Switchgear Ltd. v. CIT (232 ITR 359), spanning 2008 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Southern Switchgear Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 37(1), Section 194H, Section 35ABB, Section 40(a)(ia), Section 144B.

Southern Switchgear Ltd. v. CIT (232 ITR 359)

ACIT Circle-9(1), New Delhi vs. Fcc Clutch India Pvt Ltd(Successor of Fcc Rico Ltd.), Gurgaon

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 3664/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri K.M. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 147

…arts in India. Hence, it was claimed that it was revenue expenditure. However, Ld. AO held that royalty claimed by the assessee is capital in nature after relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Southern Switchgear Ltd vs CIT ([1998] 232 ITR 359 (SC). 5. It is pertinent to note that exactly similar basis for disallowances were made in the earlier assessment years starting from Assessment year 2005-06. The appeal for A.Y. 2005-06 was allowed in the first appeal in favour of the assessee holding that it is revenue expenditure after detail analysis and reasoning. However, in assessment yea…

ACIT Circle-9(1), New Delhi vs. Fcc Clutch India Pvt Ltd(Successor of Fcc Rico Ltd.), Gurgaon

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 3663/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri K.M. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 147

…arts in India. Hence, it was claimed that it was revenue expenditure. However, Ld. AO held that royalty claimed by the assessee is capital in nature after relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Southern Switchgear Ltd vs CIT ([1998] 232 ITR 359 (SC). 5. It is pertinent to note that exactly similar basis for disallowances were made in the earlier assessment years starting from Assessment year 2005-06. The appeal for A.Y. 2005-06 was allowed in the first appeal in favour of the assessee holding that it is revenue expenditure after detail analysis and reasoning. However, in assessment yea…

ACIT, Circle-9(1), New Delhi vs. Fcc Clutch India P.Ltd, Gurgaon

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1504/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri K.M. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 147

…arts in India. Hence, it was claimed that it was revenue expenditure. However, Ld. AO held that royalty claimed by the assessee is capital in nature after relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Southern Switchgear Ltd vs CIT ([1998] 232 ITR 359 (SC). 5. It is pertinent to note that exactly similar basis for disallowances were made in the earlier assessment years starting from Assessment year 2005-06. The appeal for A.Y. 2005-06 was allowed in the first appeal in favour of the assessee holding that it is revenue expenditure after detail analysis and reasoning. However, in assessment yea…

ACIT, Circle-9(1), New Delhi vs. Fcc Clutch India P.Ltd, Gurgaon

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1503/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri K.M. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 147

…arts in India. Hence, it was claimed that it was revenue expenditure. However, Ld. AO held that royalty claimed by the assessee is capital in nature after relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Southern Switchgear Ltd vs CIT ([1998] 232 ITR 359 (SC). 5. It is pertinent to note that exactly similar basis for disallowances were made in the earlier assessment years starting from Assessment year 2005-06. The appeal for A.Y. 2005-06 was allowed in the first appeal in favour of the assessee holding that it is revenue expenditure after detail analysis and reasoning. However, in assessment yea…

ACIT, Circle-9(1), New Delhi vs. Fcc Clutch India P.Ltd, Gurgaon

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1502/DEL/2019[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2021AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri K.M. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 147

…arts in India. Hence, it was claimed that it was revenue expenditure. However, Ld. AO held that royalty claimed by the assessee is capital in nature after relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Southern Switchgear Ltd vs CIT ([1998] 232 ITR 359 (SC). 5. It is pertinent to note that exactly similar basis for disallowances were made in the earlier assessment years starting from Assessment year 2005-06. The appeal for A.Y. 2005-06 was allowed in the first appeal in favour of the assessee holding that it is revenue expenditure after detail analysis and reasoning. However, in assessment yea…

M/S Contitech India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5222/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14A

…ure was acquired by the appellant company. Further in assessment order at Page No.7 – para 4, the AO mentioned that only 25% will be treated as capital expenditure i.e. Rs.5,803,750/- after following the Hon’ble SC decision of Southern Switch Gear Ltd. vs CIT 232 ITR 359. However, while calculating total additions at page No.14 of the order, total royalty amount of Rs.23,215,000/- was disallowed. 3 Ground No.2 The Assessing Officer had erred both on the law as well as on the facts while making disallowance of Rs.757,345/- under Section 14A of the Act in accordance with rule 8D as per notification no.45/2008 dat…

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

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5088/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14A

…ure was acquired by the appellant company. Further in assessment order at Page No.7 – para 4, the AO mentioned that only 25% will be treated as capital expenditure i.e. Rs.5,803,750/- after following the Hon’ble SC decision of Southern Switch Gear Ltd. vs CIT 232 ITR 359. However, while calculating total additions at page No.14 of the order, total royalty amount of Rs.23,215,000/- was disallowed. 3 Ground No.2 The Assessing Officer had erred both on the law as well as on the facts while making disallowance of Rs.757,345/- under Section 14A of the Act in accordance with rule 8D as per notification no.45/2008 dat…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Expeditors International (India) P. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2128/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) Dcit Vs. Expeditors International Circle – 11(1), (India) Pvt. Ltd., Room No.312, No.6, Ground Floor, C.R. Building, New Delhi Sector – C, Pocket – 8 Csc, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi - 110070 Pan No. Aaace 1795 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv Shri Rohan Khare, Adv Shri Harpreet Singh, Adv Revenue By Shri Ajit Kumar Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 07/12/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 17/12/2020 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 10.03.2011 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)- Xx, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2005-06. 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under : Dcit Vs. Expeditors International (India) Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2005-06 2 3. Assessee Is A Company Which Is Stated To Be Engaged In The Business Of Supplying Chain Management, Logistics & Freight Forwarding Related To Movement Of Goods & Cargo Within & Outside India By Road, Rail, Air Or Ship.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…noted that assessee did not furnish any reply. He further noticed that in A.Y. 2004-05 the royalty was capitalized and the amount was disallowed. He thereafter by following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Southern Switchgear Ltd. vs. CIT 232 ITR 359, disallowed 25% of the royalty and made disallowance of Rs.3,39,91,372/-. 31. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A). CIT(A) while deciding the issue noted that the payment of royalty was an operational expenses and therefore revenue in nature and the ratio of the decision in the case of Southern Switchgear L…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Advance Surfactants India Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6520/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 6520/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Vs M/S. Advance Surfactants India Ltd. Circle-1(2), 511/2/1, Rajokari New Delhi Delhi- 110038 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabca9042Q Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.11.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.12.2020

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. DR

…formation after the expiry of the agreement, the assessee had acquired an enduring 7 Advance Surfactants India Ltd. benefit by the above agreement. To that extent, the amount paid was held clearly capital. 5.3] In the case of Southern Switch Gear Ltd. Vs CIT 232 ITR 359 (SC), the Hon’ble Apex Court has upheld the finding of the Madras High Court that the right to manufacture certain goods exclusively in independent right, secured by the assessee from the foreign co. which was of an enduring nature. 6] In view of above factual matrix and legal position, as concluded in the last assessment year, it is held that a…

Bellsonica Auto Components India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the

ITA 5946/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Before Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Before Shri Before Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Bhavnesh Saini & Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Shri R.K. Pandashri Shri R.K. Pandar.K. Pandar.K. Panda

Section 32(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI BENCH DELHI DELHI BENCH BENCH ’A BENCH ’A ’A’ NEW DELHI ’A NEW DELHI NEW DELHI NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. ITA No.5844 5844/Del/201…

ACIT, Gurgaon vs. M/S. Bellsonica Auto Component India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the

ITA 5844/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Before Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Before Shri Before Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Bhavnesh Saini & Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Shri R.K. Pandashri Shri R.K. Pandar.K. Pandar.K. Panda

Section 32(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI BENCH DELHI DELHI BENCH BENCH ’A BENCH ’A ’A’ NEW DELHI ’A NEW DELHI NEW DELHI NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. ITA No.5844 5844/Del/201…

Coperion Ideal Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 48/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.48/Del/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2006-07 M/S. Coperion Ideal Pvt.Ltd., 402, Hemkunth Tower, Nehru Place, New Delhi. ……..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan-Aaccc3990N Vs The Dcit, …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Circle-3(1), New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, "द"ल" "यायपीठ “बी”, नई "द"ल" म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI सु"ी सुषमा चावला, "या"यक सद"य एवं डॉ. बी आर आर कुमार, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM & DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.48/Del/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2006-07 M/s. Coperion Ideal Pvt.Ltd., 402, Hemkunth Tower, Nehru Place, New Delhi. ……..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant PAN-AACCC3990N vs The DCIT, …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Circle-3(1), New Delhi. अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv., Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Sh. Samarth Chaudhary, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. I.P. Rings Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 3538/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri. R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, IRS, JCIT

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 35

…royalty expenditure, the ld. CIT(A) held that 25% of Royalty payment should be treated as capital expenditure and balance of 75% was held to be revenue expenditure following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Southern Switch Gear vs. CIT, 232 ITR 359. As regards to the disallowance of service fees paid to India Pistons Ltd, the issue was remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer to examine the evidences of services rendered on technical services. Regarding additional depreciation, ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to allow additional depreciation, following the decision of…

I P Rings Ltd, Kancheepuram vs. DCIT, Corp CIT-2(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 3500/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri. R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, IRS, JCIT

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 35

…royalty expenditure, the ld. CIT(A) held that 25% of Royalty payment should be treated as capital expenditure and balance of 75% was held to be revenue expenditure following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Southern Switch Gear vs. CIT, 232 ITR 359. As regards to the disallowance of service fees paid to India Pistons Ltd, the issue was remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer to examine the evidences of services rendered on technical services. Regarding additional depreciation, ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to allow additional depreciation, following the decision of…

Heidelberg Cement India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

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

ITA 2054/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12 Heidelberg Cement India Ltd., Vs Dcit, 9Th Floor, Tower-C, Circle-2, 3Rd Floor, Infinity Towers, Dlf Cyber City, Vanijya Nikunj, Gurgaon. Hsiidc Building, Udyog Vihar, Ph. V, Pan: Aabcm2359J Near Shankar Chowk, Nh-8, Gurgaon. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Deepak Chopra, Advocate & Sh. Harpreet Singh Ajmani, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Ashima Neb, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 1St February, 2016 Of The Cit(A)-1, Gurgaon, Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Grounds Of Appeal No. 1 & 1.1 Raised By The Read As Under:- “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred On Facts & In Law, In Confirming The Disallowance Made By The Ld. Ao, Amounting To Inr 87,12,690/-, On Account Of Additional Depreciation Claimed By The Appellant On New Plant & Machinery In Accordance With The Provisions Of Section 32(I)(Iia) Of The Act. 1.1 The Ld. Cit(A) / Ld. Ao Erred On Facts & In Law, In Considering Only The Nomenclature Of The Assets To Hold The Disallowance, Without Appreciating The Detailed Nature & Use Of The Assets.”

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Ashima Neb, Sr. DR

Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)

…f the CIT(A). She submitted that the benefit received by the assessee on account of such payment amounts to enduring benefit beyond the terms of the agreement. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Southern Switch Gear Ltd., 232 ITR 359, she submitted that in that case the assessee has entered into a collaboration agreement for providing for technical know-how for setting up of a factory and operation thereof. The foreign company agreed not to manufacture products in India and given right to a third person to do the same. Referring to the clauses of the agreement, it was held t…

JCIT(OSD), New Delhi vs. M/S Advaqnce Surfactants India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2245/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Years: 2012-13 Jcit(Osd), Circle 1(2), Vs Advance Surfactants India Ltd., New Delhi. 511/2/1, Rajokari, New Delhi. Pan: Aabca9042Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Surender Pal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 04.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 10.04.2019 Order

Section 37(1)

…udgment of the Madras High Court in the case of Fenner Woodroffe & Co. Ltd. vs CIT (1976) 102 ITR 665 (Mad); ACIT vs. Southern Structural’s Ltd. (1977) 110 ITR 890 and also the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Southern Switchgear Ltd. vs CIT, 232 ITR 359 (SC), reached a conclusion that the royalty expenses of Rs.10,32,98,536/- does not fulfil the conditions of Section 37(1) and cannot be treated as revenue expenditure. He, therefore, while referring to the earlier orders and to maintain the consistency on the matter, disallowed the royalty expenditure holding it to be of capital in nature but all…

M/S Xerox India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2896/DEL/2013[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Nov 2018AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(ii)Section 43B

…diture is concerned, AO has treated the payment of royalty of the assessee company to its overseas parent company, Xerox Limited, a capital expenditure following the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Southern Switchgear Ltd. vs. CIT and another 232 ITR 359. Various reasons given by the AO for making the disallowance are as under: - i. That the assessee made the payment of royalty towards use of Trade mark and therefore, Ld. AO disallowed the expenditure. ii. As per Ld. AO, the assessee company was solely dependent on parent company for any technical inputs, manufacturing technology and supplies fr…

M/S Xerox India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2895/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(ii)Section 43B

…diture is concerned, AO has treated the payment of royalty of the assessee company to its overseas parent company, Xerox Limited, a capital expenditure following the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Southern Switchgear Ltd. vs. CIT and another 232 ITR 359. Various reasons given by the AO for making the disallowance are as under: - i. That the assessee made the payment of royalty towards use of Trade mark and therefore, Ld. AO disallowed the expenditure. ii. As per Ld. AO, the assessee company was solely dependent on parent company for any technical inputs, manufacturing technology and supplies fr…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Xerox India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2845/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(ii)Section 43B

…diture is concerned, AO has treated the payment of royalty of the assessee company to its overseas parent company, Xerox Limited, a capital expenditure following the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Southern Switchgear Ltd. vs. CIT and another 232 ITR 359. Various reasons given by the AO for making the disallowance are as under: - i. That the assessee made the payment of royalty towards use of Trade mark and therefore, Ld. AO disallowed the expenditure. ii. As per Ld. AO, the assessee company was solely dependent on parent company for any technical inputs, manufacturing technology and supplies fr…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Caryaire Air System Components Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2783/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Smt. Lalitha Krishnamurthy, CAFor Respondent: Sh. M. Nand Kumar Shate, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…opy of technical services and License agreement is enclosed herewith.” The said reply of the assessee was considered by the AO and by placing the reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Southern Switch Gear Ltd. vs. CIT 232 ITR 359, AO treated the royalty payment of Rs. 1,64,00,000/- as capital expenditure and added back to the total income of the assessee. Aggrieved with the AO’s action, the Assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide his impugned order dated 27.1.2015 has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee and deleted the addition in dispute, after follow…

Southern Switchgear Ltd. v. CIT

What is Southern Switchgear Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Southern Switchgear Ltd. v. CIT

ACIT Circle-9(1), New Delhi vs. Fcc Clutch India Pvt Ltd(Successor of Fcc Rico Ltd.), Gurgaon

ACIT Circle-9(1), New Delhi vs. Fcc Clutch India Pvt Ltd(Successor of Fcc Rico Ltd.), Gurgaon

ACIT, Circle-9(1), New Delhi vs. Fcc Clutch India P.Ltd, Gurgaon

ACIT, Circle-9(1), New Delhi vs. Fcc Clutch India P.Ltd, Gurgaon

ACIT, Circle-9(1), New Delhi vs. Fcc Clutch India P.Ltd, Gurgaon

M/S Contitech India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Expeditors International (India) P. Ltd., New Delhi

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Advance Surfactants India Ltd., Delhi

Bellsonica Auto Components India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

ACIT, Gurgaon vs. M/S. Bellsonica Auto Component India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

Coperion Ideal Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. I.P. Rings Ltd., Chennai

I P Rings Ltd, Kancheepuram vs. DCIT, Corp CIT-2(2), Chennai

Heidelberg Cement India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

JCIT(OSD), New Delhi vs. M/S Advaqnce Surfactants India Ltd., New Delhi

M/S Xerox India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

M/S Xerox India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Xerox India Ltd., New Delhi

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Caryaire Air System Components Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi