What is Sugar Factory & Oils Mills (P) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Expenditure incurred for improving business operations or facilitating business conduct, even if the advantage endures indefinitely, is generally on revenue account if it leaves the fixed capital untouched.

How many judgments cite Sugar Factory & Oils Mills (P) Ltd. v. CIT?

110 judgments on BharatTax cite Sugar Factory & Oils Mills (P) Ltd. v. CIT (125 ITR 293), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Sugar Factory & Oils Mills (P) Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 254.

Sugar Factory & Oils Mills (P) Ltd. v. CIT (125 ITR 293)

Hospira Healthcare India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

ITA 821/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 821/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-2012

For Appellant: Shri. Ashik Shah and Shri. Sriram Seshadri, C.A

Section 144C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"ाहम पी. जॉज", लेखा सद"य के सम" । [BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 821/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2011-2012 M/s. Hospira Healthcare India Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Private Limited, Income Tax, Sri-Nivas, New No.86, Old No.89, Corporate Circle 2(2) G.N. Chetty Road, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [PAN AABCO 2190F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से…

M/S. Tata Motors Ltd., Mumbai vs. Jt. CIT Spl. RG. - 2, Mumbai

Appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 7148/MUM/2004[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2017AY 1998-1999

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh VyasFor Respondent: Shri-Anand Mohan-CIT-DR

Section 254(1)Section 37

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ “ “ “ ई” ” ” ” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, , , , सी एवं सी सी. एन सी एन एन. "साद एन "साद "साद,, "याियक "साद "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/ ITA/6214/M/2003: िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-1997-98 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष…

Tata Motors Ltd vs. DCIT RG - 2(1)

Appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 6214/MUM/2003[1997 - 98]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2017

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh VyasFor Respondent: Shri-Anand Mohan-CIT-DR

Section 254(1)Section 37

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ “ “ “ ई” ” ” ” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, , , , सी एवं सी सी. एन सी एन एन. "साद एन "साद "साद,, "याियक "साद "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/ ITA/6214/M/2003: िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-1997-98 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष…

DCIT, Coimbatore vs. T. Stanes & Company Ltd., Coimbatore

In the result, for the AY 2011-12, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes and for the AY 2010-11, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 888/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.888/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Respondent: Mr. Vijayaraghavan, Adv

Section 115J

…substantiate its claim by proving the identity of the persons and genuineness of the transactions for claiming the related expenditure. 3. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India have decided in the case of L.H. Sugar Factory and Oil Mills (P) Ltd., Vs. CIT [1980] 125 ITR 293 (SC) that where an assessee claims a deduction the onus is on him to bring all material facts on record to substantiate his claim. Further, the jurisdictional High Court i.e. the Hon'ble Madras High Court have laid down the law with regard to the nature of proof required to substantiate an expenditure in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs.…

DCIT, Coimbatore vs. T.Stanes and Company Limited, Coimbatore

In the result, for the AY 2011-12, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes and for the AY 2010-11, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1386/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Dec 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.888/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Respondent: Mr. Vijayaraghavan, Adv

Section 115J

…substantiate its claim by proving the identity of the persons and genuineness of the transactions for claiming the related expenditure. 3. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India have decided in the case of L.H. Sugar Factory and Oil Mills (P) Ltd., Vs. CIT [1980] 125 ITR 293 (SC) that where an assessee claims a deduction the onus is on him to bring all material facts on record to substantiate his claim. Further, the jurisdictional High Court i.e. the Hon'ble Madras High Court have laid down the law with regard to the nature of proof required to substantiate an expenditure in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs.…

M/S. Honda Siel Power Products Ltd., Gautam Budh Nagar vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee-company are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 551/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: S/Sh. Neeraj Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Armendra Kumar, CIT/ DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 2Section 92B

…52 (SC) • DevidasVithaldas& Co. v. CIT: 84 ITR 277 (SC) • Chelpark Company Ltd. v. CIT: 191 ITR 249 (Mad.) • K.T.M.T.M. Abdul Kayoom v. CIT: 44 ITR 689 (SC) • Assam Bengal Cement Co. Ltd. v. CIT: 27 ITR 34 (SC) • L.H. Sugar Factory & Oil Mills P. Ltd. v. CIT: 125 ITR 293 (SC) • Dalmia Jain & Co. Ltd. v. CIT: 81 ITR 754 (SC) • M.K. Bros. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT: 86 ITR 38 (SC) • Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT: 62 ITR 566 (SC) • CIT v. B.N. Elias & Co. (P.) Ltd.: 168 ITR 190 (Cal.) • CIT v. Hindustan General Electric Corpn. Ltd.: 81 ITR 243 (Cal.) • Gannon Norton Metal Diamond Dies Ltd. v. CIT: 163 ITR 606 (Bom…

H & R Johnson India Ltd ( Now Know As A Division A of Prisim Cement Ltd), Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 34, Mumbai

In the result,appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 877/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2016AY 2005-06

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vachaspati Tripathi-DR

Section 115JSection 136Section 143(3)Section 147Section 254(1)

…अिधकरण, ‘एच’ खंडपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई आयकर आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI “H” BENCH सव"ी राजे"", लेखा सद"य एवं राम लाल नेगी, "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member & Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.ITA No.877/Mum/2012,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-2005-06 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/s. H&R Johnson India Ltd.(Now The Asst. CIT known as a Division o Prism Central Circle-34 Cement Ltd.), Windsor, 7th Floor, Room No.104, 1st Floor Vs. CST Road, Kalina…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Rmz Ecoworld Infrastructure Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 814/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri. Abraham P. George

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, Addl. CIT

…efficiency and profitability without touching the fixed capital of the assessee ; (e) there is no addition to, or expansion the profit-making apparatus. Following the ratio in L. H. Sugar Factory and Oil Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (1980) 19 CTR (SC) 185 : (1980) 125 ITR 293 (SC), held that the expenditure incurred by the assessee for the formation of the road, not belonging to the assessee, is an admissible revenue expenditure. 22. It is thus clear that the test of enduring nature applied to the purpose for which a particular expenditure is incurred is not a conclusive test ; it is only one of the several factors to…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Bharti Hexacom Ltd

ITA - 1336 / 2010HC Delhi19 Dec 2013

…different sugarcane producing centers and sugar factories was held to be revenue in nature as it was incurred for the purposes of facilitating running of assessee‘s motor vehicles etc. Similarly in L.H. Sugar Factory and Oil Mills (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 293 (SC), amount paid as contribution for construction of roads in an area around the factory under a scheme was held to be revenue in nature. CIT vs. Associated Cement Companies Ltd. (1988) 172 ITR 257 (SC) was quoted and observed that the expenditure incurred to concrete the main road was revenue as the installation and accessories were asset…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Pepsico India Holdings Pvt Ltd

ITA/319/2010HC Delhi30 Mar 2011

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

Section 37

…red in future years as well and contention of the assessee was accepted by the AO in earlier assessment years as well. The CIT (A) took support of the judgments in the cases of the Empire Jute Vs. CIT, 124 ITR 1, L.H. Sugar Factory and Oil Mills P. Ltd.,125 ITR 293 and Hindustan Times Ltd. 122 ITR 977 and few other judgments referred to by the assessee. The Tribunal vide its order dated 7th November, 2008 accepted the contention of the Revenue holding that the expenditure incurred on glow signs and neon signs had a long life thus expenditure incurred on of maintainable of glow signs and neon signs m…

Sugar Factory & Oils Mills (P) Ltd. v. CIT