How many judgments cite Tata Sons Ltd. v. CIT?

29 judgments on BharatTax cite Tata Sons Ltd. v. CIT (18 ITR 460), spanning 2011 to 2025.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 115VD, Section 115VI, Section 143(3), Section 153A, Section 2(22)(d), Section 40A(3).

Tata Sons Ltd. v. CIT

18 ITR 460High Court1950#4112 most cited

What is Tata Sons Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Expenditure claimed by an assessee-company is deductible if it is considered in light of commercial expediency, ordinary commercial trading principles, and whether it was part of the profit-making process.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Tata Sons Ltd. v. CIT · 18 ITR 460 · commercial expediency · ordinary commercial trading · profit making process · deductibility of expenditure · business expenditure · Income Tax Act

Also reported as

158 Taxmann.com 601

Sections most often in play

Section 115VD Section 115VI Section 143(3)Section 153A Section 2(22)(d)Section 40A(3)Section 115VP Section 33AC

Issues it is cited on

section 33ac section 115v scheme of arrangement management fees ddt dividend distribution tax tax benefit section 2(22)section 33 deemed dividend section 80ib put to use

Judgments citing Tata Sons Ltd. v. CIT

The DCIT, Visakhapatnam vs. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Mills Pvt Ltd, Srikakulam

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 340/VIZ/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Feb 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bledcit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Visakhapatnam. Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Rajam (Po), Srikakulam District. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Vs. Ito, Ward-3, Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Srikakulam. Rajam (Po), Srikakulam Dist. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Acit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Visakhapatnam. Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Rajam (Po), Srikakulam District. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Vs. Dcit, Circle-4(1), Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Visakhapatnam. Rajam (Po), Srikakulam Dist. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L (Appellants) (Respondents)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A. Thar &For Respondent: Shri T. Satyanandam – Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…ertaken in the Lease Agreements to continue the services of the existing employees and ensure to take care their interest (d) the assessee had taken steps to ensure continuity of service of employees with the Lessees. 9. In the case of Tata Sons Ltd. vs. CIT (18 ITR 460) it was noted that the assessee, a managing agent company paid voluntarily half share of bonus which the managed company paid to its officers in order to increase efficiency of working of managed company which would result in higher and better profits of manufactured company and which tended to increase the income on profits of the assessee. The r…

Gigaplex Estate P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT OSD II Cen RG 7, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1137/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri Alok Joshi

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “जे” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री सी. एन.प्रसाद, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री राजेश कुमार, ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM ITA NO.1132, 1133/Mum/2016 And ITA No.1137/Mum/2016 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2006-07) Gigaplex Estate Pvt Ltd., Dy.Commissioner of Income (Formerly known as B Raheja Tax, OSD-II, Central Range -7, Builders Pvt Ltd), Aayakar Bhavan, फनधभ/ Plot No.C-30, G Block, M K Road, Opp SIDBI Bank, Mumbai-400020 Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (Est), Mumbai-400051 (अऩी…

Gigaplex Estate P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT OSD II Cen RG 7, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1133/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri Alok Joshi

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

Gigaplex Estate P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT OSD II Cen RG 7, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1132/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri Alok Joshi

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

Gateway Terminals India P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3595/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3595/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Gateway Terminals India Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of बनाम/ Ltd., Income Tax, 5(1), V. Gti House, Jawaharlal Nehru Aaykar Bhavan, Port, M.K. Road, Sheva, District Uran, Mumbai. Navi Mumbai – 400 707. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaccg1899E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kiran NisarFor Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist, DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)

…s; and ITA 3595/Mum/2016 19 (ii)whether the assessee paid the amount in his capacity as businessman or in his personal capacity. Examining the Indian decisions, reference was made, amongst other cases, to Tata Sons Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1950] 18 ITR 460 (Bom.), where the share of bonus voluntarily paid by a company not to its own officers, but to some of the officers of a managed company, was held to be a permissible deduction, as the object was said to be increase the profits of the managed company and thereby increase its own share of the commission. Another case considered was Commissioner of…

Kotak Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 4(3), Mumbai

ITA 3494/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Feb 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra, A.M. & Sanjay Garg,J.M. आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं././././Ita No. 3494/Mum/2010,िनधा"रण आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 वष" Kotak Securities Limited Addl. Cit 1St Floor, Bakthawar Range-4(3), Aayakar Bhavan Vs. 229 Nariman Point,Mumbai-400 021. Mumbai-400 020. Pan: Aaack 3436 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Pavan Kumar Beerla Assessee By: Shri F.V. Irani सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 18.01.2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 22.02.2017 आयकर अिधिनयम आयकर अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)के अ"तग"त आदेश के अ"तग"त आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा के अ"तग"त आदेश के अ"तग"त आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य,राजे"" के अनुसार लेखा सद"य राजे"" के अनुसार -Per Rajendra,Am: लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य राजे"" के अनुसार राजे"" के अनुसार Challenging The Order Dt. 17.03.2010 Of Cit(A)-8,Mumbai The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee-Company,A Share Broker, Filed Its Return Of Income On 31.10.2007 Declaring Its Total Income Of Rs.390.03 Crores.The Assessing Officer(Ao) Completed Assessment On 30. 03.2009,Determining Its Income At Rs.401.55 Crores.

For Appellant: Shri F.V. IraniFor Respondent: Shri Pavan Kumar Beerla

Section 14ASection 254(1)Section 36(1)(vii)

…ales Magnesite Pvt.Ltd. (214 ITR 1),Eastern Investments Ltd. (20ITR1);Sasson J. David and Co. Pvt.Ltd.(118 ITR 261);F.M. Chinoy and Co. Pvt.Ltd. (74 ITR780);Glaxo Laboratories(India)Pvt.Ltd.(114ITR110);Dhanrajgiri Raja Narasingirji (91 ITR 544);Tata sons Ltd.(18 ITR 460);Delhi Safe Deposit Co.Ltd.(133ITR756) and Walchand and Co. Pvt. Ltd.(65ITR381(SC).The DR relied upon the order of the FAA. 5.4.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us.We find that CDM, proprietor of MFS was affiliated as a broker to the assessee vide agreement dated 25/ 11/2004, that the sub broker had to assist th…

Globex Energia P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 6(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1109/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2010-11 Globex Energia P. Ltd. Acit 6(3) 4Th Floor, Sadhna House, 570 Mumbai- बनाम/ Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Vs. Behind Mahindra Towr, S. Worli Mumbai-400018 (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aadcg1161C Appellant By Shri Nishant Thakkar & Mis. Jasmin Amalsadvala (Ar) Revenue By Shri Prakash Mane (Dr) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing: 09/11/2016 18/11/2016 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order:

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…or for commercial expediency:- 1. Eastern Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT (20 ITR 1) (SC) 2. J.R. Patel & Sons Pvt. Ltd. 69 ITR 782 (Guj) 3. Raipur Mfg. Co. Ltd. (84 ITR 508,516) (Guj) 4. Security Printers of India Pvt. Ltd. (78 ITR 766,774) (All) 5. Tatasons Ltd. (18 ITR 460,467) (Bom) 6. Walchand & Co. P. Ltd.(65 ITR 381, 385) (SC) 7. J.K. Woolen Manufactures (72 ITR 612) (SC) 8. Aluminium Corp. of India Ltd. (86 ITR 11, 17) (SC) 9. Orissa Cement Ltd. (73 ITR 14, 17) (Del) In following cases it has been held that expenses shall become deductible after setting up of the business, even if commencement of business has n…

Quantium Advisors P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 1(3), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3418/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhquantum Advisors Pvt. Ltd., 503, Regent Chamber, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021. Pan:Aaacq 0281C ... Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: S/Shri J.D.Mistry/Niraj D. SethFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar Singh

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Quantum Advisors Pvt. Ltd., 503, Regent Chamber, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021. PAN:AAACQ 0281C ... Appellant Vs. The Dy. Comm. Of Income-tax, Circle -1 (3), Aaykar Bhavan, MK Road, Mumbai 400 020 .... Respondent Appellant by : S/Shri J.D.Mistry/Niraj D. Seth Respondent by : Shri Amit Kumar Singh Date of hearing : 09/09/2015 Date of pronouncement : 15/07/2016 ORDER PER G.S. PANNU,AM: The captioned appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to assessment year 2011-12 is…

Shanti Bhushan vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITR-230/1994HC Delhi31 May 2011

For Appellant: Mr. S.K.PathakFor Respondent: Ms. Rashmi Chopra

Section 144Section 256(2)Section 31Section 37

….03.1986. Nevertheless, the point made is that there has been a substantial increase in the assessee‟s income, post the surgery conducted on him. In support of the submissions made, reliance has been placed once again on the following judgments:- (1950) 18 ITR 460 Bombay, TATA Sons Ltd. Vs. CIT at pages 467/468, (1981) 131 ITR 223 Madras (at page 227) Waterfall Estates Ltd. Vs. CIT, (1977) 106 ITR 758 Bombay (at page 766/767) Mehboob Productions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, XIX QB 647 Yarmouth Vs. France at 652 and 658, (1974) 96 ITR 672 (Gujrat) CIT Vs. Elecon Engineering and (1987) 166 ITR 66 Scientific Engin…