← All Phrases

“enduring benefit”

Business ExpensesSection 37Section 371,056 judgments

The decision most relied on for enduring benefit is Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT (124 ITR 1), cited in 622 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on enduring benefit

Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT
124 ITR 1 · 1980 · Supreme Court
622
citing judgments

Expenditure is classified as revenue or capital based on its practical business effect, necessity, or expediency, rather than solely on the juristic classification of rights; an enduring benefit does not automatically make an expenditure capital if it facilitates trading operations or business efficiency.

Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. v. CIT
225 ITR 802 · 1997 · Supreme Court
568
citing judgments

Expenditure that provides an enduring benefit should be amortized over its useful life, not allowed as a deduction in a single year, to prevent a distorted picture of profits. Specifically, premium paid on debentures for their issue should be amortized on a straight-line method over the life of the debentures.

CIT v. De Beers India Minerals (P.) Ltd.
346 ITR 467 · 2012 · High Court
371
citing judgments

For fees for technical or consultancy services to 'make available' technical knowledge or know-how under a DTAA, the service must transmit such knowledge, allowing the recipient to derive an enduring benefit and utilize it independently in the future.

Eastern Investments Ltd. v. CIT
38 ITR 601 · 1960 · Supreme Court
346
citing judgments

Expenditure must be commercially expedient for carrying on the business, and it is not for revenue authorities to dictate how an assessee should conduct its business. The court will not question the business expediency of a transaction, even if a third party also benefits.

Taparia Tools Ltd. v. JCIT
372 ITR 605 · 2015 · Supreme Court
343
citing judgments

An expenditure does not automatically become capital in nature merely because it results in some enduring benefit for the assessee; it can be treated as revenue expenditure if incurred for genuine business purposes.

Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. v. CIT
177 ITR 377 · 1989 · Supreme Court
275
citing judgments

Expenditure that provides a commercial advantage of an enduring nature may still be classified as revenue expenditure if its purpose is to facilitate existing trading operations, improve business efficiency, or upgrade existing products, depending on the specific context and objective.

CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd.
233 ITR 468 · 1998 · Supreme Court
246
citing judgments

Expenditure providing an enduring advantage, such as upfront lease rent for land, is revenue expenditure if no capital asset is acquired or generated, allowing for deduction under Section 37, even when capitalized in the books of account.

Brooke Bond India Ltd. v. CIT
225 ITR 798 · 1997 · Supreme Court
228
citing judgments

Expenditure incurred for increasing a company's share capital or expanding its capital base, such as expenses related to the issue of shares, constitutes capital expenditure. Such expenses are not deductible as revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, even if they incidentally benefit the business.

Judgments citing enduring benefit

Rana Sugars Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1), Chandigarh

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 513/CHANDI/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1048/Chandi/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1049/Chandi/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit-Central Circle-1 M/S Rana Sugars Limited Chandigarh Sco No.49-50, Sector 8-C बनाम/ Vs. Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcr-6744-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.512/Chandi/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.513/Chandi/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Rana Sugars Limited Dcit-Central Circle-1 Sco No.49-50, Sector 8-C Chandigarh बनाम/ Vs. Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcr-6744-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) & Ms. Shruti Khandelwal (Advocate) – Ld. Ars. ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit) – Ld. Dr & Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) and Ms. ShrutiFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) – Ld. DR & Dr. Ranjit
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

Rs.25.60 Lacs which was claimed as revenue expenditure. The Ld. AO opined that the same was capital in nature since the expenditure gave enduring benefit to the assessee’s business. The royalty was an intangible asset and accordingly, the claim was denied. 4.2 The Ld. CIT(A) noted that ... payment for use of trademark which could not be used except for sale of IMFL. No absolute right accrued to the assessee and no enduring benefit resulted to the assessee from this transaction. It was mere right to use the brand and not to acquire the brand. Therefore, the expenditure

Rana Sugars Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1), Chandigarh

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 512/CHANDI/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1048/Chandi/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1049/Chandi/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit-Central Circle-1 M/S Rana Sugars Limited Chandigarh Sco No.49-50, Sector 8-C बनाम/ Vs. Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcr-6744-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.512/Chandi/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.513/Chandi/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Rana Sugars Limited Dcit-Central Circle-1 Sco No.49-50, Sector 8-C Chandigarh बनाम/ Vs. Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcr-6744-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) & Ms. Shruti Khandelwal (Advocate) – Ld. Ars. ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit) – Ld. Dr & Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) and Ms. ShrutiFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) – Ld. DR & Dr. Ranjit
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

Rs.25.60 Lacs which was claimed as revenue expenditure. The Ld. AO opined that the same was capital in nature since the expenditure gave enduring benefit to the assessee’s business. The royalty was an intangible asset and accordingly, the claim was denied. 4.2 The Ld. CIT(A) noted that ... payment for use of trademark which could not be used except for sale of IMFL. No absolute right accrued to the assessee and no enduring benefit resulted to the assessee from this transaction. It was mere right to use the brand and not to acquire the brand. Therefore, the expenditure

DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Rana Sugars Ltd, Chandigarh

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 1049/CHANDI/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1048/Chandi/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1049/Chandi/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit-Central Circle-1 M/S Rana Sugars Limited Chandigarh Sco No.49-50, Sector 8-C बनाम/ Vs. Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcr-6744-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.512/Chandi/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.513/Chandi/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Rana Sugars Limited Dcit-Central Circle-1 Sco No.49-50, Sector 8-C Chandigarh बनाम/ Vs. Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcr-6744-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) & Ms. Shruti Khandelwal (Advocate) – Ld. Ars. ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit) – Ld. Dr & Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) and Ms. ShrutiFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) – Ld. DR & Dr. Ranjit
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

Rs.25.60 Lacs which was claimed as revenue expenditure. The Ld. AO opined that the same was capital in nature since the expenditure gave enduring benefit to the assessee’s business. The royalty was an intangible asset and accordingly, the claim was denied. 4.2 The Ld. CIT(A) noted that ... payment for use of trademark which could not be used except for sale of IMFL. No absolute right accrued to the assessee and no enduring benefit resulted to the assessee from this transaction. It was mere right to use the brand and not to acquire the brand. Therefore, the expenditure

DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Rana Sugars Ltd, Chandigarh

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 1048/CHANDI/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1048/Chandi/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1049/Chandi/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit-Central Circle-1 M/S Rana Sugars Limited Chandigarh Sco No.49-50, Sector 8-C बनाम/ Vs. Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcr-6744-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.512/Chandi/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.513/Chandi/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Rana Sugars Limited Dcit-Central Circle-1 Sco No.49-50, Sector 8-C Chandigarh बनाम/ Vs. Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcr-6744-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) & Ms. Shruti Khandelwal (Advocate) – Ld. Ars. ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit) – Ld. Dr & Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) and Ms. ShrutiFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) – Ld. DR & Dr. Ranjit
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

Rs.25.60 Lacs which was claimed as revenue expenditure. The Ld. AO opined that the same was capital in nature since the expenditure gave enduring benefit to the assessee’s business. The royalty was an intangible asset and accordingly, the claim was denied. 4.2 The Ld. CIT(A) noted that ... payment for use of trademark which could not be used except for sale of IMFL. No absolute right accrued to the assessee and no enduring benefit resulted to the assessee from this transaction. It was mere right to use the brand and not to acquire the brand. Therefore, the expenditure

Unimed Technologies Limited, Panchmahal vs. The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Vadodara

ITA 623/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2016-17 Unimed Technologies Limited Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Survey No.22 & 22, Vs. Vadodara. Baska, Ujeti Halol Panchmahal Pan : Aaace 4022 B Asstt.Year : 2016-17 Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Unimed Technologies Limited Vadodara. Vs. Survey No.22 & 22, Baska, Ujeti Halol Panchmahal Pan : Aaace 4022 B (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar Assessee By : Shri Sher Singh, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/07/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

manufacturing facility at Baska. The CIT(A) was of the view that the said ITA No.623 and 632/Ahd/2024 4 expenditure conferred an enduring benefit to the assessee and therefore fell within the nature of capital expenditure not allowable under section 37(1) of the Act. The CIT(A) also confirmed ... account of software expenditure holding it as allowable expenditure under section 37(1), without appreciating the findings of the AO that the expenditure gave enduring benefit to the assessee? 2. Whether, on facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified

Acc Mineral Resources Limited, Mumbai vs. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai-1, Mumbai

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

ITA 2687/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am Acc Minerals Resources Limited Principal Commissioner Of Income 121, Cement House, Maharshi Karve Tax, Mumbai – 400 001. Vs. Road, Church Gate, Mumbai – 400020. Pan/Gir No. Aaact2214N (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Saurabh Soparkar (Virtually Appear) Respondent By : Shri Shekhar L. Gajbhiye, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.07.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Mumbai -1 (‘Ld. Pcit’ For Short), Passed U/S.263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. In Law & In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Appellant'S Case, Impugned Order U/S. 263 Of The Act Passed By Pcit-1, Mumbai Is Bad In Law & Deserves To Be Quashed. 2. In Law & In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Appellant'S Case, The Pcit-1, Mumbai Has Erred In Setting Aside The Assessment Order Dated 20.04.2021 Passed By The Assessing Officer Without Considering The Fact That The Assessing Officer During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings Has Already Gone Through Issue

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Soparkar (Virtually appear)For Respondent: Shri Shekhar L. Gajbhiye, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35D

capital or revenue expenditure, for which various parameters such as the terms and conditions, duration, the purpose for lending which resulted in enduring benefit and whether or not the same would be investment, etc. were not looked into by the ld. AO. The ld. DR further contended that