Which cases are most cited on Section 2(11)?

Sharp Business System v. CIT III (27 Taxmann.com 50) — 50 citing judgments; Sharp Business System v. CIT (254 CTR 233) — 50 citing judgments; CIT v. Hughes Escorts Communications Ltd. (311 ITR 253) — 29 citing judgments; My Home Power Ltd. v. DCIT (27 Taxmann.com 27) — 26 citing judgments; CIT v. L.G. Electronic (India) Ltd. (282 ITR 545) — 23 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 2(11)?

BharatTax indexes 53 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 2(11) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 2(11) of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 2(11) of the Income Tax Act?

Sharp Business System v. CIT III (27 Taxmann.com 50) is the decision most relied on for Section 2(11), cited in 50 judgments. A non-compete fee, being a capital expenditure, is not allowable as a deduction from income and does not qualify for depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

The decision most relied on for Section 2(11) is Sharp Business System v. CIT III (27 Taxmann.com 50), cited in 50 of the 53 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 2(11)

Sharp Business System v. CIT III

27 Taxmann.com 50 · 2012 · High Court

citing judgments

A non-compete fee, being a capital expenditure, is not allowable as a deduction from income and does not qualify for depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Sharp Business System v. CIT

254 CTR 233 · 2012 · High Court

citing judgments

Expenditure incurred for acquiring a non-compete right is capital in nature but is not eligible for depreciation under section 32(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act.

CIT v. Hughes Escorts Communications Ltd.

311 ITR 253 · 2009 · High Court

citing judgments

Expenses incurred prior to business commencement but after business setup are deductible as revenue expenses, as the setting up and commencement dates of a business are not necessarily the same.

My Home Power Ltd. v. DCIT

27 Taxmann.com 27 · 2012 · ITAT

citing judgments

The sale of certified emission reductions or carbon credits constitutes business income and is treated as trading receipts. This treatment is affirmed by considering the manufacturing process and is supported by a series of tribunal decisions.

CIT v. L.G. Electronic (India) Ltd.

282 ITR 545 · 2006 · High Court

citing judgments

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax v. Real Image Tech. (P) Ltd.

120 TTJ 983 · 2009 · ITAT

citing judgments

Arthur Anderson & Co. v. ACIT

324 ITR 240 · 2010 · High Court

citing judgments

CIT v. Cinceita Private Limited

137 ITR 652 · 1982 · High Court

citing judgments

CIT v. Hon’ble Kerala High Court

236 ITR 416 · 1999 · High Court

citing judgments

Income Tax Officer v. Medicorp Technologies India Ltd.

122 TTJ 394 · 2009 · ITAT

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 2(11)

BANDEKAR BROTHERS PRIVATE LIMITED,VASCO-DA-GAMA, GOA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANAJI, GOA

The appeal of the assessee is PARTLY ALLOWED in aforestated terms

ITA 38/PAN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Years: 2013-14 Bandekar Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Post Box No. 11, Suvarna Bandekar Bldg., Swatantra Path, Vasco-Da-Gama Goa-403802 Pan: Aaacb5502B . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Represented Assessee By: Mr Pramod & Mr Shriniwas Deshpande [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By: Mr M Satish & Mr Renga Rajan [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 12/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 11/02/2026 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Assessee’S Appeal Filed U/S 253(1) Of The Income-

For Appellant: Mr Pramod & Mr Shriniwas Deshpande [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish & Mr Renga Rajan [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(14)Section 246ASection 250Section 253(1)Section 37(1)

TRENT LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5165/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 2(11)Section 250Section 32Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(ii)

SHRI JAGBIR,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

ITA 4201/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 159Section 2(11)Section 2(29)

OM PRAKASH ,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 2 (3), NOIDA

Appeal is dismissed as premature at this stage in above terms subject to all just exceptions

ITA 8824/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 8824/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Om Prakash(Deceased), Vs Income Tax Officer, X-3199A, Gali No. 2, Raghbar Pura Ward-2(3), No. 2, Gandhi Nagar, Noida, Delhi-110031 Uttar Pradesh-201307 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aqapp8677N Assessee By: Sh. Amar Nath, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.01.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1075543446(1) Dated 08.04.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Amar Nath, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 159Section 2(11)Section 2(29)

LATE SH. MAHA SINGH TH. LEGAL HEIR BIJENDER SINGH,SONIPAT vs. ITO, WARD - 3, SONIPAT

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4568/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Naveen Chandraita No. 4568/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Late Sh. Maha Singh Th. Legal Heir Vs Income Tax Officer, Bijender Singh, Ward-3, Vill. Moi Majri, Tehsil & Distt. Sonipat, Sonipat, Haryana-131002 Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Jtips2811F Assessee By : Sh. Saurav Rohtagi, Ca & Sh. Rajat Mittal, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.01.2026 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18, Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023–24/1060398128(1) Dated 01.02.2024, In Proceedings U/S 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Saurav Rohtagi, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 159Section 2(29)

THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INDIA P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

Accordingly, the AO, vide draft assessment order, disallowed the

ITA 7393/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri Anmol MahajanFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 32(1)

THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INDIA P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 577/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri Anmol MahajanFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 32(1)

JCIT CENT. CIR. - 1(4), MUMBAI vs. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal is allowed

ITA 1561/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar / Ms SukanyaFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR

Section 153CSection 250Section 43BSection 80I

ESTATE OF VANDRAVAN P SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 19(3), MUMBAI

In the result all the three captioned appeals are dismissed

ITA 5401/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Respondent: Ms. Shivani Shah

Section 147Section 148Section 35A

DCIT CC 7(2).MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MAN INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 619/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2020-2021

For Respondent: Mr. K. Gopal

Section 14ASection 194ASection 40

LATE YASH CHOWDHARY,GORAKHPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -27, NEW DELHI

ITA 4026/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 153ASection 159Section 2(11)Section 2(29)

LATE YASH CHOWDHARY,GORAKHPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -27, NEW DELHI

ITA 4025/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 153ASection 159Section 2(11)Section 2(29)

LATE YASH CHOWDHARY ,GORAKHPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -27, NEW DELHI

ITA 4024/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 153ASection 159Section 2(11)Section 2(29)

ITO WARD 43 1, NEW DELHI vs. SANWAR MAL SHARMA THROUGH LEGAL HEIR KESAR DEVI , DELHI

Appeal is dismissed in above terms, subject to all just exceptions

ITA 4988/DEL/2024[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwalita No. 4988/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Vs Sanwar Mal Sharma Through Legal Ward-41(4), Heir Kesar Devi, C-48/3, 2Nd Floor, Lawrence Road, New Delhi Indl. Area, New Delhi-110035 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Arzps6572P Assessee By : Ms. Rano Jain, Adv. & Ms. Mansi Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Rupinder Kaur, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.11.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13, Arises Against The Cit(A)-14, New Delhi’S In Case No. 140/15- 16/It/Del/2015-16 Dated 05.09.2016, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Rupinder Kaur, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 159Section 2

SEEMA SINGH LEGAL HEIR OF SANJAY SINGH,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-58(1), DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 6148/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 6148/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Late Sh. Sanjay Singh Through L/H Vs Income Tax Officer, Smt. Seema Singh, Ward-58(1), C-10, 4Th Floor, Guru Ram Dass New Delhi-110002 Nagar, Laxmi Nagar, East Delhi, New Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Bgops2752L Assessee By: Sh. Kamlesh Chaurasiya, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.10.2025 Order

For Appellant: Sh. Kamlesh Chaurasiya, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 2(29)

HANUR SINGH(RETIRED TEACHER), THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SMT. KAMLA DEVI(WIDOW),HARYANA vs. ITO, WARD NWR-W-(107)(93), REWARI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 6002/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 6002/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Late Sh. Hamir Singh (Retired Vs Income Tax Officer, Teacher) Through L/H Smt. Kamla Ward Nwr-W-(107)(93), Devi(Wido), Mata Mohalla, Kosli, Rewari, District Rewari-123302 Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Agrps9298K Assessee By: Sh. Hamir Singh, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.10.2025 Order

For Appellant: Sh. Hamir Singh, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 2(29)