Which cases are most cited on Section 43(6)(c)?

Marketing Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (122 Taxmann.com 40) — 41 citing judgments; PCIT v. CIMS Hospital Pvt.Ltd. (125 Taxmann.com 227) — 17 citing judgments; CIT v. Text Hundred India (P)Ltd. (197 Taxmann 128) — 12 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 43(6)(c)?

BharatTax indexes 42 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 43(6)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 43(6)(c) of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 43(6)(c) of the Income Tax Act?

Marketing Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (122 Taxmann.com 40) is the decision most relied on for Section 43(6)(c), cited in 41 judgments. Where goodwill is recorded pursuant to a merger based on purchase consideration determined by a valuation report, and no goodwill is transferred from the predecessor's books, the fifth proviso to section 32(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is not applicable, and thus depreciation on such goodwill is not allowable.

Income-tax Act, 2025: ss.39, 41

Section 43(6)(c) falls under section 43 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 39 (Computation of actual cost) and section 41 (Written down value of depreciable asset) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 39 of the 2025 Act Read section 41 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 43(6)(c) is Marketing Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (122 Taxmann.com 40), cited in 41 of the 42 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 43(6)(c)

Marketing Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

122 Taxmann.com 40 · 2020 · Reported

citing judgments

Where goodwill is recorded pursuant to a merger based on purchase consideration determined by a valuation report, and no goodwill is transferred from the predecessor's books, the fifth proviso to section 32(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is not applicable, and thus depreciation on such goodwill is not allowable.

PCIT v. CIMS Hospital Pvt.Ltd.

125 Taxmann.com 227 · 2021 · High Court

citing judgments

The Assessing Officer can apply Rule 8D for disallowance under Section 14A only if they are not satisfied with the correctness of the assessee's claim regarding expenditure in relation to exempt income, after considering the assessee's accounts. Invocation of Rule 8D is not automatic.

CIT v. Text Hundred India (P)Ltd.

197 Taxmann 128 · 2011 · High Court

citing judgments

The Tribunal has the discretion to admit additional evidence in the interest of justice if it deems it necessary for the proper adjudication of a matter, even if the application is filed by a party to the appeal and not solely on the Tribunal's own initiative.

Judgments on Section 43(6)(c)

Amd India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

ITA 262/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

Amd India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

ITA 238/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

Indorama Industries Ltd., Chandigarh vs. ACIT, Circle- 12(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 6926/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 143(3)Section 32Section 43(6)(c)

Publics Communications P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 6(1), Mumbai

In the result, for assessment year 2012 – 13, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes whereas the cross objection of the assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 7523/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 32(1)(ii)Section 92C

Publicis Communications P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 7(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, for assessment year 2012 – 13, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes whereas the cross objection of the assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 462/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 32(1)(ii)Section 92C

Publicis Communications P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, for assessment year 2012 – 13, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes whereas the cross objection of the assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 1994/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 32(1)(ii)Section 92C

M/S Mhm Holdings Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Range-12, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 372/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.M/S. Mhm Holding Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit, Range - 12 Bengaluru No. 52, Bassappa Road Shantinagar Bengaluru 560027 Pan – Aabcm6614L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Parthasarathi, Adv. Revenue By: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 23/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/11/2022 O R D E R Per: Padmavathy, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Parthasarathi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 40Section 50B

ACIT 13 (3)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Zelle Biotechnology Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7675/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleacit-13(3)(2) V. M/S. Zelle Biotechnology Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 229/219, 2Nd Floor 110, Udyog Bhavan Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Sonawala Road, Goregaon (E) Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400063 Pan: Aaacz2106R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Meet Shah Department By : Shri Hoshang B. Irani

For Appellant: Shri Meet ShahFor Respondent: Shri Hoshang B. Irani

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 32(1)

M/S. Altimetrik India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2511/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT (DR)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)Section 43(1)Section 43(6)(c)

Xerox India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2060/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Aug 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 234BSection 92BSection 92F

Positive Packaging P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(2), Mumbai

In the result this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2483/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Positive Packaging Industries Vs Dcit Circle 3(2), Room No. Ltd, 12A-06, B-Wing, 608, Aayakar Bhawan, Parinee Crescenzo, M.K.Road, C-38/39, G-Block, Mumbai-20 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 Pan : Aaacp2836Q Appellant Respondednt

Section 201Section 43(6)(c)Section 43A

Aditya Birla Money Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Company Circle 1 (1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the assessment years

ITA 1797/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S.Jayaraman

Section 154

Aditya Birla Money Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Company Circle 1 (1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the assessment years

ITA 1796/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S.Jayaraman

Section 154

Aditya Birla Money Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Company Circle 1 (1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the assessment years

ITA 1795/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S.Jayaraman

Section 154

M/S. Nabros Transport Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2847/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2847/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12)

For Appellant: Arti N. Shah, A.R

Section 43(6)(c)

Kamlesh S. Patil, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above

ITA 1121/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1121/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-13) बिाम/ Kamlesh S. Patil Ito 24(2)(3) Ockam Systems Room No. 609,6Th Floor, 1001, 10Th Floor, Piramal Chambers, V. Quantum Tower, Lalbaug, Mumbai Rambaug Lane 400012 Nadiyadwada Colony 2 Malad(West) Mumbai-400064 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aadpp9859R (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri. Ajay R. Singh (Ar) Revenue By: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15.03.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being Ita No. 1121/Mum/2017, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 29.12.2016 In Appeal No. Cit(A)-36/It-117/Ito-24(2)(3)/2015-16, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-36, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”), For Assessment Year(Ay) 2012-13, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From The Assessment Order Dated 28.03.2015 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer

For Appellant: Shri. Ajay R. Singh (AR)For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, (DR)

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)

Janata Industries, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 21, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4025/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalm/S. Janata Industries 162, Janata Compound Tulsi Pipe Road, Senapati Bapat Marg ……………. Appellant Lower Parel, Mumbai 400 013 Pan – Aaafj4875E V/S Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–21, Mumbai M/S. Janata Industries 162, Janata Compound Tulsi Pipe Road, Senapati Bapat Marg ……………. Appellant Lower Parel, Mumbai 400 013 Pan – Aaafj4875E V/S Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–21, Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. ParikhFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Patankar

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(2)