Skip to content

Filter by :

Search Results Judgments > Act:INCOME TAX ACT 1961 Section 35D

Jun 20 2012

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ms.Ashok Leyland Ltd.

  • Decided on : 20-Jun-2012

Court : Chennai

... for deduction under Section 35D of the Income Tax Act. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) also agreed with the assessee that it was entitled to deduction on the expansion undertaken by it. Aggrieved by this, the Revenue went on appeal before the Tribunal.7. As far as the eligibility of the assessee for claiming deduction under Section 35D of the Income Tax Act was concerned ... provisions of Section 35D of the Income Tax Act. On the question of the assessee's entitlement for amortisation under Section 35-D, the Tribunal held that as the expenditure was for extension of the industrial undertaking, the same qualified for deduction in terms of Section 35D. However, on the aspect of expenditure to be considered under Section 35D, the Tribunal referred to Section 35D(2) ... of production with extension of industrial undertaking under Section 35D of the Income Tax Act?2.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the expenses related to the 'Euro issue' by the assessee were entitled to be amortised under Section 35D of the Income Tax Act?2. The assessee is also on appeal ... claim is for deduction of the entire amount under Section 35D, whereas the Department's claim is that the assessee is not entitled to deduction of the entire expenditure under Section 35D, since the assessee did not qualify itself to be considered as an eligible undertaking under Section 35D of the Income Tax Act.11. Learned counsel appearing for the assessee pointed ...

Aug 24 2009

Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi-IV Vs. Escorts Finance Limited

  • Decided on : 24-Aug-2009

Court : Delhi

Reported in : (2009)226CTR(Del)105; [2009]183TAXMAN453(Delhi)

... by the Assessing Officer in exercise of his powers contained in Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'the Act' for short). The penalty proceedings came to be initiated by the Assessing Officer under the following circumstances:2. The respondent assessee filed the income tax return declaring income at Rs. 1,21,03,280/- on 30.11.1996. During ... Section 35D of the Act. It would be important to note that assessee has nowhere pleaded that return was filed claiming benefit of Section 35D of the Act on the basis of the said opinion. What was stated was that in the prospectus it was mentioned that as per the opinion given by the Chartered Accountants, the company would be entitled for relief under Section 35D of the Act ... the decision of the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short) which has upheld the decision of the CIT (A) deleting the penalty of Rs. 13,18,151/- imposed by the Assessing Officer in exercise of his powers contained in Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'the Act' for short). The ... Act' for short). The penalty proceedings came to be initiated by the Assessing Officer under the following circumstances:2. The respondent assessee filed the income tax return declaring income at Rs. 1,21,03,280/- on 30.11.1996. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had claimed deduction of Rs. 21,02,228/- under Section 35D of the Act ...

May 15 2006

Berger Paints India Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Income Tax

  • Decided on : 15-May-2006

Court : Delhi

Reported in : [2007]292ITR658(Delhi)

... to 'capital employed in the business of the company' within the meaning of Section 35D(3) of the Act. The present appeal, as already mentioned earlier, assails the correctness of the said view .5. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. Section 35D of the Income Tax Act regulates amortisation of certain preliminary expenses. The provision inter alias says that if ... meaning of Section 35D of the Income Tax Act. It arises in the following circumstances:2. For the assessment year 1996-97, the assessed company declared an income of Rs. 3,64,64,527/- which was subsequently revised to Rs. 3,58,92,771/- and then to Rs. 3,57,26,644/-. The return was eventually processed under Section 143(1B) of the Act at an ... have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. Section 35D of the Income Tax Act regulates amortisation of certain preliminary expenses. The provision inter alias says that if an assessed being an Indian Company or a person incurs after the 31st March, 1990 any expenditure specified in Sub-section 2 after the commencement of his business in connection with the extension ... contended by the assessed. He accordingly calculated the allowable deduction under Section 35D at Rs. 1,95,049/- only, disallowing and adding back the rest of the amount claimed to be taxable income of the assessed.3. Aggrieved by the above order, the assessed filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax who took the view that since 'the capital employed' ...

Jul 08 2008

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Tamil Nadu Road Development Co. Ltd. (N ...

  • Decided on : 08-Jul-2008

Court : Chennai

Reported in : [2009]316ITR380(Mad)

... conclusion that those expenses cannot be treated as capital expenditure for the current year and the expenses clearly come within the ambit of the provisions of Section 35D because these have not been incurred for the expansion or extension of business but merely to find out new ideas by conducting test studies and pilot ... assessee. The appeal preferred by the Revenue to the Tribunal ended in dismissal. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed.3. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has recorded a finding that various expenses claimed by the assessee have been incurred on various test studies, feasibility reports, pilot studies and related travelling ... ] 182 ITR 62 held that the assessee is entitled to the benefit being a firm. In view of the abovesaid factual finding recorded by the authorities under the Act as well as the Tribunal, we are of the view that there is no question of law, much less, a substantial question of law involved in ... the manufacture of new products. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of the assessee and treated the same as capital expenditure. On appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) following the decision of this Court in the case of CIT v. Seshasayee Brothers P. Ltd. : [1981] 127 ITR 218 and that of the ... .1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, dated November 30, 2007, in I.T.A. No. 2096/Mds/2006. The relevant assessment year is 2003-04. The substantial ...

Jan 29 2007

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Southern Petrochemical Industries Corpo ...

  • Decided on : 29-Jan-2007

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (2007)211CTR(Mad)116; [2007]292ITR362(Mad)

... had an occasion to deal with section 10(2)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 which is similar to section 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In that case, the factory of the assessee was not employed in the work of ginning and the assessee claimed depreciation. While interpreting the word, 'used' found in section 10(2)(vi) of the 1922 Act, the Bombay High Court held ... made by the Revenue on the strength of section 35D of the Act which deals with amortisation of certain preliminary expenses, and the Bombay High Court held that Section 35D deals with amortisation of certain preliminary expenses. Under section 35D(1)(ii), it is laid down that after the commencement of the business any expenditure as described in section 35D(2), which is incurred in connection with ... Income-tax Act, 1922 which is similar to section 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In that case, the factory of the assessee was not employed in the work of ginning and the assessee claimed depreciation. While interpreting the word, 'used' found in section 10(2)(vi) of the 1922 Act, the Bombay High Court held as under:But I think that the word 'used in this section ... of Pursa Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) : [1954]25ITR265(SC) , in construing the expression 'used for the purposes of the business' found in section 10(2)(iv) of the 1922 Act, the Supreme Court observed as follows:The words 'used for the purposes of the business' in section 10(2)(iv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, mean used for the purpose of ...

Mar 13 1996

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Malayalam Plantations (India) Ltd.

  • Decided on : 13-Mar-1996

Court : Kerala

Reported in : (1997)141CTR(Ker)97; [1997]224ITR126(Ker)

... will consider the said judgment while deciding the matter.20. Since, according to us, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in arriving at the conclusion that the expenses in question are of capital nature and that the provisions of Section 35D of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are applicable to the instant case, has not considered the issue with reference tothe principles laid ... provisions of Section 35D of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are applicable to the instant case, has not considered the issue with reference tothe principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the aforementioned cases and also the order passed by this court in the company application and the scheme approved thereunder, we are of the view that the Income-tax Appellate ... Section 35D of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and allowed deduction of only 10 per cent. of the said expenses. Likewise, the assessing authority also disallowed one-third of the expenditure and depreciation on the cars given for the use of the employees. The assessing authority also held that the reimbursement of medical expenses had tobe treated as part of salary for computing the disallowance under Section ... Section 40A(5) of the Income-tax Act. We find that a similar question has come up for consideration before this court in I. T. R. No. 28 of 1991--Aspinwall and Co. Ltd. v. CIT (No. 1) : [1996]220ITR611(Ker) . This court with reference to the special definition of perquisites contained in Explanation 2(b) to Section 40A(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ...

Oct 07 2008

Dy. C.I.T. Vs. Core Healthcare Ltd.

  • Decided on : 07-Oct-2008

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (2009)221CTR(Guj)580; [2009]308ITR263(Guj)

... in appeal before Tribunal and succeeded. The Tribunal has held that allowability or otherwise of the expenditure had to be tested as per the requirements of provisions of Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act,1961 ('the Act'), that the expenditure in question was not of personal nature and the only test which was then required to be applied was whether the expenditure was ... up a new industrial unit. The expenditure which is allowable is specified in Sub-section (2) of Section 35D of the Act. Under Sub-section (3) a limitation is prescribed as to the amount of expenditure which would be allowable under Sub-section (2) read with Sub-section(1) of Section 35D of the Act. For working out the limit, therefore, the cost of project or in case ... Explanation to Section 35D(3) which refers only to long-term borrowings;(c) whether the Tribunal had erred in directing deduction under Sections 80HH and 80I on the miscellaneous income of Rs. 26,64,113 being income on sale of empty containers?Although the Department had moved the said Civil Applications Nos. 53 and 54 of 2001 during the pendency of Tax Appeals Nos. ... Appeals) that the expenditure in question was treated as 'deferred revenue expenditure' and hence was capital in nature, cannot be termed to be a correct approach because insofar as the Income Tax Act is concerned, there is no such category of 'deferred revenue expenditure'. Similarly, making of an entry or absence of an entry does not determine the allowability or otherwise of ...

Oct 16 1992

Madras Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

  • Decided on : 16-Oct-1992

Court : Chennai

Reported in : [1994]209ITR174(Mad)

... section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, both at the instance of the assessee as well as the Department, the Tribunal referred the following questions for our opinion : The questions referred in T. C. 166 of 1980 at the instance of the assessee : '(i) In the facts and circumstances of the case, was the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal correct in holding that the relief under section ... of subsidy to farmers and soil test expenses, should be allowed as admissible deduction under section 35D of the Income-tax Act ? (v) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in not upholding that order of the Income-tax Officer as such rejecting capitalisation of the pre-production expenses to the extent of Rs ... cannot be a subject of any allowance in that year. The assessee is following the mercantile system of accounting. These expenses cannot be allowed either under section 28 or under section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Further, it is capital expenditure, and, therefore, it cannot be allowed. 13. On the other hand, learned counsel for the assessee submitted as under : Though ... been set up. Therefore, the expenditure incurred by the assessee-company from June 10, 1964, should be allowed as a deduction in determining its business profits under section 28 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 19. Yet another decision relied upon by learned counsel for the Department was that in Bhodilal Menghraj and Co. P. Ltd. v. CIT : [1979]119ITR968(Bom) . ...

Nov 04 1985

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shree Synthetics Limited

  • Decided on : 04-Nov-1985

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : [1986]162ITR819(MP)

... out of the expenditure of Rs. 14,35,224 claimed by the assessee under Section 35D(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that for the purpose of relief under Section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961, borrowed capital should also be taken into account in order to arrive ... 6,03,410.7. Against the decision of the Income-tax Officer, the assessee went up in appeal and before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, it was contended that all the above items of expenses were clearly covered by Sub-clause (iv) of Clause (c) of Sub-section (2) of Section 35D of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and hence the Income-tax Officer was not justified in disallowing the same. ... not hit by the provisions of Section 37(2B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 6,03,410 out of the expenditure of Rs. 14,35,224 claimed by the assessee under Section 35D(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? (3) Whether, on the facts ... of relief under Section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961, borrowed capital should also be taken into account in order to arrive at the capital employed in the industrial undertaking ? ' 2. So far question No. (3) is concerned, learned counsel for the parties submitted that in view of the decision of the Supreme Court relating to Section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in Lohia Machines ...

Oct 27 1990

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Multi Metals Ltd.

  • Decided on : 27-Oct-1990

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : (1990)88CTR(Raj)1; [1991]188ITR151(Raj)

... raising the authorised capital of the assessee-company wascovered by Sub-clause (2)(c)(iv) of Section 35D of the Income-tax Act,1961 ?' The assessee is a limited company which paid Rs. 60,000 as fee for registration to the Registrar of Companies as required under the Companies Act, 1956, for amendment of the memorandum of association for raising the authorised capital from Rs. ... . Agrawal, C.J.1. The following two questions have been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the opinion of the High Court at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Jaipur :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the fees paid ... section (2)(c)(iv) of Section 35D, the expenditure incurred for obtaining registration would be liable to be deductible.11. We, consequently, hold that the fee paid to the Registrar of Companies for raising authorised capital of the assessee-company was covered by Sub-section (2)(c)(iv) of Section 35D of the Income-tax Act,12. Let the papers of this case be returned to the Income-tax ... Section 37 of the Income-tax Act.5. It is, no doubt, true that the distinction between 'revenue' and 'capital' expenditure is a fine one. Dealing with all those cases which took, the view that expenses incurred in obtaining registration of the memorandum of association and articles for enhancing capital, the Kerala High Court held that the fee paid under the Companies Act ...

Get Latest cases on this phrase via RSS

RSS feed
Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //