DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S CAPACIT"E INFRAPROJECTS LTD, MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance of professional fees paid to a related party, finding no infirmity in the order. The AO had not established how the fees were excessive or unreasonable.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed ITAT's deletion of disallowances made by the Assessing Officer (AO) concerning unverified purchases, sub-contract expenses, education fees, and professional fees paid to a related party. The assessee was engaged in construction services.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in deleting disallowances related to unverified purchases, sub-contract expenses, education fees, and professional fees paid to a related party. The primary issue revolved around the genuineness of expenses and the reasonableness of payments to related parties.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 37(1),Section 40(2)(a)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. Johnson & Johnson Ltd.26 citing80 Taxmann.com 337 · 2017 · HC
- Satkal Papers P Ltd. v. Hon’ble Bombay High Court12 citing114 ITR 256 · 1978 · HC
- Kimaya Impex (P.) Ltd. v. ITO5 citing136 Taxmann.com 117 · 2020
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL
PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM
These appeals by the Revenue are directed against separate order, each dated 03.01.2023, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-47, Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment years 2017-18 to 2020-21. The common grounds are involved in these appeals and therefore, same were heard together and disposed off by way of this consolidated order for convenience.
M/s Capacit’e Infraprojects Ltd. 2 M/s Capacit’e Infraprojects Ltd. ITA Nos. 954 to 957/Mum/2023 ITA Nos.
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 37(1)
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Smit Navnitlal Soni, Ahmedabad, Gujarat vs ITO Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad, GujaratITA 1434/AHD/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Shobha Sudamrao Tagad, Ahmednagar vs ITO WD-1, AhmednagarITA 311/PUN/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2023-24
- Digjam Limited, Jamnagar vs The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 349/RJT/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Rajesh Maru, Mhow vs ITO-5(1), IndoreITA 839/IND/2025[2023-2024]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2023-2024
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Chandan Kumar Bathual vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Cuttack-Iii Range, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Manoranjan Sadangi vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Gopalpur Range, GanjamOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Bijaya Kumar Parekh vs. State Tax Officer, CT And GST Balangir Circle, BalangirOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Puspanjali Bhuyan vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S A2Z Infra Engineering LTD vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026