How many judgments cite Abbas Wazir (P) Ltd. v. CIT?

18 judgments on BharatTax cite Abbas Wazir (P) Ltd. v. CIT (265 ITR 77), spanning 2011 to 2024.

Abbas Wazir (P) Ltd. v. CIT

265 ITR 77High Court2004#6328 most cited

What is Abbas Wazir (P) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

When applying Section 40A(2) of the Income Tax Act, the reasonableness of expenditure concerning related parties must be assessed from the perspective of a prudent businessman, considering legitimate business needs and benefits, not solely from the revenue's viewpoint.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Abbas Wazir (P) Ltd. v. CIT · section 40A(2) · reasonableness of expenditure · businessman's point of view · related parties · excessive payments · bona fide cases

Also reported as

133 Taxmann 702

Issues it is cited on

section 40a(2)(a)section 40a(2)section 40a(2)(b)principal officer source of source commercial expediency section 40a mercantile system of accounting section 127 child search assessment section 40

Judgments citing Abbas Wazir (P) Ltd. v. CIT

M S HOSTEL,NEW SAMA SAVLI ROAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(3), VADODARA, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, VADODARA

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 614/AHD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)(b)

…n unsecured loans of family cannot be said to be excessive or unreasonable u/s 40A(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961." ITA No. 614/Ahd/2023 (M S Hostel vs. DCIT) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 9 – * Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Abbas Wazir (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT - 265 ITR 77 (All) has held that "even while invoking the provisions of section 40A (2) of the Act, the reasonableness of expenditure for the purpose of business has to be judged from the point of view of a businessman and not that of the revenue. The reasonableness must be looked into from businessman point of view." Similar view is held by Hon'ble Madras Hig…

ACIT CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. SARTHAK INNOVATION (P) LTD., INDORE

ITA 230/IND/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: 28.02.2023For Respondent: Shri P. K. Mishra, CIT.D.R

Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 404(2)Section 40ASection 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE (CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.228 to 230/Ind/2021 (Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2017-18) ACIT, Central-2, Vs. Sarthak Innovation (P) Indore Ltd. Indore "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAKCS4846B (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri P. K. Mishra, CIT.D.R. Shri Ajay Tulsiyan, CA Assessee by : 28.02.2023 Date of Hearing 30.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: The bunch of appeals filed by the Revenue…

ACIT CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. SARTHAK INNOVATION (P) LTD., INDORE

ITA 229/IND/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: 28.02.2023For Respondent: Shri P. K. Mishra, CIT.D.R

Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 404(2)Section 40ASection 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

DCIT CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. SARTHAK INNOVATION (P) LTD., INDORE

ITA 228/IND/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: 28.02.2023For Respondent: Shri P. K. Mishra, CIT.D.R

Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 404(2)Section 40ASection 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 4(1), RAIPUR vs. M/S SUPER IRON AND STEEL PVT LTD.,, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and Cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 261/RPR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.261/Rpr/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Acit-4(1), Raipur Vs M/S Super Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd., Pritpal Farm House, Vip Road, Raipur(C.G.) Pan No. : Aaics 2579 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) & Cross Objection No.13/Rpr/2017 (Arising Out Of Ita No.261/Rpr/2017) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) M/S Super Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit-4(1), Raipur Pritpal Farm House, Vip Road, Raipur(C.G.) Pan No. : Aaics 2579 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N.Singh, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)Section 68

…khs from three concerns including from the assessee company and some 4 & CO No.13/RPR/2017 income under the head other sources. He has paid tax of Rs. 2388644/-. It has been held by the Hon'ble Allahabad High [ Abbas Wazir (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in (2004) 265 ITR 77] that whenevKiclaim IS made before the Income-tax Officer for allowing an expenditure as a legitimate witness expenditure, the approach of the Income-tax .Officer ( or other 'Income-tax authority) has to be that he has to look at the matter from the view point of a prudent businessman, and not from his own view point, and then ascertain whether th…

M/S ARICIA CONSTRUCTION,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, 29(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 3333/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman ( & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

Section 37(1)Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…1 N THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A No. 3333/Mum/2019 (Assessment year : 2014-15) M/s Aricia Construction vs ACIT -29(1), Mumbai 1501, 15th Floor, B-Wing 02 Commercial Complex, Opp. Asha Nagar, Mulund (W) Mumbai-400 080 PAN : AAOFA9504F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Adv. Devendra Jain Revenue represented by Shri Mehul Jain (DR) Date of hearing 25-10-2021 Date of pronouncement 03-01-2022 O R D E R Per : S. Rifaur Rahman (AM): This is an appeal filed by the assessee against t…

MAXWELL & STUART PROJECT MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the assessees appeals are allowed

ITA 650/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

…yments to relatives and associate concerns, and should not be so applied as to "cause hardship in bona fide cases". Hive (supra) also considered the effect of the Allahabad High Court's decision in Abbas Wazir (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [2004] 265 ITR 77 and the Madras High Court's ruling in CIT Vs. Computer Graphics Ltd. [2006] 285 ITR 84. The Court also relied upon the Calcutta High Court's ruling in CIT Vs. Edward Keventer (P.) Ld. [1972] 86 ITR 370. In Edward Keventer's case (supra), the Court had stated that the reasonableness or otherwise of the expenditure should take into account firs…

MAXWELL & STUART PROJECT MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the assessees appeals are allowed

ITA 649/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

FREEWINGS POWER & INFRA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed

ITA 778/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “SMC” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S, Godara, Judicial Member Assessment Year:2012-13 Freewings Power & Infra DCIT Cicle-10(1) बनाम / Ltd., Ganga Business Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, V/s. Centre, 4, Dhakinapur, Chowringhee Square Shopping Complex-02, Kolkata-69 Garihat Road (South), Kolkata-700 068 [PAN No.AAACF 4480 A] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Miraj D. Shah, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Imlimeran Jamir, Addl. CIT-DR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 21-01-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 25-01-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement आद…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. SECOND LEASING PVT. LTD.

ITA/906/2017HC Delhi30 Oct 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

Section 37Section 40A(2)(b)

…ITA No.906/2017 Page 1 $~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 906/2017 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel for Revenue. versus M/S. SECOND LEASING PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ved Jain with Mr. Pranjal Srivastava, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA O R D E R % 30.10.2017 The Revenue claims to be aggrieved by the order of the ITAT to set aside the addition made on re-assessment of the fair market value…

SECOND LEASING PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 2412/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiay. 2009-10 M/S Second Leasing Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, Circle-8(1), Flat No. N, Sagar Apartment, Vs. New Delhi 6, Tilak Marg, New Delhi – 11 001 (Pan: Aabcs6609R) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Ms. RanoFor Respondent: Sh. N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 142(3)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…nal was not correct in law in upholding disallowance of Rs. 13.20 lacs out of remuneration paid to Mr. Sushil Pandit (director) by invoking the provisions of Section 40A(2) of the Act. IV. Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in Abbas Wazir (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (2004) 265 ITR 77 (AII).wherein the High Court held as under: "In Newtone Studios Ltd. v. CiT [1955J 28 ITR 378 (Mad), it was observed that the remuneration paid to a director should not be rejected by the Assessing Officer on any subjective standard of reasonableness, and that so long as the reality of the payment was not challenged and no allegation was made th…

SIGMA CORPORATION INDIA LTD. vs. DCIT

The appeal is allowed in

ITA/795/2016HC Delhi15 Feb 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

…payments to relatives and associate concerns, and should not be so applied as to “cause hardship in bona fide cases”. Hive (supra) also considered the effect of the Allahabad High Court’s decision in Abbas Wazir (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [2004] 265 ITR 77 and the Madras High Court’s ruling in CIT Vs. Computer Graphics Ltd. [2006] 285 ITR 84. The Court also relied upon the Calcutta High Court’s ruling in CIT Vs. Edward Keventer (P.) Ld. [1972] 86 ITR 370. In Edward Keventer’s case (supra), the Court had stated that the reasonableness or otherwise of the expenditure should take into account firstly t…

M/S DIVAKAR SOLAR SYSTEM LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1301/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Dec 2016AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)

…summons u/s 131 of the Act to her and recorded statement from her, which was admittedly not done by the ld AO. He placed reliance on the following decisions :- (a) Decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Abbas Wazir (P) Ltd vs CIT reported in 265 ITR 77 (All) (b) Decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs Nagesh Cine Enterprises reported in 232 ITR 750 (Mad) He further argued that the revenue had made this addition purely based on surmise and conjecture. The law is very well settled as on date that no additions could be made on surmise and conjecture. Reliance in this regard wa…

HIND AIRLINK PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 2634/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddyay: 2011-12 Hind Airlink P.Ltd. Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle 12(1) A -1, Okhla Industrial Area New Delhi Phase I, New Delhi 110 020

For Appellant: Sh. M.P.Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: None (Adjournment Application rejected)

Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…e find that the assessee has been able to discharge the burden that the price paid by it to Mr. SushilPandit is not excessive or unreasonable. “12. It will also be useful to refer to the judgment of Allahabad High Court in Abbas Wazir (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2004] 265 ITR 77/[2003] 133 Taxman 702 wherein the High Court held that even while invoking the provisions of section 40A(2) of the Act, the reasonableness of the expenditure for the purpose of business has to be judged from the point of view of a businessman and not that of the revenue. The approach has to be that of a prudent businessman and the reasonableness m…

. AMSERVE CONSULTANTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result both the appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 6059/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddyay: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. C.S.Agarwal, Sr.AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ravi Jain, CIT, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…e find that the assessee has been able to discharge the burden that the price paid by it to Mr. SushilPandit is not excessive or unreasonable. “12. It will also be useful to refer to the judgment of Allahabad High Court in Abbas Wazir (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2004] 265 ITR 77/[2003] 133 Taxman 702 wherein the High Court held that even while invoking the provisions of ITA 6059/Del/2013 M/s Amserve Consultants Ltd. ITA 6090/Del/13 M/s Amsure Insurance Agency Ltd. A.Y. 2009-10 section 40A(2) of the Act, the reasonableness of the expenditure for the purpose of business has to be judged from the point of view of a businessm…

DCIT 10(2), MUMBAI vs. AARVI ENCON P.LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 5347/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jan 2016AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Dr. K. ShivaramFor Respondent: Shri Mohammed Rizwan

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(ii)Section 40ASection 40A(2)(b)

…आयकर आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, अिधकरण " ए” खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI-“A”,BENCH सव"ी जोिग"दर"सह , "याियक सद"य एवं एवं एवं राजे"", लेखा सद"य एवं Before S/Sh. Joginder Singh,Judicial Member & Rajendra,Accountant Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.ITA No.5347/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-2010-11 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dy. CIT-10-(2) Vs. M/s. Aarvi Encon Pvt. Ltd. Room No.432, 4th Floor, Unit No.155, 1st Floor Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Shah & Nahar Indl. Estate(A 1) Mumba…

HIVE COMMUNICATIONS PVT LTD

Appeal is allowed

ITA/306/2011HC Delhi08 Jul 2011

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

Section 143Section 260Section 40ASection 40A(2)

…asonable payments to relatives and associate concerns and should not be applied in a manner which will cause hardship in bona fide cases. 12. It will also be useful to refer to the judgment of Allahabad High Court in Abbas Wazir (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (2004) 265 ITR 77 wherein the High Court held that even while invoking the provisions of Section 40A(2) of the Act, the reasonableness of the expenditure for the purpose of business has to be judged from the point of view of a businessman and not that of the revenue. The approach has to be that of a prudent businessman and the reasonableness must be looked i…

HIVE COMMUNICATIONS PVT LTD

Appeal is allowed

ITA - 306 / 2011HC Delhi08 Jul 2011

Section 143Section 260Section 40ASection 40A(2)