Batlivala & Karanai v. ACIT

2 SOT 379Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2005#15220 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2020.

Judgments citing Batlivala & Karanai v. ACIT

DCIT Cir 4(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Shcil Services Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1811/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1811/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri M. M. Galvala, DRFor Respondent: Shri T. S. Khalsa, AR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 194J

…such services is to be determined first. Unless this benchmark is set, there cannot be any question of resorting to disallowance under section 40A(2)(b) for excessive payment vis-à-vis fair market value of services. In the case of Batlivala & Karanai Vs ACIT (2 SOT 379), a coordinate bench of this Tribunal has observed as follows. Section 40A(2) provides that where the Assessing Officer is of the view that expenditure incurred by the assessee, in respect of which payment is made to the specified persons, is excessive or unreasonable having 11 I.T.A. No. 1811/Mum/2019 M/s SHCIL Services Ltd regard to the market…

DCIT-6(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S.Frischmann Prabhu (I) Privets Limited, Mumbai

ITA 5554/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. G. S. Pannu, Vp & Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5554/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) In The Matter Of:

For Respondent: Shri Malav P. Sheth, AR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 40A(2)(a)

…ing judicial precedents wherein it is held that in the absence of any opinion/cogent findings from the A.O. in relation to unreasonableness/excessive payment to related parties, no disallowance u/s. 40A(2)(a) can be made. 1. Batlivala & Karani Vs ACIT (2005) 2 SOT 379 (Mum) 2. Orchard Advertisising (P) ltd. Vs Addl.CIT(2010) 8 TAXMANN.COM 162(Mum) 3. Global Innovsource Search Solutions (P) Ltd. Vs ITO (2013) 57 SOT 139(Mum-Trib) 15. After having gone through the facts of the present case and hearing the parties at length, we find from the records that the AO had made disallowance u/s 40A(2)(a) of the Act by h…

ITO, Ward-2(1)(3), Ahmedabad vs. Hemato Oncology Clinic (Ahmedabad)P.Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 3411/AHD/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

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

…rchases made by it from them. ITO Vs. Hemato Oncology Clinic Assessment year: 2012-13 Page 4 of 6 • DCIT Vs. Meet Heat Engineers [ITA No. 3654/07 dt. 23/07/2010] • ITO Vs. Cello Paper Co. [ITA No. 1815/AHD/2010 dt.28/12/2012] • Bativala and Karani Vs. ACIT [2 SOT 379 (Mum)] 3.15. The related grounds of appeal are accordingly allowed.” 4. Aggrieved by the relief so granted by the CIT(A), the Assessing Officer is in appeal before us. 5. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of the applicable legal position. 6. We have noted that t…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Delhi Press Samachar Patra Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result ground No. 1 of the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1433/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Manish Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anshu Prakash, Sr. DR

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

…fair market value of services for which expenditure was incurred was contraiy to the scheme of the company as held in the case of Orchard Advertising Pvt. Ltd. v Addl. CIT 8 Taxmann.com 162 (Mum). It has also been held in the case of Battibala & Karani V ACIT 2 SOT 379 (Mum) that an expenditure being excessive cannot be inferred based on some subjective perception of the authority dealing with the same, it has to be based on cogent material on record. In the instant appeal the AO has simply disallowed 10% & 2% of expenditure on adhoc basis without any inquiry, as regards the market price. The disallowance is arbi…

Schil Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5743/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No. 5743 /Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 M/S. Shcil Services Ltd., The Acit-4(2), बनाम/ C/O Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Army & Navy Bldg., Mumbai-400 020 3Rd Floor, 148, M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 01 आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No. 6019 /Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 The Acit-4(2), M/S. Shcil Services Ltd., बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, C/O Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Army & Navy Bldg., 148, M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 01 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aajcs 5661H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Assessee By: Shri F.V. Irani & Shri Zareer N. Mehta Shri Manjunatha Swamy ""यथ" क" ओर से/Revenue By:

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani &

Section 194HSection 194JSection 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…uch services is to be determined first. Unless this benchmark is set, there cannot be any question of resorting to disallowance under section 40A(2)(b) for excessive payment vis-à-vis fair market value of services. In the case of Batlivala & Karanai Vs ACIT ( 2 SOT 379), a coordinate bench of this Tribunal has observed as follows Section 40A(2) provides that where the Assessing Officer is of the view that expenditure incurred by the assessee, in respect of which payment is made to the specified persons, is excessive or unreasonable having regard to the market value of goods, services or facilities for which the p…

Schil Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1777/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.1777/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Shcil Services Ltd., The Dcit-4(2)(1), बनाम/ C/O Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Army & Navy Bldg., Mumbai-400 020 3Rd Floor, 148 M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 आयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.1669/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Dcit-4(2)(1), M/S. Shcil Services Ltd., बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, C/O Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Army & Navy Bldg., 3Rd Floor, 148 M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 आयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.5004/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Shcil Services Ltd., The Dcit-4(2)(1), बनाम/ C/O Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Army & Navy Bldg., Mumbai-400 020 3Rd Floor, 148 M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aajcs 5661H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Assesee By: Shri F.V. Irani Shri Z. Mehta ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Manjunatha Swamy Shri R.A. Dhyani

For Respondent: Shri Manjunatha Swamy

Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 194JSection 271(1)(c)Section 40A(2)(b)

…ch services is to be determined first. Unless this benchmark is set, there cannot be any question of resorting to disallowance under section 40A(2)(b) for excessive payment vis-à-vis fair market value of services. In the case of Batlivala & Karanai Vs ACIT ( 2 SOT 379), a coordinate bench of this Tribunal has observed as follows Section 40A(2) provides that where the Assessing Officer is of the view that expenditure incurred by the assessee, in respect of which payment is made to the specified persons, is excessive or unreasonable having regard to the market value of goods, services or facilities for which the…