CIT v. Anil Hardware Store

323 ITR 368High Court2010#14380 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 40(b)Section 40A(2)(a)

Judgments citing CIT v. Anil Hardware Store

M/S. D.S ENTERPRISES ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 22(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4778/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt.Renu Jauhri7 (A.Y.2023-24)

For Appellant: Ms Dinkle Hariya & Ms SrutiFor Respondent: Shri Annaravan Kosuri- Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40

…strued strictly and no additional condition can be read into it. On this point, Ld. AR has placed reliance on several judgments in support of his contention, some of which are as under: P a g e | 5 ITA NO. 4778/mum/2025. i. CIT V Anil Hardware Store [(2010) 323 ITR 368 (HP)] wherein Hon’ble High Court had held that in a given year, the partners may decide to invest certain amounts of the profits into other venture and receive less remuneration than that which is permissible under the partnership deed, but there is nothing which debars them from claiming the maximum amount of remuneration payable in terms o…

LUTHRA & LUTHRA LAW OFFICES NEW DELHI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5349/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantasstt. Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Saksham Singhal &For Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40

…shall be an amount permissible as remuneration to the working partners under the Income Tax Act, 1961 and as applicable from time to time. " [Paragraph 13 and 14] Ratio of the decision of the Himachal Pradesh High Court in CIT v. Anil Hardware Store [2010} 323 ITR 368, does not assist the stand and contention of the appellant. On examining the partnership deed, it was held that the two partners were entitled to 50% or equal amount as remuneration. The contention of the Revenue that the partnership deed did not exactly determine the remuneration payable to the partners, was rejected holding that the requirement…

SALES EMPORIUM (SOUTH),KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-26, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes subject to directions contained hereinabove

ITA 2262/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2262/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2010-11 Sales Emporium (South) -Vs- Dcit, Circle-53/Now 26, Kolkata [Pan: Aawfs 6903 J ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri V.N. Datta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 40

…t. Moreover, he observed that the quantification of partners’ remuneration is not made in the partnership deed and accordingly by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs Anil Hardware Store reported in 323 ITR 368 (HP), he held that the remuneration is not allowable in any case. With regard to other claim made by the assessee, that the partners’ remuneration has been allowed in the past by the revenue in the scrutiny assessments, the ld AO observed that there is no RES JUDICATA in income tax proceedings and accordingly the decision taken in earlier years w…

M/S. S & K DIAMONDS,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2515/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2515/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14) M/S. S. K. Diamonds, Dcit, बनाम/ 12, Saryu Flats, Circle – 5(2), Vs. Mithakhali Six Road, Ahmedabad. Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abffs 3397 A .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. K. Patel, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri T. Sankar, Sr. D.R.

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri T. Sankar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 40

…wed by the AO in the assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 24-08-2015. 7. The assessee in support of his claim has also relied on the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh, in the case of CIT vs. Anil Hardware Store reported in 323 ITR 368. 8. However, the AO referred the supplementary partnership deed made on 18-05-2006, which reads as under: “Remuneration to Partners:- Mr. Parag Dineshbhai Shah shall devote his full time and Ms. Rupali Tushar Kothori shall devote her time for the business of Partnership firm and in consideration, both partners are entitled to the amount of remune…

M/S. S.C.PADHEE,SAMBALPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 28/CTK/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack04 Aug 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri N.L.Dash, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CIT DR
Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2010-2011 DCIT, Circle -1(1), Vs. M/s.S.C.Padhee, Sambalpur Balibandha, Sambalpur PAN/GIR No.AAQFS 7009 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) ITA No. 28/CTK/2016: Asst. Year: 2011-12 C.O.No.09/CTK/2015 (arising out of ITA No.495/CTK/2014) Assessment Year : 2010-2011 M/s.S.C.Padhee, Vs. JCIT/DCIT, Circle -1(1), Balibandha, Sambalpur Sambalpur PAN/GIR No.AAQFS 7009 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : Shri N.L.Dash, AR Revenue by : Shri Kunal Singh…

GARG TRADING CO.,ROHTAK vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 6865/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Garg Trading Co. , C/O- N.C. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, New Garg, Chartered Accountant, M.G. Delhi Road, Rohtak Gir/Pan : Aaffg5606F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By S/Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush Kumar Kamal, Advocates Respondent By Smt. Rishpal Bedi, Jcit (Dr) Date Of Hearing 18.04.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 31.05.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal Of The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Dated 13/11/2015 Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Rohtak, For Assessment Year 2011-12, Raising Following Grounds: 1. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred Both In Law & On Facts In Sustaining Disallowance Of Rs. 169829/- Representing The Alleged Excess Salary Paid To The Partner By Invoking Clause (V) Of Section 40(B) Of The Act. 1.1 That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Has Failed To Appreciated That The Salary Paid To The Partners Was In Terms Of Clause (9) Of The Deed Of Partnership Dated 12.04.2007 Which Had Been Allowed Consistently In Preceding & Succeeding Assessment Years And, Therefore, Disallowance Made Is Illegal, Invalid & Untenable. It Is, Therefore, Prayed That Additions Sustained Of Rs. 169829/- Be Deleted & Appeal Of The Appellant May Kindly Be Allowed.

Section 143(3)Section 40

…Tribunal Delhi bench decision in the case of Shri Ranvir Singh and company versus ITO, Ward 3, Rohtak in ITA No. 3777 and 3778/Del/2015 (ii) Judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh’s in the case of CIT versus Anil Hardware Store reported in (2010) 323 ITR 368 (HP) (iii) Judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of CIT versus Asian marketing reported in (2012) 254 CTR 0453 (Raj) 3 AY:2011-12 (iv) Judgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT versus Great City Manufacturing Company reported in (2013) 256 ITR 420 (Allahabad) and (v) Judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Himachal…

Sood Brij & Associates

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/1154/2011HC Delhi04 Nov 2011
Section 260ASection 40Section 44A

…ITA No. 1154/2011 1 of 11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Income Tax Appeal No. 1154 of 2011 Reserved on: 17th October, 2011 % Date of Decision: 4th November, 2011 Sood Brij & Associates ....Appellant Through Mr. Ajay Vohra, Mr. Amit Sachdeva and Mr. Somnath Shukla, Advocates. Versus The Commissioner of Income-tax-XIII, New Delhi …Respondents Through Mr. N P Sahni and Mr. Ruchesh Sinha, Advocates.…