CIT v. Calcutta Agency Ltd.

Manisha Bipin Bhinsara, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 25(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA N0

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4512/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Mrs. Manisha Bipin The Income Tax Officer- बनाम/ Bhinsara, Ward 25(2)(2), V. 501/A, Yogi Ratna, Bandra Kurla Complex, Opp Mogaveera Bank, Mumbai – 400 051. Eksar Road, Borivali (West), Mumbai – 400 092. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Amlpb7464N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

…anif v. CIT , 50 ITR 1(SC) d) CIT v. Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad , 72 ITR 194(SC) e) Sumati Dayal v. CIT , 80 Taxman 89(SC) f) CIT v. M Ganapathi Mudaliar , 53 ITR 623(SC) g) A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT 34 ITR 807(SC) h) CIT v. Calcutta Agency Limited, 19 ITR 191(SC) i) CIT v. Transport Corporation of India Limited 256 ITR 701(AP HC) j) CIT v. Imperial Chemicals Industries India Private Limited 74 ITR 17 ITA 4512/Mum/2015 5 4.Aggrieved by the assessment orders dated 07.12.2011 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act by the A.O., the assessee filed first appeal before the ld. CIT(A). 5. Before the ld. CIT(A) , the…

H. Parsons P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the Assessee is treated as allowed accordingly

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6638/Mum/13 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. H. Parsons Private Limited Income Tax Officer 2(1)(4) बनाम/ Asian Bldg., Nicol Road, 455, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Ballard Estate, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400038 Mumbai-400020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaach1326D

…per sec. 37 of the Act no expenditure shall be allowed unless it is duly supported by the relevant documentary evidences. Strong reliance is placed on the following decisions: (i) L H Sugar Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT 125 hR 293(SC) (ii) CIT Vs. Calcutta Agency 19 ITR 191 (SC) (iii) Laxmi Narayan Cotton Mills Vs. CIT 73 ITR 634 (SC) Where an appellant claim a deduction, the onus is on the appellant to bring all material facts on record to substantiate the claim made by it." 5.3.3 Having regard to facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the aforesaid decision of Supreme Court, the disallowance of…

Kamlesh S. Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO 21(2)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: The Ld. Assessing Officer & The Accounts Of The Assessee Are Audited One, Therefore, The Addition Is Purely On The Basis Guess Work. Our Attention Was Invited To Exhibit A (Pages 1 & 2) & Exhibit D Containing Ledger Of Transportation, Octroi & Staff Welfare Expenses.

…either provided any explanation nor filed any details. The Sales Tax Department also published a list of parties, who are providing bogus bills without supply of goods/material. The ld. Assessing Officer relied upon the decision in CIT vs Calcutta Agency Ltd. 19 ITR 191 (SC) and Imperial Chemicals Indu. Ltd. 74 ITR 17 (SC) along with various other decision as mentioned in para 5.5 of the assessment order along with the decision in Udaipur Mineral Development Syndicate Pvt. Ltd. 269 ITR 263 (Raj.) by holding that onus is upon the assessee to prove that the expenses, if any, was incurred for business purposes. The…

H & R Johnson India Ltd ( Now Know As A Division A of Prisim Cement Ltd), Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 34, Mumbai

In the result,appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

…yee cheques did not make the transaction genuine.He referred to the case of Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd.(208 ITR 465).The AO also referred to the cases of L.H Sugar Factory and Oil Mills (P) Ltd. (125ITR293), Chandravilas Hotel (164ITR102),Calcutta Agency Ltd.(19 ITR 191), Transport Corporation of India Ltd. (256 ITR701) and Imperial Chemical Industries(I) Pvt. Ltd.(74 ITR 17). The AO disallowed the commission payment amounting to Rs.35 lacs u/s.37(1) of the Act. 4.Aggrieved by the order of the AO the assessee preferred an appeal before the FAA.After considering the submission of the assessee and the assessment or…