What is CIT v. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. authority for?

When there is a nexus between an expenditure and the purpose of business, incurred on grounds of commercial expediency, the Revenue cannot question its reasonableness or assume the role of the businessman to compel profit maximization. This principle applies even if the business is not that of the assessee itself.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd.?

417 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. (254 ITR 377), spanning 2006 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 36(1)(iii), Section 143(3), Section 40(a)(ia), Section 14A, Section 37, Section 37(1).

CIT v. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. (254 ITR 377)

M/S Ispat Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-6(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1738/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Section 143(2)

…ings:- 1) Ramchandar Sivnarayan v. CIT (1978) 111 ITR 263(SC) 2) Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd v. CIT (1979) 116 ITR 1 (SC) 3) Davidson of India P.Ltd v. CIT (1983) 140 ITR 344 (Cal). 4) CIT v. Dhnarigiri Raja Narsingiriji 91 ITR 544(SC) 5) CIT v. Dalmia Cement Ltd 254 ITR 377, and 6) CIT v. National Rayan Commercial Co. Ltd 193 ITR 744 8. The CIT-A has not accepted the submissions of assessee for the reason that the assessee in most of cases sold the goods directly to the sale party by not taking any delivery and confirmed the addition made by the AO for non submission of confirmation from third party. 9. Before us…

M/S Divakar Solar System Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-10, 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)

…ot correct. 33. Similarly, the view taken by the Bombay High Court in Phaltan Sugar Works Ltd. v. CIT [1995] 215 ITR 5851 also does not appear to be correct. 34. We agree with the view taken by the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. [2002] 254 ITR 377 2 that once it is established that there was nexus between the expenditure and the purpose of the business (which need not necessarily be the business of the assessee itself), the Revenue cannot justifiably claim to put itself in the arm-chair of the businessman or in the position of the board of directors and assume the role to decide how much i…

Ashraj Foods & Veverages P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part in terms indicted hereinabove

ITA 4838/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm M/S. Ashraj Foods & Vs. Ito – 9(1)-1, Mumbai Beverages Pvt. Ltd., Shop No.23, Galaxy Apts., B.J.Road, Bandra (W), Mumbai – 400 050 Pan/Gir No. Aaaca5134E Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…enditure will yield benefits to the business. Reliance was placed on the following case laws:-  CIT v Dhanrajgirji Raja Narasingirji 1973 91 ITR 544 (SC)  Sassoon J David & Co. P. Ltd., V/s CIT 118 ITR 261, 275-6 (SC)  CIT v Dalmia Cement (B.) Ltd., (2002) 254 ITR 377 (Delhi HC)  Amarjothi Pictures v CIT (1968) 69 ITR 755 (Mad.) CIT v Gobald Motor Service (P) Ltd., (1975) 100 ITR 240 (Mad.) 13. In view of the above discussion and applying the proposition of law laid down in above judicial pronouncements to the facts of instant case, it is clear that expenditure was incurred as commercial expediency and the as…

M/S Business Park Development Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2310/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. V.S. Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. S.K. Jain, D.R

Section 132Section 143(1)

…abortive because of long pending litigation and at times for fear of hostility by the seller. In order to buy peace, the additional payment is agreed upon. So, • payments are made for such commercial expediency and in view of judgment in CIT Vs. Dalmia Cement 254 ITR 377 (SC), department cannot put itself in the arm chair of a businessman. Further: • The entire expenditure has been reimbursed by M/s. Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. in view of agreement. In view of judgment of CIT Vs. Tejaji Forasram Kharwalla Ltd (1968) 67 ITR 95 (SC) and Delhi High Cour: in CIT Vs. Industrial Engineering Projects Pvt. Ltd. 202 I…

Hero Motocorp Limited, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1545/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. NC Sawain, CIT DR

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…ollen Manufacturers vs. CIT: 72 ITR 612 (SC) iii) Aluminium Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT: 86 ITR 11(SC) iv) CIT vs. Panipat Woollen & General Mills Co. Ltd.: 103 ITR 666 (SC) v) J.J. Enterprises v. CIT: 254 ITR 216 (SC) vi) CIT v. Dalmia Cement (P.) Ltd: 254 ITR 377 (Del) vii) S.A. Builders: 288 ITR 1 (SC) According to him further, since the aforesaid party was not related to the appellant in terms of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act, there was no scope for the Revenue to examine the reasonableness of the expenditure incurred and to disallow any part thereof for that reason. In any case, no evidence has been br…

D.C.I.T. Cir-12, Kolkata vs. Usha Martin Telematics Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee on this ground is dismissed

ITA 838/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, J.M. &Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: G. Mallikarjuna, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)

…g judicial decisions: a.Ambika Prasad Sonar V. CIT 168 ITR 444 b.CIT Vs. RajeevaLochan (1994) 208 ITR 616 ( Kolkata H.C) c.CITVs.Jardine Henderson Ltd. (1994) 210 ITR 981 (Cal) d.SA Builders Ltd. Vs. CIT 289 ITR 261 e. CIT Vs. Dalmic Cement Bharati Ltd (2002) 254 ITR 377 However, the ld CIT (A) rejected the stand taken by the assessee and held that interest expenditure incurred is on account of capital investment and accordingly the interest expenditure incurred on borrowed capital for making an investment in equity shares going to add to the cost of investment. Accordingly it should be capitalized. Not being sa…

Stovec Industries Ltd, Gujrat vs. Addl CIT RG 2(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 2812/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & C.N. Prasadआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/2812/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. Stovec Industries Ltd. Addl.Cit, Range- 2(3) Room No.555, 5Th Floor Nidc, Nr. Lambha Village Post Narol, Ahmedabad Vs. Aayakar Bhavan Gujarat-382 405. Mumbai-20. Pan:Aabcs 7223 D आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/2449/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 वष" Addl.Cit, Range- 2(3) M/S. Stovec Industries Ltd. Vs. Mumbai-20. Gujarat-382 405. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By:Shri N. Sathya Moorthy-Dr Assessee By: S/Shri Dhanesh Bafna & Ravi Sawana सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 11.07.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 24.08.2016 आयकर अिधिनयम आयकर अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 29.01.13 Of Cit(A)-6, Mumbai The Assessing Officer (Ao) & The Assessee Have Filed The Cross-Appeals For The Year Under Consideration.Assessee-Company, Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing Of Rotary Screens Etc.Filed Its Return Of Income On 31. 10.2007,Declaring Income Of Rs.5.52 Crores. The Ao Completed The Assessment On 18.12.09 U/S. 143(3)Of The Act,Determining Income Of The Assessee At Rs.8,88,79,430/- .

For Appellant: S/Shri Dhanesh Bafna & Ravi SawanaFor Respondent: Shri N. Sathya Moorthy-DR

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…ate the sole selling agent as per the agreement. It was a pure commercial decision and the AO had no business to question the intelligence of the assessee in that 2812 & 2449/Mum/2013(07-08)StovecIndustries regard.In the case of Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. (254 ITR 377) the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held as under: “In applying the test of commercial expediency, for determining whether the expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of the business the reasonableness of the expenditure has to be just from the point of view of the businessman and not the Revenue. The jurisdiction of the Rev…

ACIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Stovec Industries Ltd, Ahemedabad

The appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 2449/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & C.N. Prasadआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/2812/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. Stovec Industries Ltd. Addl.Cit, Range- 2(3) Room No.555, 5Th Floor Nidc, Nr. Lambha Village Post Narol, Ahmedabad Vs. Aayakar Bhavan Gujarat-382 405. Mumbai-20. Pan:Aabcs 7223 D आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/2449/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 वष" Addl.Cit, Range- 2(3) M/S. Stovec Industries Ltd. Vs. Mumbai-20. Gujarat-382 405. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By:Shri N. Sathya Moorthy-Dr Assessee By: S/Shri Dhanesh Bafna & Ravi Sawana सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 11.07.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 24.08.2016 आयकर अिधिनयम आयकर अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 29.01.13 Of Cit(A)-6, Mumbai The Assessing Officer (Ao) & The Assessee Have Filed The Cross-Appeals For The Year Under Consideration.Assessee-Company, Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing Of Rotary Screens Etc.Filed Its Return Of Income On 31. 10.2007,Declaring Income Of Rs.5.52 Crores. The Ao Completed The Assessment On 18.12.09 U/S. 143(3)Of The Act,Determining Income Of The Assessee At Rs.8,88,79,430/- .

For Appellant: S/Shri Dhanesh Bafna & Ravi SawanaFor Respondent: Shri N. Sathya Moorthy-DR

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…ate the sole selling agent as per the agreement. It was a pure commercial decision and the AO had no business to question the intelligence of the assessee in that 2812 & 2449/Mum/2013(07-08)StovecIndustries regard.In the case of Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. (254 ITR 377) the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held as under: “In applying the test of commercial expediency, for determining whether the expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of the business the reasonableness of the expenditure has to be just from the point of view of the businessman and not the Revenue. The jurisdiction of the Rev…

M/S. Tata Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. The ITO 2(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed

ITA 4894/MUM/2008[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2016AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Accoutant Member & Shri Sanjay Gargtata Industries Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- Bombay House,24,Homi 2 (3) (3), Room No.555, Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi 400 001 Karve Road, Mumbai 400 020 Pan: Aaact 4058 L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By Shri Dinesh Vyas, Ar Respondent By Shri Alok Johri, Dr Date Of Hearing 22-06-2016 Date Of Pronouncement 20-07-2016

Section 10ASection 115JSection 14ASection 36

…s incurred on grounds of commercial expediency.” 17. The Hon’ble Supreme Court thereafter considering the various aspects of the matter has concluded as under: “We agree with the view taken by the Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Dalmia Cement (Bhart) Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 377 that once it is established that there was nexus between the expenditure and the purpose of the business (which need not necessarily be the business of the assessee itself), the Revenue cannot justifiably claim to put itself in the arm-chair of the businessman or in the position of the board of directors and assume the role to decide how much is…

ACIT, Hisar vs. Parkash Industries Ltd, Hisar

In the result, Assessee’s Appeal No

ITA 4545/DEL/2009[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Wadhwa, Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Ms. Archana S. Awasthi, CIT(DR)

Section 114

…pages 334 to 336 and MD's remuneration at pages 323 to 333 and do not find any expense that has been incurred for non-business purpose. 26. The assessee has also cited the judgement of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Dalmia Cement (B) Ltd. 254 ITR 377 (Del) wherein it has been held that reasonableness of expenditure cannot be gone into by the Department. This judgement has been relied upon for the proposition that remuneration paid to the Managing Director of Rs. 2 lacs was justifiable and could not be disallowed. 27. After having perused the orders of the ITAT on identical issue and details…

Prakash Industries Ltd vs. DCIT, Spl. Range

In the result, Assessee’s Appeal No

ITA 1290/DEL/2006[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2016AY 1998-1999

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Wadhwa, Adv. & MsFor Respondent: Ms. Archana S. Awasthi, CIT(DR)

Section 114

…pages 334 to 336 and MD's remuneration at pages 323 to 333 and do not find any expense that has been incurred for non-business purpose. 26. The assessee has also cited the judgement of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Dalmia Cement (B) Ltd. 254 ITR 377 (Del) wherein it has been held that reasonableness of expenditure cannot be gone into by the Department. This judgement has been relied upon for the proposition that remuneration paid to the Managing Director of Rs. 2 lacs was justifiable and could not be disallowed. 27. After having perused the orders of the ITAT on identical issue and details…

M/S Paliwal Overseas Ltd., Panipat vs. ACIT, Panipat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly

ITA 3491/DEL/2011[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 80H

…f the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court was set aside by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of SA Builders Ltd. 288 ITR 1 (SC) in which the Hon’ble Apex Court agreed with the earlier judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Dalmia Cement Ltd. 254 ITR 377 (Del.) that once it is established that there was a nexus between expenditure and the purpose of business, the Revenue cannot assume the role to decide as to how much is reasonable expenditure having regard to the circumstances of the case. It was, therefore, held that even if there is a nexus of borrowed funds with funds advanced ITA Nos. 3490…

M/S Paliwal Overseas Ltd., Panipat vs. ACIT, Panipat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly

ITA 3490/DEL/2011[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2016AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 80H

…f the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court was set aside by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of SA Builders Ltd. 288 ITR 1 (SC) in which the Hon’ble Apex Court agreed with the earlier judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Dalmia Cement Ltd. 254 ITR 377 (Del.) that once it is established that there was a nexus between expenditure and the purpose of business, the Revenue cannot assume the role to decide as to how much is reasonable expenditure having regard to the circumstances of the case. It was, therefore, held that even if there is a nexus of borrowed funds with funds advanced ITA Nos. 3490…

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)

…ures. ITA 6059/Del/2013 M/s Amserve Consultants Ltd. ITA 6090/Del/13 M/s Amsure Insurance Agency Ltd. A.Y. 2009-10 14. We now examine the legal position on this issue. (i) The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. B. Dalmia Cement (P) Ltd., (2001) 254 ITR 377 (Del) at para 7 held as follows. “7. It is to be noted that in the present case the question that has been raised by the Revenue is not one relating to the expenditure being not for the purposes of the business. It is an question of the appropriate amount which would have been paid as commission. In fact the Assessing Officer himself has allowed…

Ashraj Foods & Beverages P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1505/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Ashraj Foods & Beverages Ito-9(1)(1), Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai बनाम/ Shop No.22, Vs. Galaxy Apartments, B.J. Road, Bandra (W), Mumbai-400050 Pan. No. Aaaca5134E ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue )

Section 115JSection 234B

…rpose of the business, the Revenue cannot, justifiably, claim to put itself in the arm-chair of the businessman to decide as to how to run the business. No businessman can be compelled to maximise its profits. The ratio laid down in CIT vs Dalmia Cement Ltd. (254 ITR 377) (Bom.) and the ratio laid down in Amarjothi Pictures vs CIT 69 ITR 755 (Mad.), CIT vs Gobald Motor Service Pvt. Ltd. 100 ITR 240 (Mad.) comes to the rescue of the assessee. Considering the totality of facts and the judicial pronouncements discussed hereinabove, it is concluded that the expenditure was incurred wholly and exclusively for the purp…

ACIT Cen Cir 13, Mumbai vs. Asian Star Diamonds Iternational P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4412/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.4411/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2011-2012) Acit, Central Circle-13, Room Vs. M/S ‘A’ Star Exports, No.1103, 11Th Floor Old Cgo 114/116, Mittal Court, C- Wing, 11Th Floor, Nariman Building (Annex.) M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 Point, Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabfv 4508 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.4412/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2011-2012) Acit, Central Circle-13, Room Vs. M/S Asian Star Diamonds No.1103, 11Th Floor Old Cgo International Pvt. Ltd., Building (Annex.) M.K.Road, 114, Mittal Court, C- Wing, 11Th Floor, Nariman Mumbai-400020 Point, Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacp 4726 H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 69A

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ ‘ए’, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA No.4411/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2011-2012) ACIT, Central Circle-13, Room Vs. M/s ‘A’ Star Exports, No.1103, 11th Floor Old CGO 114/116, Mittal Court, C- Wing, 11th Floor, Nariman Building (Annex.) M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 Point, Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. : AABFV 4508 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. AND आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA No.4412/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2011-…

ACIT Cen Cir 13, Mumbai vs. 'A' Star Exports, Mumbai

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4411/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.4411/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2011-2012) Acit, Central Circle-13, Room Vs. M/S ‘A’ Star Exports, No.1103, 11Th Floor Old Cgo 114/116, Mittal Court, C- Wing, 11Th Floor, Nariman Building (Annex.) M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 Point, Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabfv 4508 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.4412/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2011-2012) Acit, Central Circle-13, Room Vs. M/S Asian Star Diamonds No.1103, 11Th Floor Old Cgo International Pvt. Ltd., Building (Annex.) M.K.Road, 114, Mittal Court, C- Wing, 11Th Floor, Nariman Mumbai-400020 Point, Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacp 4726 H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 69A

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ ‘ए’, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA No.4411/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2011-2012) ACIT, Central Circle-13, Room Vs. M/s ‘A’ Star Exports, No.1103, 11th Floor Old CGO 114/116, Mittal Court, C- Wing, 11th Floor, Nariman Building (Annex.) M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 Point, Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. : AABFV 4508 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. AND आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA No.4412/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2011-…

The ACIT Cen Cir 17 & 28, Mumbai vs. M/S. J.B. Boda & Co. Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 4107/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Tanejaआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No. 4022/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2003-04 M/S. J.B. Boda & Co. Pvt. The Acit, Cc-17 & 28, बनाम/ Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Maker Bhavan, Mumbai 1, Sir V.T. Marg, Mumbai-400 020 आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No. 4107/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2003-04 The Acit, Cc-17 & 28, M/S. J.B. Boda & Co. Pvt. Ltd., बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Maker Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai 1, Sir V.T. Marg, Mumbai-400 020

For Appellant: Shri P.J. PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Heliwal

Section 143(3)

…assume the role to decide how much is reasonable expenditure having regard to the circumstances of the case. No businessman can be compelled to maximize his profits. We agree with the view taken by the Delhi High. Court in CIT Vs. Dalmia Cement (B) Ltd (2002) 254 ITR 377 that once it is established that there was nexus between the expenditure and the purpose of the business (which need not necessarily be the business of the assessee itself), the Revenue cannot justifiably claim to put itself in the arm- chair of the businessman or in the position of the board of directors and assume the role to decide how much is…

M/S. J B Boda & Co Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. The ACIT CC 17 & 28, Mumbai

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

ITA 4022/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Tanejaआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No. 4022/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2003-04 M/S. J.B. Boda & Co. Pvt. The Acit, Cc-17 & 28, बनाम/ Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Maker Bhavan, Mumbai 1, Sir V.T. Marg, Mumbai-400 020 आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No. 4107/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2003-04 The Acit, Cc-17 & 28, M/S. J.B. Boda & Co. Pvt. Ltd., बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Maker Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai 1, Sir V.T. Marg, Mumbai-400 020

For Appellant: Shri P.J. PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Heliwal

Section 143(3)

…assume the role to decide how much is reasonable expenditure having regard to the circumstances of the case. No businessman can be compelled to maximize his profits. We agree with the view taken by the Delhi High. Court in CIT Vs. Dalmia Cement (B) Ltd (2002) 254 ITR 377 that once it is established that there was nexus between the expenditure and the purpose of the business (which need not necessarily be the business of the assessee itself), the Revenue cannot justifiably claim to put itself in the arm- chair of the businessman or in the position of the board of directors and assume the role to decide how much is…

Vipula J Choksi, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(3)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 6064/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Vipula J. Choksi Vs. Income Tax Officer-8(3)-4 Siddhi Priya Building Aaykar Bhavan, N.S. Road 4, Jvpd Scheme Mumbai-400 020. Vile Parle (W) Mumbai-400 056. Pan: Acxpc2426M Appellant .. Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 57

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI JASON P. BOAZ, AM AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM Vipula J. Choksi Vs. Income Tax Officer-8(3)-4 Siddhi Priya Building Aaykar Bhavan, N.S. Road 4, JVPD Scheme Mumbai-400 020. Vile Parle (W) Mumbai-400 056. PAN: ACXPC2426M Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by S/Shri Ajay R Singh Respondent by S/Shri A. Kumbhar Date of hearing: 03-05-2016 Date of pronouncement:25-05-2016 O R D E R PER SANDEEP GOSAIN,JUDICIAL MEMBER: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the learned CIT (A)-18, Mumbai dated 11-07-2014 passed in appe…

CIT v. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd.

What is CIT v. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd.

M/S Ispat Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-6(2), Kolkata

M/S Divakar Solar System Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-10, Kolkata

Ashraj Foods & Veverages P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(1)(1), Mumbai

M/S Business Park Development Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Hero Motocorp Limited, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

D.C.I.T. Cir-12, Kolkata vs. Usha Martin Telematics Limited, Kolkata

Stovec Industries Ltd, Gujrat vs. Addl CIT RG 2(3), Mumbai

ACIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Stovec Industries Ltd, Ahemedabad

M/S. Tata Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. The ITO 2(3)(3), Mumbai

ACIT, Hisar vs. Parkash Industries Ltd, Hisar

Prakash Industries Ltd vs. DCIT, Spl. Range

M/S Paliwal Overseas Ltd., Panipat vs. ACIT, Panipat

M/S Paliwal Overseas Ltd., Panipat vs. ACIT, Panipat

Amserve Consultants Ltd., New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

Ashraj Foods & Beverages P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(1)(1), Mumbai

ACIT Cen Cir 13, Mumbai vs. Asian Star Diamonds Iternational P.Ltd, Mumbai

ACIT Cen Cir 13, Mumbai vs. 'A' Star Exports, Mumbai

The ACIT Cen Cir 17 & 28, Mumbai vs. M/S. J.B. Boda & Co. Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

M/S. J B Boda & Co Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. The ACIT CC 17 & 28, Mumbai

Vipula J Choksi, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(3)(4), Mumbai