CIT v. Dhanrajgirji Raja Narasingirji

91 ITR 544Supreme Court of India1973#643 most cited

What is CIT v. Dhanrajgirji Raja Narasingirji authority for?

The revenue cannot question the commercial expediency or wisdom of an expenditure incurred by a businessman, as the businessman is the best judge of their own business interests. The department's role is limited to verifying if the expenditure was genuinely incurred and was wholly and exclusively for business purposes.

154

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Dhanrajgirji Raja Narasingirji · 91 ITR 544 · Section 37(1) · commercial expediency · business expediency · revenue dictating business affairs · expenditure wholly and exclusively for business · allowability of business expenditure · genuineness of expenditure · Section 40A(2)(b) · Income-tax Act 1961

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 1961Section 195Section 40A(2)(b)Section 68Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

Issues it is cited on

section 5(2)(b)section 10(2)(xv)section 5(2)section 40a(2)(b)section 40a(2)section 41(1)commercial expediencybusiness expediencysundry creditorssection 41section 40asection 145(3)

Judgments citing CIT v. Dhanrajgirji Raja Narasingirji

M/S Fincity Investments Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 616/HYD/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…(Cal)). It is for the assessee to decide how best to protect its own interest. It is not open to AO to prescribe what expenditure an assessee should incur and in what circumstances he should incur that expenditure (CIT Vs. Dhanrajgiri Raja Narasingiri (1973) 91 ITR 544 (SC)). Expression "commercial expediency" is not a term of art. It :- 14 -: M/s. Fincity Investments Pvt. Ltd., mean everything that serves to promote commerce and includes every means suitable to that end. In applying the test of commercial expediency for determining whether the expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purposes of…

M/S Highgrace Investements Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 733/HYD/2006[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…(Cal)). It is for the assessee to decide how best to protect its own interest. It is not open to AO to prescribe what expenditure an assessee should incur and in what circumstances he should incur that expenditure (CIT Vs. Dhanrajgiri Raja Narasingiri (1973) 91 ITR 544 (SC)). Expression "commercial expediency" is not a term of art. It mean everything that serves to promote commerce and includes every means suitable to that end. In applying the test of commercial expediency for determining whether the expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the :- 14 -: M/s. Highgrace Investments Pvt. Ltd., purposes…

M/S Fincity Investments Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 732/HYD/2006[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…(Cal)). It is for the assessee to decide how best to protect its own interest. It is not open to AO to prescribe what expenditure an assessee should incur and in what circumstances he should incur that expenditure (CIT Vs. Dhanrajgiri Raja Narasingiri (1973) 91 ITR 544 (SC)). Expression "commercial expediency" is not a term of art. It :- 14 -: M/s. Fincity Investments Pvt. Ltd., mean everything that serves to promote commerce and includes every means suitable to that end. In applying the test of commercial expediency for determining whether the expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purposes of…

M/S Elem Investments Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 731/HYD/2006[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…(Cal)). It is for the assessee to decide how best to protect its own interest. It is not open to AO to prescribe what expenditure an assessee should incur and in what circumstances he should incur that expenditure (CIT Vs. Dhanrajgiri Raja Narasingiri (1973) 91 ITR 544 (SC)). Expression "commercial expediency" is not a term of art. It mean everything that serves to promote commerce and includes every means suitable to that end. In applying the test of commercial expediency for determining whether the expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the :- 14 -: M/s. Elem Investments Pvt. Ltd., purposes of th…

ACIT, Cir-32, Kolkata vs. Jitendra Seth, Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1420/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year:2012-13 Acit, Circle-32, Jitendra Seth बनाम 10B, Middleton Row, 87, Karnani Estate, 209, / 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-71 V/S. A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata-700 017 [Pan No.Ajhs 9552 M] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Sr-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 04-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 27-07-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Challenges Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Kolkata’S Order Dated 31.03.2016 Passed In Case No. 749/Cit(A)-9/Cir-32/2014-15/Kol, Reversing Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing Assessee’S Commission Paid Of ₹51,56,694/- As Well As Partly Restricting Section 54F Deduction Disallowance To ₹42,39,181/- Out Of ₹56,52,242/-; Respectively, Involving Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’ Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused.

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 54F

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA Before Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member and Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member Assessment Year:2012-13 ACIT, Circle-32, Jitendra Seth बनाम 10B, Middleton Row, 87, Karnani Estate, 209, / 2nd Floor, Kolkata-71 V/s. A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata-700 017 [PAN No.AJHS 9552 M] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT-SR-DR अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Miraj D Shah, AR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 04-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 27-07-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pron…

Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Range-11, New Delhi

In the result ground No

ITA 6990/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No. 6990/Del/2017 (A.Y 2013-14)

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…the business, the Supreme Court laid down that the reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the Revenue. 15.14. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Dharamraj Giriji Riya Narsingiriji 91 ITR 544 held that "it is not open to the Department to prescribe what expenditure an assessee should incur and in what circumstances he should incur that expenditure. Every businessman knows its interest best". 15.15. It is well settled that the assessing officer cannot place himself in the arm chair of businessman and decide the amount of expenditure tha…

Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal No. 2424/Del/ 2015 filed by the revenue in assessment year 2010-11 is partly allowed

ITA 1616/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…the business, the Supreme Court laid down that the reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the Revenue. 15.14. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Dharamraj Giriji Riya Narsingiriji 91 ITR 544 held that "it is not open to the Department to prescribe what expenditure an assessee should incur and in what circumstances he should incur that expenditure. Every businessman knows its interest best". 15.15. It is well settled that the assessing officer cannot place himself in the arm chair of businessman and decide the amount of expenditure tha…

ITO, Ward-2(3), Durgapur, Kolkata vs. M/S Height Insurance Services Ltd., Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2266/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2011-12 Income Tax Officer, V/S. M/S Height Insurance Ward-2(3), R/No.10/21, Services Ltd., Room 7Th Floor, Aayakar No.319,3Rd Floor, Bhawan, P-7, Kamalaya Centre, 156A, Chowringhee Square, Lenin Sarani, Kolakta-13 Kolkata-69 [Pan No.Aacch 0943 G] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Md. Usman, Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A.K. Tibrewal, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 31-05-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 08-06-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2011-12 Arises Against Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-14, Kolkata’S Order Dated 31.08.2016 In Case No. 188/Cit(A)-14/Wd-1(1)/2015-16, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. 2. The Revenue’S Solitary Grievance Pleaded In The Instant Appeal Seeks To Revive Section 37 R.W 40(A)(Ia) Disallowances / Addition Of ₹66,18,00,000/- Pertaining To Assessee’S Service Charges Paid To M/S Golden Trust Financial Services (Gtfs) Hereafter For Having Acted As Its Agent. It’S Next Two Averments Are That The Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Examining Assessee’S Exclusive Method Of Accounting In Service Tax Receivable On Output Services As Against Inclusive Method Of Service Tax

Section 143(3)Section 37

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “B” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “B” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member and Dr. A.L. Saini, Accountant Member Assessment Year :2011-12 Income Tax Officer, V/s. M/s Height Insurance Ward-2(3), R/No.10/21, Services Ltd., Room 7th Floor, Aayakar No.319,3rd Floor, Bhawan, P-7, Kamalaya Centre, 156A, Chowringhee Square, Lenin Sarani, Kolakta-13 Kolkata-69 [PAN No.AACCH 0943 G] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Md. Usman, CIT-DR अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A.K. Tibrewal, FCA ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 31-05-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Dat…

Vaaya Renewable Energy (Purna) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(1)`, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 535/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Years: 2012-13 Vaaya Renewable Energy Dcit, (Purna) Private Limited, Central Circle-3(1), बनाम/ A-9, Enercon Tower, Veera 19Th Floor, Air India Bldg. Vs. Desai Raod, Veera Nariman Point, Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400021 Andheri (West), Mumbai-400053 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.Aadcv7290F "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Hemakataria राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Ms. N. Hemlatha-Dr

…664 (Bom.) 2.7. It is to be seen whether the expenditure was bonafidely incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business [see, CIT v. Birla Cotton Spng. & Wvg. Mills Ltd., (1971) 82 ITR 166 (SC); CIT v. Dhanrajgirji Raja Narsingirji, (1973) 91 ITR 544, 549 (SC)]. 2.8. So far as, issue of quantum of the expenditure to be incurred is concerned, we are of the view, it is for the assessee to decide how best to protect his own interest. It is not open to the department to prescribe what expenditure an assessee should incur and in what circumstances he should incur that expenditure. The ratio laid…

Bfil Finance Limited (Formerly Itc Bhadrachalam Finance & Investments Ltd), Mumbai vs. I.T.O.1(1)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1898/MUM/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2002-03 & Assessment Year: 2002-03 Bfil Finance Ltd. (Formerly The Income-Tax Itc Bhadrachalam Finance & Vs. Officer-1(1)-1 Investment Ltd.) Eucharistic Aayakar Bhavan, Congress Building No. 1, 4Th Maharshi Karve Road, Floor, 5, Convent Street, Mumbai-400020. Colaba, Mumbai-400039. Pan No. Aaaci3193H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Mr. F. V. Irani, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Arju Garodia, Dr Date Of Hearing : 08/03/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/03/2018

For Appellant: Mr. F. V. Irani, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia, DR
Section 138Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…appeal the Ld. CIT(A) has allowed the balance in sundry debtors account of Rs.42,12,434/-. So there in no reason to confirm the balance amount of Rs.1,79,80,120/-. Reliance is also placed by him on the decision in CIT v. Dhanrajgirji Raja Narasingirji (1973) 91 ITR 544 (SC). 2.5 On the other hand, the Ld. DR supports the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). 2.6 We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. The reasons for our decision is given below. In the instant case, the assessee had initiated legal proceedings against ZGFL in Chennai and Mumbai u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instru…

Dorf Ketal Chemicals Llc, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 45, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 4819/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4819/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Dorf Ketal Chemicals Llc Dy. Cit, Central Circle-45, बनाम/ 1, Dorf Ketal Tower Orlem, Mumbai Vs. Malad (West), Mumbai-400 064 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccd 1719 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Nishant Thakkar & Shri Hiten Chande ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Abhijit Patankar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 16.01.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 22.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 28.03.2013 & Pertains To The Assessment Year 2009- 10. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, I.E., Dorf Ketal Chemicals Llc (Hereinafter Referred To As Dkllc) Is A 100% Subsidiary Of An Indian Company Dorf Ketal India Pvt. Ltd, (Herein After Referred To As Dkip). Dkllc Has Its Control & 2 M/S. Dorf Ketal Chemicals Llc Management In India & Therefore, The Dkllc, Apart From Being The Resident Of United States, Has Also Become Tax Resident In India By Virtue Of Its 100%

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Shri Abhijit Patankar
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 4Section 40Section 9

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “डी” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4819/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/s. Dorf Ketal Chemicals LLC Dy. CIT, Central Circle-45, बनाम/ 1, Dorf Ketal Tower Orlem, Mumbai Vs. Malad (West), Mumbai-400 064 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AACCD 1719 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Nishant Thakkar & Shri Hiten Chande ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Abhijit Patankar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 16.01.2018 Da…

ACIT, Circle-4(1), Visakhapatnam vs. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd, Rajam

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 458/VIZ/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Feb 2018AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bledcit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Visakhapatnam. Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Rajam (Po), Srikakulam District. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Vs. Ito, Ward-3, Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Srikakulam. Rajam (Po), Srikakulam Dist. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Acit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Visakhapatnam. Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Rajam (Po), Srikakulam District. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Vs. Dcit, Circle-4(1), Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Visakhapatnam. Rajam (Po), Srikakulam Dist. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L (Appellants) (Respondents)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A. Thar &For Respondent: Shri T. Satyanandam – Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…ed from the point of view of businessman and not by the subjective standard of reasonableness of revenue as held by Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Sales Magnesite P Ltd. 214 ITR 1 and CIT vs. Dalmia Cement 254 ITR 377 SC, CIT vs. Dhanraj Giriji Raja Narsinginji 94 ITR 544. It was also contended that contractual obligation and legal liability are not the touch stone to test commercial expediency, and relied on the decision in the case of CIT vs. Associated Electrical Agencies 266 ITR 63, CIT vs. Motor Industries Co. Ltd. 223 ITR 112 (Kar.), Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. 224 CTR 32 SC. The authorised representative als…

Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Mills Private Limited, Rajam vs. DCIT, Circle-4(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 404/VIZ/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Feb 2018AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bledcit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Visakhapatnam. Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Rajam (Po), Srikakulam District. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Vs. Ito, Ward-3, Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Srikakulam. Rajam (Po), Srikakulam Dist. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Acit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Visakhapatnam. Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Rajam (Po), Srikakulam District. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Vs. Dcit, Circle-4(1), Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Visakhapatnam. Rajam (Po), Srikakulam Dist. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L (Appellants) (Respondents)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A. Thar &For Respondent: Shri T. Satyanandam – Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…ed from the point of view of businessman and not by the subjective standard of reasonableness of revenue as held by Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Sales Magnesite P Ltd. 214 ITR 1 and CIT vs. Dalmia Cement 254 ITR 377 SC, CIT vs. Dhanraj Giriji Raja Narsinginji 94 ITR 544. It was also contended that contractual obligation and legal liability are not the touch stone to test commercial expediency, and relied on the decision in the case of CIT vs. Associated Electrical Agencies 266 ITR 63, CIT vs. Motor Industries Co. Ltd. 223 ITR 112 (Kar.), Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. 224 CTR 32 SC. The authorised representative als…

Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Rajam vs. The ITO, Srikakulam

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 349/VIZ/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Feb 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bledcit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Visakhapatnam. Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Rajam (Po), Srikakulam District. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Vs. Ito, Ward-3, Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Srikakulam. Rajam (Po), Srikakulam Dist. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Acit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Visakhapatnam. Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Rajam (Po), Srikakulam District. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Vs. Dcit, Circle-4(1), Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Visakhapatnam. Rajam (Po), Srikakulam Dist. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L (Appellants) (Respondents)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A. Thar &For Respondent: Shri T. Satyanandam – Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…ed from the point of view of businessman and not by the subjective standard of reasonableness of revenue as held by Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Sales Magnesite P Ltd. 214 ITR 1 and CIT vs. Dalmia Cement 254 ITR 377 SC, CIT vs. Dhanraj Giriji Raja Narsinginji 94 ITR 544. It was also contended that contractual obligation and legal liability are not the touch stone to test commercial expediency, and relied on the decision in the case of CIT vs. Associated Electrical Agencies 266 ITR 63, CIT vs. Motor Industries Co. Ltd. 223 ITR 112 (Kar.), Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. 224 CTR 32 SC. The authorised representative als…

The DCIT, Visakhapatnam vs. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Mills Pvt Ltd, Srikakulam

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 340/VIZ/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Feb 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bledcit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Visakhapatnam. Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Rajam (Po), Srikakulam District. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Vs. Ito, Ward-3, Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Srikakulam. Rajam (Po), Srikakulam Dist. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Acit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Visakhapatnam. Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Rajam (Po), Srikakulam District. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Vs. Dcit, Circle-4(1), Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Visakhapatnam. Rajam (Po), Srikakulam Dist. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L (Appellants) (Respondents)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A. Thar &For Respondent: Shri T. Satyanandam – Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…ed from the point of view of businessman and not by the subjective standard of reasonableness of revenue as held by Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Sales Magnesite P Ltd. 214 ITR 1 and CIT vs. Dalmia Cement 254 ITR 377 SC, CIT vs. Dhanraj Giriji Raja Narsinginji 94 ITR 544. It was also contended that contractual obligation and legal liability are not the touch stone to test commercial expediency, and relied on the decision in the case of CIT vs. Associated Electrical Agencies 266 ITR 63, CIT vs. Motor Industries Co. Ltd. 223 ITR 112 (Kar.), Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. 224 CTR 32 SC. The authorised representative als…

Gigaplex Estate P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT OSD II Cen RG 7, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1137/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri Alok Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…ng decisions namely (i) The Newton Studio Ltd Vs CIT 28 ITR 378 (Mad), (ii) Raman and Raman Ltd Vs CIT 46 ITR 400(Mad), (iii) CIT Vs Walchand & Co Pvt Ltd 65 ITR381 SC, (iv) JK Woollen Manufacture Vs CIT 72 ITR 612 SC, (v) CIT Vs Dhanrajgiri Raja Narasingirji 91 ITR 544 SC, (vi) Sasoon J.David and Co Pvt Ltd Vs CIT 118 ITR 261 SC, (vii) CIT Vs National Rayon Commercial Co Ltd 193 ITR 744 Bom, (viii) CIT Vs Dalmia Cement (B) Ltd 254 ITR 377 (Del). On the reasonability of the payment, the ld AR argued that value as per registered valuer’s report by the assessee was Rs.1,25,72,94,500/- whereas as per DVO it was Rs.1…

Gigaplex Estate P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT OSD II Cen RG 7, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1133/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri Alok Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…ng decisions namely (i) The Newton Studio Ltd Vs CIT 28 ITR 378 (Mad), (ii) Raman and Raman Ltd Vs CIT 46 ITR 400(Mad), (iii) CIT Vs Walchand & Co Pvt Ltd 65 ITR381 SC, (iv) JK Woollen Manufacture Vs CIT 72 ITR 612 SC, (v) CIT Vs Dhanrajgiri Raja Narasingirji 91 ITR 544 SC, (vi) Sasoon J.David and Co Pvt Ltd Vs CIT 118 ITR 261 SC, (vii) CIT Vs National Rayon Commercial Co Ltd 193 ITR 744 Bom, (viii) CIT Vs Dalmia Cement (B) Ltd 254 ITR 377 (Del). On the reasonability of the payment, the ld AR argued that value as per registered valuer’s report by the assessee was Rs.1,25,72,94,500/- whereas as per DVO it was Rs.1…

Gigaplex Estate P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT OSD II Cen RG 7, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1132/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri Alok Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…ng decisions namely (i) The Newton Studio Ltd Vs CIT 28 ITR 378 (Mad), (ii) Raman and Raman Ltd Vs CIT 46 ITR 400(Mad), (iii) CIT Vs Walchand & Co Pvt Ltd 65 ITR381 SC, (iv) JK Woollen Manufacture Vs CIT 72 ITR 612 SC, (v) CIT Vs Dhanrajgiri Raja Narasingirji 91 ITR 544 SC, (vi) Sasoon J.David and Co Pvt Ltd Vs CIT 118 ITR 261 SC, (vii) CIT Vs National Rayon Commercial Co Ltd 193 ITR 744 Bom, (viii) CIT Vs Dalmia Cement (B) Ltd 254 ITR 377 (Del). On the reasonability of the payment, the ld AR argued that value as per registered valuer’s report by the assessee was Rs.1,25,72,94,500/- whereas as per DVO it was Rs.1…

J. Thomas & Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-4, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2071/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Nov 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 2066 /Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-4, Kolkata -Vs- M/S J.Thomas & Co. Pvt. Ltd.. [Pan: Aabcj 2851 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 2071/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S J.Thomas & Co. Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-4, Kolkata [Pan: Aabcj 2851 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri David Z. Chowngthu, Addl. CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Anup Sinha, ACA
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…enditure incurred is to accrue immediately or after a lapse of time, whether directly or indirectly. While deciding the issue the Hon’ble High Court placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Dhanrajgirji Raja Narasingirji (1973) 91 ITR 544 (SC) wherein it was held that it is not open to the Department to prescribe what expenditure an assessee should incur and in what circumstances he should incur the expenditure. Every businessman knows his business best.” 10.5. We find that the ld. CIT(A) had upheld the disallowance of foreign travel expenses on the contentions that it is the enti…

DCIT, Circle-4, Kolkata vs. M/S. J. Thomas & Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 2066/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Nov 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 2066 /Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-4, Kolkata -Vs- M/S J.Thomas & Co. Pvt. Ltd.. [Pan: Aabcj 2851 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 2071/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S J.Thomas & Co. Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-4, Kolkata [Pan: Aabcj 2851 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri David Z. Chowngthu, Addl. CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Anup Sinha, ACA
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…enditure incurred is to accrue immediately or after a lapse of time, whether directly or indirectly. While deciding the issue the Hon’ble High Court placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Dhanrajgirji Raja Narasingirji (1973) 91 ITR 544 (SC) wherein it was held that it is not open to the Department to prescribe what expenditure an assessee should incur and in what circumstances he should incur the expenditure. Every businessman knows his business best.” 10.5. We find that the ld. CIT(A) had upheld the disallowance of foreign travel expenses on the contentions that it is the enti…