CIT v. Edward Keventer (P.) Ltd.

115 ITR 149Supreme Court of India1978#4130 most cited

What is CIT v. Edward Keventer (P.) Ltd. authority for?

When assessing expenses under Section 40A(2), tax authorities must consider the entire position judiciously from the viewpoint of a prudent businessman, not arbitrarily or capriciously. The revenue must demonstrate tax evasion and cannot disallow expenses if the recipient is taxed at the same or higher rate.

28

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Edward Keventer · Section 40A(2) · prudent businessman · arbitrary disallowance · tax evasion · expenditure · closely held company · fair market value · management fees

Sections most often in play

Section 10(2)(xv)Section 10(4A)Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 41Section 68

Issues it is cited on

section 40a(2)(a)section 40a(2)(b)legal expensesclosely held companymanagement feessection 40a(2)maximum marginal ratefair market valueenduring benefitsection 40asection 260section 30

Judgments citing CIT v. Edward Keventer (P.) Ltd.

JYOTI AJIT KULKARNI,PUNE vs. DCIT CENT. CIR. 5(3), MUMBAI

In the result ground no. 3 raised by the assessee is allowed and AO is directed to give benefit on whole deposit of Rs

ITA 5067/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyal- A.Y.2007-08 - A.Y.2008-09 - A.Y.2009-10 - A.Y.2010-11 - A.Y.2011-12 - A.Y.2012-13

For Appellant: Shri ChandrasekharFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair – (SR DR)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER - A.Y.2007-08 - A.Y.2008-09 - A.Y.2009-10 - A.Y.2010-11 - A.Y.2011-12 - A.Y.2012-13 Mrs. Jyoti Ajit Kulkarni Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income- 23B, Gharkul, Ganeshkruda tax, Central Circle-5(3), Room Society No.11, Ground Floor, Aayakar Off. Paud Road, Kothrud Bhavan, M.K. Road Pune-411 038. Mumbai-400 020. PAN: ABTPK9281B APPELLANT RESPONDENT - A.Y.2008-09 Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Mrs. Jyoti Ajit Kulkarni Income-tax, Central Circle- 23B, Gharkul, Ganeshkruda Societ…

M/S SANOFI INDIA LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS AVENTIS PHARMA LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT RG 8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1606/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2023AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 271(1)(c)

…tely, judiciously and objectively from point ofview of prudent businessman and not capriciously, routinely, arbitrarily, subjectively and in a prejudiced manner with a view to collect more revenue [CIT v. EDWARD KEVENTER (PVT) LTD 86 ITR 370 (CAL) affirmed in 115 ITR 149 (SC). Relying upon aforesaid circular, Bombay High Court in CIT V. INDO SAUDI SERVICES (TRAVELS) PVT LTD 310 ITR 306, held that if revenue fails to demonstrate how tax is Page No.| 26 ITA.NO.1606 & 1302/MUM/2007 (A.Y: 2003-04) ITA.NO.1128/MUM/2009 (A.Y. 2003-04) ITA.NO. 5939 & 6548/MUM/2010 (A.Y. 2004-05) ITA.NO. 6745/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2004-05) M/s…

ACIT- 3(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. MM/S SANOFI INDIA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS AVENTIS PHARMA LTD)., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1302/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2023AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 271(1)(c)

…tely, judiciously and objectively from point ofview of prudent businessman and not capriciously, routinely, arbitrarily, subjectively and in a prejudiced manner with a view to collect more revenue [CIT v. EDWARD KEVENTER (PVT) LTD 86 ITR 370 (CAL) affirmed in 115 ITR 149 (SC). Relying upon aforesaid circular, Bombay High Court in CIT V. INDO SAUDI SERVICES (TRAVELS) PVT LTD 310 ITR 306, held that if revenue fails to demonstrate how tax is Page No.| 26 ITA.NO.1606 & 1302/MUM/2007 (A.Y: 2003-04) ITA.NO.1128/MUM/2009 (A.Y. 2003-04) ITA.NO. 5939 & 6548/MUM/2010 (A.Y. 2004-05) ITA.NO. 6745/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2004-05) M/s…

O3 CAPITAL GLOBAL ADVISORY PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 931/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Prashanth, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R

…ies to decide what is necessary for the assessee and what is not. Reliance is placed on the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of S A Builders Ltd. vs. CIT, reported in 288 ITR 1 and in the case of CIT vs. Edward Keventer Private Limited, reported in 115 ITR 149. Reliance is also placed on the following decisions in support of the contentions canvassed supra: • PCIT vs. V.S. Dempo Holding (P.) Ltd., 130 taxmann.com 456 (Born.) B. Nanji & Co. vs. DCIT, 124 taxmann.com 357 (Gujarat) • CIT vs. Alapatt Brothers, 73 taxmann.com 43 (Kerala) 4.9 lt is further submitted that the authorities below have opined t…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. FUTURE FIRST SERVICES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3476/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, CA & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Singh, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 197(1)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40a

…d the this sum in his return of income. (iv) Ld. AR has relied on the following judicial pronouncements where such adhoc disallowance was not approved. (a) “The Hon’ble Supreme Court held in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Edward Keventer {private) Ltd.(1978) 115 ITR 149 (SC) (b) The Hon’bie ITAT, Delhi held, in Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Spark Hotels (P) Ltd. 2012 52 SOT 305 (Delhi)” 14. Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the said disallowance on the ground that Assessing Officer has not brought any evidence/ any material for making the disallowance u/s.401A(2). In subsequent Assessment Year, i.e., Assessment Ye…

FUTURE FIRST INFO. SERVICEES PVT. LTD,,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 9(2), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3838/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, CA & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Singh, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 197(1)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40a

…d the this sum in his return of income. (iv) Ld. AR has relied on the following judicial pronouncements where such adhoc disallowance was not approved. (a) “The Hon’ble Supreme Court held in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Edward Keventer {private) Ltd.(1978) 115 ITR 149 (SC) (b) The Hon’bie ITAT, Delhi held, in Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Spark Hotels (P) Ltd. 2012 52 SOT 305 (Delhi)” 14. Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the said disallowance on the ground that Assessing Officer has not brought any evidence/ any material for making the disallowance u/s.401A(2). In subsequent Assessment Year, i.e., Assessment Ye…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S OPUS PROJECTS LTD.,, DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 5470/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri C. S. Anand, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Chaudhary, CIT DR
Section 30Section 40Section 40A

…able and honest person in business. Aforesaid ratio elucidated relies and refers to several earlier judgments including CIT v. Edward Keventer (P.) Ltd. [1972] 86 ITR 370 (Cal) which was affirmed by Hon Supreme Court in CIT v. Edward Keventer (P.) Ltd. [1978] 115 ITR 149 (SC) and CIT v. Shatrunjay Diamonds [2003] 261 ITR 258/128 Taxman 759 (Bom). Similar view has been expressed by Hon. Delhi High Court in Sigma Corpn. India Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [IT Appeal No. 795 of 2016, dated 15-2- 2017]. Assessee company as well as sister company, both are assessed to income tax at maximum marginal rate, and, therefore it cannot be…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. OPUS PROJECTS LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 3939/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri C. S. Anand, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Chaudhary, CIT DR
Section 30Section 40Section 40A

…able and honest person in business. Aforesaid ratio elucidated relies and refers to several earlier judgments including CIT v. Edward Keventer (P.) Ltd. [1972] 86 ITR 370 (Cal) which was affirmed by Hon Supreme Court in CIT v. Edward Keventer (P.) Ltd. [1978] 115 ITR 149 (SC) and CIT v. Shatrunjay Diamonds [2003] 261 ITR 258/128 Taxman 759 (Bom). Similar view has been expressed by Hon. Delhi High Court in Sigma Corpn. India Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [IT Appeal No. 795 of 2016, dated 15-2- 2017]. Assessee company as well as sister company, both are assessed to income tax at maximum marginal rate, and, therefore it cannot be…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. OPUS PROJECTS LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 3938/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri C. S. Anand, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Chaudhary, CIT DR
Section 30Section 40Section 40A

…able and honest person in business. Aforesaid ratio elucidated relies and refers to several earlier judgments including CIT v. Edward Keventer (P.) Ltd. [1972] 86 ITR 370 (Cal) which was affirmed by Hon Supreme Court in CIT v. Edward Keventer (P.) Ltd. [1978] 115 ITR 149 (SC) and CIT v. Shatrunjay Diamonds [2003] 261 ITR 258/128 Taxman 759 (Bom). Similar view has been expressed by Hon. Delhi High Court in Sigma Corpn. India Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [IT Appeal No. 795 of 2016, dated 15-2- 2017]. Assessee company as well as sister company, both are assessed to income tax at maximum marginal rate, and, therefore it cannot be…

THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.ASPINWALL & CO. LTD, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 133/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

Section 14A

…ent for that purpose and not otherwise. For this, the Ld. AR relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Dalmia Cement (P) Ltd. (254 ITR 377) (Delhi) 2) CIT vs. M/s. Walchand& Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. (65 ITR 381 (SC) 3) CIT vs. M/s. Edward Keventer (Private) Ltd. (115 ITR 149) (SC) 5.3 The Ld. AR submitted that disallowance computed u/s. 14A should not exceed the exempt income earned during the year under consideration. In this context, the Ld. AR relied on the following judgments: i) Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (59 taxmann.com 295) (Delhi) ii) Daga Global Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (ITA No.5592/Mum/2012…

M/S ASPINWALL & CO.,LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 128/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

Section 14A

…ent for that purpose and not otherwise. For this, the Ld. AR relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Dalmia Cement (P) Ltd. (254 ITR 377) (Delhi) 2) CIT vs. M/s. Walchand& Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. (65 ITR 381 (SC) 3) CIT vs. M/s. Edward Keventer (Private) Ltd. (115 ITR 149) (SC) 5.3 The Ld. AR submitted that disallowance computed u/s. 14A should not exceed the exempt income earned during the year under consideration. In this context, the Ld. AR relied on the following judgments: i) Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (59 taxmann.com 295) (Delhi) ii) Daga Global Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (ITA No.5592/Mum/2012…

ASPINWALL & COMPANY LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 61/COCH/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

Section 14A

…ent for that purpose and not otherwise. For this, the Ld. AR relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Dalmia Cement (P) Ltd. (254 ITR 377) (Delhi) 2) CIT vs. M/s. Walchand& Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. (65 ITR 381 (SC) 3) CIT vs. M/s. Edward Keventer (Private) Ltd. (115 ITR 149) (SC) 5.3 The Ld. AR submitted that disallowance computed u/s. 14A should not exceed the exempt income earned during the year under consideration. In this context, the Ld. AR relied on the following judgments: i) Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (59 taxmann.com 295) (Delhi) ii) Daga Global Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (ITA No.5592/Mum/2012…

ASPINWALL & COMPANY LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 60/COCH/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

Section 14A

…ent for that purpose and not otherwise. For this, the Ld. AR relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Dalmia Cement (P) Ltd. (254 ITR 377) (Delhi) 2) CIT vs. M/s. Walchand& Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. (65 ITR 381 (SC) 3) CIT vs. M/s. Edward Keventer (Private) Ltd. (115 ITR 149) (SC) 5.3 The Ld. AR submitted that disallowance computed u/s. 14A should not exceed the exempt income earned during the year under consideration. In this context, the Ld. AR relied on the following judgments: i) Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (59 taxmann.com 295) (Delhi) ii) Daga Global Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (ITA No.5592/Mum/2012…

MAXWELL & STUART PROJECT MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the assessees appeals are allowed

ITA 650/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

…erived by or accruing to the company, and that while doing so, the view point of the company or concern having regard to prudent business practices, should prevail. This decision was affirmed by the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Edward Keventer (P.) Ltd. [1978] 115 ITR 149. Pertinently, the Calcutta High Court in Edward Kevender (P.) Ltd. (supra) summarized the position as follows:- "13..................It is not for the Assessing Officer to dictate what the business needs of the company should be and he is only to judge the legitimacy of the business needs of the company from the point of view of a prudent bu…

MAXWELL & STUART PROJECT MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the assessees appeals are allowed

ITA 649/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

…erived by or accruing to the company, and that while doing so, the view point of the company or concern having regard to prudent business practices, should prevail. This decision was affirmed by the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Edward Keventer (P.) Ltd. [1978] 115 ITR 149. Pertinently, the Calcutta High Court in Edward Kevender (P.) Ltd. (supra) summarized the position as follows:- "13..................It is not for the Assessing Officer to dictate what the business needs of the company should be and he is only to judge the legitimacy of the business needs of the company from the point of view of a prudent bu…

FREEWINGS POWER & INFRA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed

ITA 778/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…onsidered judiciously, dispassionately without any bias of any kind from the view-point of reasonable and honest person in business. "The aforesaid judgment of Calcutta High Court was affirmed by the Apex Court in Cit Vs. Edward Keventer (Private) Ltd. (1978) 115 ITR 149 (SC) Sir. similar view is held by the Madras High Court in CIF Vs. Computer Graphics Ltd. (2006) 285 ITR 84. In the same line is the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Shatronjay Diamonds (2003) 261 ITR 258 (Born). Sir, we would like to place our reliance on Delhi ITAT in the case of M/s. Second Leasing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Cir-8…

SIGMA RESEARCH & CONSULTING PVT. LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR.

The appeal is allowed and the addition made under Section 40A(2)(a) of the Act

ITA/120/2018HC Delhi12 Dec 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI

Section 260ASection 40ASection 40A(2)(a)

…atio elucidated relies and refers to several earlier judgments including CIT vs. Edward Keventer Pvt. Ltd., (1972) 86 ITR 370 (Cal) ITA 120/2018 page 6 of 9 which was affirmed by the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Edward Keventer Pvt. Ltd. (1978) 115 ITR 149 (SC) and CIT vs. Shatrunjay Diamonds (2003) 261 ITR 258 (Bom). Similar view has been expressed by the Delhi High Court in Sigma Corporation India Ltd. vs. DCIT, ITA No. 795/2016 decided on 15.02.2017. 6. In the present case, the Tribunal has failed to apply test of prudent and reasonable business person. The disallowance was solely predicat…

DCIT, REWARI vs. M/S NIPPON LEAKLESS TALBROS PVT. LTD.,, REWARI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal for assessment year

ITA 5584/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O. P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Agarwal, AR
Section 143(3)Section 40A

…nsidered judiciously, dispassionately without any bias of any kind from the view-point of a reasonable and honest person in business. 15. The aforesaid judgement of Calcutta High Court was affirmed by the Apex Court in CIT Vs. Edward Keventer (P.) Ltd. [1978] 115 ITR 149. In the same line is the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Shtrunjay Diamonds [2003] 261 ITR 258/128, Taxmann, 759. 16. Following the ratio laid down in the above cases, we hold that in the present case also there is no warrant for disallowance of sum of Rs. 1,49,76,358/- paid to M/s Talbros Automotive Pvt. Ltd. as the Assessin…

DCIT, REWARI vs. M/S. NIPPON LEAKLESS TALBROS PVT. LTD., REWARI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal for assessment year

ITA 2764/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O. P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Agarwal, AR
Section 143(3)Section 40A

…nsidered judiciously, dispassionately without any bias of any kind from the view-point of a reasonable and honest person in business. 15. The aforesaid judgement of Calcutta High Court was affirmed by the Apex Court in CIT Vs. Edward Keventer (P.) Ltd. [1978] 115 ITR 149. In the same line is the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Shtrunjay Diamonds [2003] 261 ITR 258/128, Taxmann, 759. 16. Following the ratio laid down in the above cases, we hold that in the present case also there is no warrant for disallowance of sum of Rs. 1,49,76,358/- paid to M/s Talbros Automotive Pvt. Ltd. as the Assessin…

DCIT, REWARI vs. M/S. NIPPON LEAKLESS TALBROS PVT. LTD., REWARI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal for assessment year

ITA 2763/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O. P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Agarwal, AR
Section 143(3)Section 40A

…nsidered judiciously, dispassionately without any bias of any kind from the view-point of a reasonable and honest person in business. 15. The aforesaid judgement of Calcutta High Court was affirmed by the Apex Court in CIT Vs. Edward Keventer (P.) Ltd. [1978] 115 ITR 149. In the same line is the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Shtrunjay Diamonds [2003] 261 ITR 258/128, Taxmann, 759. 16. Following the ratio laid down in the above cases, we hold that in the present case also there is no warrant for disallowance of sum of Rs. 1,49,76,358/- paid to M/s Talbros Automotive Pvt. Ltd. as the Assessin…

Showing 1–20 of 28 · Page 1 of 2

CIT v. Edward Keventer (P.) Ltd. (115 ITR 149) — Cited in 28 Judgments | BharatTax