CIT v. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt. Ltd.

310 ITR 306High Court2009#986 most cited

What is CIT v. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

No tax evasion occurs when a company pays higher expenditure to a sister concern if the sister concern also pays taxes at a higher rate. This principle applies to disallowances under section 40A(2)(b) when it can be shown that the related entity is not benefiting from a lower tax rate.

109

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt. Ltd. · 310 ITR 306 · section 40A(2)(b) · section 40A(2) · business expediency · tax evasion · sister concern · higher expenditure · higher tax rate

Sections most often in play

Section 40A(2)Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 8DSection 250

Issues it is cited on

section 40a(2)(b)section 40a(2)annual letting valueannual valuesection 40abusiness expediencyblock of assetssection 40mercantile system of accountingsection 36(1)(iii)section 115jdisallowance u/s 14a

Judgments citing CIT v. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt. Ltd.

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 provisions of the section 40A (2) would apply to the present case, then the following propositions laid down by various courts have to be considered. 13.21. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd. [2009] 310 ITR 306 relying on CBDT Circular No. 6-P, dated 6-7-1968 held that no disallowance should be made under section 40A(2) of the Income-tax Act in respect of the payments made to the relatives and sister concerns where there is no attempt to evade tax. 13.22. Having held that the provisions of section 40A (2) of the Act does not apply to the facts of the ca…

Nat Steel Equipment P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 7(1), Mumbai

ITA 4011/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Ita Nos. 4011 & 5070/Mum/2013 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) M/S Nat Steel Equipment Dcit-7(1), Room No. 622, Private Limited, G.D. Ambedkar Aaykar Bhawan, M.K Road, बिधम/ Marg, Naigaum Road, Churchgate, Mumbai 400 020. Vs. Bombay- 400014. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaacn5119J (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Tralashwala, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 234B

…y making the payments to its related parties had evaded payment of taxes, no disallowance under Sec.40A(2)(a) could have been made, relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 310 ITR 306 (Bom). The ld. A.R further in order to drive home his contention that not only a heavy onus was P a g e | 5 ITA Nos. 4011, 5070, 4681,5270/Mum/2013 AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 M/s Nat Steel Equipment Private Limited Vs. DCIT-7(1) cast upon the revenue to establish that the payment made by the assessee to its related parties was found to be excessive or…

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 provisions of the section 40A (2) would apply to the present case, then the following propositions laid down by various courts have to be considered. 13.21. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd. [2009] 310 ITR 306 relying on CBDT Circular No. 6-P, dated 6-7-1968 held that no disallowance should be made under section 40A(2) of the Income-tax Act in respect of the payments made to the relatives and sister concerns where there is no attempt to evade tax. 13.22. Having held that the provisions of section 40A (2) of the Act does not apply to the facts of the ca…

Satish Madhukar Gokhale, Pune vs. Additional Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1033/PUN/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Aseem Sharma
Section 40

…bmissions, the ld. AR furnished copy of the Income Tax Return of Mrs. Falguni Gokhale for the assessment year 2005-06 and the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P) Ltd. reported as 310 ITR 306. 4. Shri Aseem Sharma representing the Department vehemently defended the action of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in confirming the disallowance u/s. 40(A)(2)(b) of the Act. 5. We have heard the submissions made by representatives of rival sides and have perused the orders of authorities below. The only issue in appeal is disallowance of…

Chemical Process Piping P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 10(2) Erstwhile, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1036/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Ita Nos. 1036 & 1037/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years:2011-12 & 2012-13) M/S Chemical Process Piping Pvt. Ltd. Shri R. M. Madhavi, Cpe Plots, Bsd Marg, Erstwhile Additional Cit- बिधम/ Govandi East, 10(2), Now, Addl Cit Vs. Mumbai-400 088 14(2), Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekhar &For Respondent: Shri M.V. Rajuru, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 9(1)(vii)

…ssue under consideration. It was averred by the ld. A.R that as the CIT(A) in the backdrop of the CBDT Circular No. 6-P, dated 06.07.1968 and the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 310 ITR 306 (Bom), had correctly appreciated that a perusal of the profitability of both the assessee and the related parties proved that the assessee was in no way benefitted, therefore, on the said count alone the disallowance sustained by the CIT(A) was liable to be vacated. It was submitted by the ld. A.R that despite concluding as hereinabove, the CIT(A…

Asst CIT 15(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Prashant Projects Ltd, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee as well revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4621/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.4621/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिाम/ Acit 15(2)(2) Prashant Projects Ltd., R.No. 403, 4 T H Floor, R.No. 406-408, Aayakar Bhavan, Plot No. 57, V. M.K. Road, Hermes Atrium, Mumbai 400020 Sector-11, Cbd Belapur, Navi Mumbai 400614 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aabci0639P (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Ajay. R. SinghFor Respondent: Shri. Rajat Mittal
Section 143(3)Section 41Section 41(1)

…specific finding by bringing cogent material. No subjective satisfaction permitted. No surmises, conjecture allowed. In absence of material to discredit the payment, the addition cannot be sustained. (i) CIT v/s. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) P Ltd. - {(2009) 310 ITR 306 (Bom)} (ii} Jt. CIT v/s. Modi Olivetti Ltd. - {(2004) 84 TTJ (Del) 1038} (iii) Dy. CIT v/s. Lab India Instruments P. Ltd. - {(2005) 277 ITR (AT) 39 (Pune)} The said disallowance was made merely because Mrs Rama Srinivasan was related party u/s 40A(2)(b), actually she looks after administration work of company and the amount paid was comparable an…

Bentel Associates Re Bentel Associates Realty Design Consultants P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(1)(2)

In the result, Ground No.2 of the appeal is allowed

ITA 4077/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhbentel Associates Realty Design Ito-8(1) (2) Mumbai. Consultants Pvt. Ltd., A-401, Business Square, Solitaire Vs. Corporate Park, Chakala, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400093 Pan:Aaccb7588D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri H.P. Mahajani (Ar) Revenue By : Shri Aarju Garodia (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 09.01.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2018 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Under Section 253 Of Income Tax Act (‘The Act’) Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-16

For Appellant: Shri H.P. Mahajani (AR)For Respondent: Shri Aarju Garodia (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 14ASection 154Section 253Section 254(1)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 438

…ficer has not examined the aspect of Fair Market Value of services rendered by Mr. Nakul Patel before disallowing the payment made towards the services rendered by him. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT vs. Indo-Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd. 310 ITR 306 (Bom) while referring the CBDT Circular No. 6-P dated 6th July 1968 held that no disallowance be made under section 40A(2) in respect of payment to relative and sister concern where there is no attempt to evade the tax. Considering the foregoing discussion, we do not find any justification on the part of ld. CIT(A) in confirming the disallowance…

Natwaria Shrilal Lasaria, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1838/PUN/2016[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri M.K KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar Chaware
Section 244ASection 40A(2)(b)

…rates retrospectively w.e.f assessment year 2005-06 onwards. As such, the year under consideration is prior to this amendment. Further, the applicability of decision rendered by Jurisidictional High Court in the case of Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt. Ltd, 310 ITR 306 (Bom.) is relevant in law which is relevant 5 A.Y.2001-02 for the proposition that disallowance on commission is called for only when payer and payee are not subject to higher tax rates. As such, there are no papers relating to the taxability of income of the payees at the commission. Thus, according to Ld. AR when the AO failed to make out…

Mragnayani Properties Pvt. Ltd, Latur vs. Income-Tax Officer

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 2538/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal
Section 143(3)Section 263

…e payees, Ld. DR for the Revenue submitted that the matters need to revisit the file of the AO for want of data on the applicable maximum marginal rates and also the applicability of the binding judgment in the case of Indo-Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt. Ltd. 310 ITR 306 (Bom.) 10. After hearing the Ld. DR for the Revenue and after going through the orders of the Revenue available on record, we are of the opinion that the assessee paid commission to Shri Laxminiwas V. Agrawal, Director of the company and the same has the support of the Board’s Resolution. In our view this part of the claim is allowable subject…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Associated Dairy Fab Pvt. Ltd., Jalgaon

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

ITA 211/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.177/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Associated Dairy Fab Pvt. Ltd., B-5/1, Midc Area, Ajantha Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Jalgaon – 425003 …. Pan: Aaeca3963F Vs. The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Range – 2, Jalgaon

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha
Section 143(3)(ii)Section 40A(3)

…mployees. The assessee before the CIT(A) pointed out that the issue of turn, was because of efforts of the directors. Further, reliance was placed on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 310 ITR 306 (Bom) for the proposition that where the tax rates paid by the assessee company and directors were higher and there was no loss to the Revenue, then the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act could not be invoked. 14. The CIT(A) upheld the order of Assessing Officer partially, against which the assessee is in appeal. The CIT(A) allowed parti…

Associated Dairy Fab Pvt. Ltd., Jalgaon vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax

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

ITA 177/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.177/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Associated Dairy Fab Pvt. Ltd., B-5/1, Midc Area, Ajantha Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Jalgaon – 425003 …. Pan: Aaeca3963F Vs. The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Range – 2, Jalgaon

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha
Section 143(3)(ii)Section 40A(3)

…mployees. The assessee before the CIT(A) pointed out that the issue of turn, was because of efforts of the directors. Further, reliance was placed on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 310 ITR 306 (Bom) for the proposition that where the tax rates paid by the assessee company and directors were higher and there was no loss to the Revenue, then the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the Act could not be invoked. 14. The CIT(A) upheld the order of Assessing Officer partially, against which the assessee is in appeal. The CIT(A) allowed parti…

Firstsource Solutions Ltd ( Formerly Known As Icici Onesource Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2658/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Ramlal Negi (Jm)

Section 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” Bench, Mumbai Before S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Ramlal Negi (JM) I.T.A. No. 3707/Mum/2008 (Assessment Year 2004-05) I.T.A. No. 2537/Mum/2011 (Assessment Year 2005-06) DCIT 12(2)(1)/DCIT M/s. Firstsource 6(2)/ACIT-5(2) Vs. Solutions Limited Room No. 223 5th Floor, B Wing Aayakar Bhavan Paradigm, Mindspace M.K. Road Link Road, Malad (W) Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 064. (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 4752/Mum/2009 (Assessment Year 2004-05) I.T.A. No. 4053/Mum/2008 (Assessment Year 2004-05) I.T.A. No. 2658/Mum/2011 (Assessment Year 2005-06) M/s. Firstsource DCIT 6(…

Shri Yogendra Khandelwal, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

In the result, ground no. 4

ITA 906/JPR/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Jan 2018AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev SoganiFor Respondent: Shri R. A. Verma (Addl. CIT)
Section 40ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 80E

…Thus there cannot be any motive of evasion of tax by paying higher rate of Interest to such parties. 14. In support, the ld AR placed reliance on the following decisions:  Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P.) Ltd [2008] 310 ITR 306  Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat Gas Financial Services Ltd. (2015) 233 TAXMAN 0532 (Gujarat)  ITAT Jaipur Bench in the case of Bajrang Wire Products (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (ITA No. 138/JP/2014) 15. It was further submitted that in the line of the business in which assessee is engaged, the payment of commission on sales an…

Dy. CIT, Circle-1, Jalgaon vs. S.K. Transline Pvt. Ltd., Jalgaon

In the result, the cross objections are partly allowed

ITA 903/PUN/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi
Section 133ASection 154Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…see. This would result in double taxation of the same amount. In support of his submissions, the ld. AR placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) P. Ltd. reported as 310 ITR 306. 6. We have heard the submissions made by the representatives of rival sides and have perused the orders of the authorities below. We have also considered the decisions on which rival sides have placed reliance. The first ground raised in the appeal by the Department is against deleting of addition of Rs.23,34,463/- made on account of income decl…

The DCIT, Circle-4, Ahmedabad vs. Gujarat Gas Financial Services Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 2623/AHD/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri N.K. Billaiyaassessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Gujarat Gas Financial Services Ltd., Gandhinagar Circle, 2, Shantisadan Society, Gandhinagar. Near Parimal Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad. [Pan – Aaacg 5584 E] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri O.P. Pathak, Joint Cit Respondent By : Shri S.N. Soparkar With Parin Shah Date Of Hearing : 27.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.12.2017 O R D E R Per N.K. Billaiyathis Appeal By The Revenue Is Preferred Against The Order Of Cit(A)-2, Ahmedabad Dated 30.06.2015 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Only Grievance Of The Revenue Is That The Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.32,86,103/- Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Disallowance Under Section 40A(2)(A) Read With Section 40A(2)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) In Respect Of The Service Charges Paid To Gujarat Gas Company Limited.

For Appellant: Shri O.P. Pathak, Joint CITFor Respondent: Shri S.N. Soparkar with Parin Shah
Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

…td., as reported at (2014) 43 Taxmann.com 291 (Gujarat); (2) Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. Ashok J Patel, as reported at (2014) 43 Taxmann.com 227 (Gujarat) and (3) Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) P. Ltd. as reported as (2009) 310 ITR 306 (Bom). 15. It is pertinent to note that so far as the Circular dated 6.7.1968 is concerned, it makes clear that the provisions under section 40A(2) and particularly with regard to the transaction between the relatives and associates is concerned, the same shall be treated as bona fide case unless the officer finds it that one of them is trying to…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Delhi Press Samachar Patra Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result ground No. 1 of the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1433/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Manish Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anshu Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…ction has been entered into are profit making and the rate of tax are similar and therefore there is no logic in inflating the expenditure to reduce profit. In this context reliance is also placed on the decision of CIT v/s indo Saudi Service (Travel) Pvt Ltd 310 ITR 306 (Bom) wherein the Hon‟ble Bombay High court in the context of Commission has held that where commission has been paid to sister concern and the said sister concern is paying tax at a higher rates, there is no case of evasion of taxes. Hence Section 40A(2) cannot be invoked. Similar view has been expressed in Modi Revlon Pvt Ltd v/s ACIT 2 ITR (tr…

Rohit Nandlal Trust, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 476/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri N.K. Billaiyaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.476 & 477/Ahd/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-2010 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Ms.Urvashi ShodhanFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Meena, Sr.DR
Section 40

…ordance with law. Case laws relied upon were; in the case of CIT vs. Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. 112 ITD 135 [ITAT Indore ™], in the case of Aluminium Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT 86 ITR 11(SC) and in the case of CIT vs. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P) Ltd. 310 ITR 306 (Bom.). Respectfully relying upon these decisions and considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby hold that the Trust has ITA No.476 and 477/Ahd/2014 11 availed the services of these persons, therefore the commission was legitimately paid on the business brought by them. Resultantly ground raised by the assesse…

ACIT 4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Gopaldas Visram & Co. Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

ITA 4588/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev KhandelwalFor Respondent: Miss Vidisha Kalara
Section 69Section 69A

…binding on the Assessing Officer UCOBank 237 ITR 889 (SC) Paper Products Ltd 247 ITR 128 (SC) Indian Oil Corp. Ltd 267 ITR 272 (SC) Best Plastics (P.) Ltd 295 ITR 256 (Del) (iii) Bombay High Court decision in the case of Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt Ltd - 310 ITR 306 (iv) Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Triumph Securities Ltd -ITA No 2614/M/2004 and Edwise Consultants Pvt Ltd - ITA No 5376IMumI2011, 4121IMumI2014, 5941Muml2013 (consolidated order). The ld. AR in respect of purchases from Cheryl Laboratories Pvt Ltd contended that “no disallowance is called for on account of smallness of the amount involved an…

ACIT 4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Gopaldas Visram & Co. Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

ITA 4587/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev KhandelwalFor Respondent: Miss Vidisha Kalara
Section 69Section 69A

…binding on the Assessing Officer UCOBank 237 ITR 889 (SC) Paper Products Ltd 247 ITR 128 (SC) Indian Oil Corp. Ltd 267 ITR 272 (SC) Best Plastics (P.) Ltd 295 ITR 256 (Del) (iii) Bombay High Court decision in the case of Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt Ltd - 310 ITR 306 (iv) Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Triumph Securities Ltd -ITA No 2614/M/2004 and Edwise Consultants Pvt Ltd - ITA No 5376IMumI2011, 4121IMumI2014, 5941Muml2013 (consolidated order). The ld. AR in respect of purchases from Cheryl Laboratories Pvt Ltd contended that “no disallowance is called for on account of smallness of the amount involved an…

ACIT 4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Gopaldas Visram & Co. Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

ITA 4586/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev KhandelwalFor Respondent: Miss Vidisha Kalara
Section 69Section 69A

…binding on the Assessing Officer UCOBank 237 ITR 889 (SC) Paper Products Ltd 247 ITR 128 (SC) Indian Oil Corp. Ltd 267 ITR 272 (SC) Best Plastics (P.) Ltd 295 ITR 256 (Del) (iii) Bombay High Court decision in the case of Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt Ltd - 310 ITR 306 (iv) Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Triumph Securities Ltd -ITA No 2614/M/2004 and Edwise Consultants Pvt Ltd - ITA No 5376IMumI2011, 4121IMumI2014, 5941Muml2013 (consolidated order). The ld. AR in respect of purchases from Cheryl Laboratories Pvt Ltd contended that “no disallowance is called for on account of smallness of the amount involved an…