CIT v. Shatrunjay Diamonds

261 ITR 258High Court2003#2278 most cited

What is CIT v. Shatrunjay Diamonds authority for?

The assessee bears the initial burden to maintain and produce authentic documentation under Section 92D and Rule 10D to justify transactions with related parties, especially concerning the arm's length price for such transactions under Section 40A(2)(b). The discharge of this statutory obligation to maintain accurate data is a mandatory requirement of law.

50

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Shatrunjay Diamonds · Shatrunjay Diamonds 261 ITR 258 · Section 92D · Rule 10D · transfer pricing documentation · arm's length price · assessee burden of proof · Section 40A(2)(b) · mandatory documentation · related party transactions · penalty Section 271G · specified domestic transaction

Sections most often in play

Section 271GSection 10DSection 92DSection 143(3)Section 273BSection 40A(2)(b)Section 92CASection 92CA(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 92d(3)section 271gsection 40a(2)(a)section 92dlegal expensesclosely held companyarms length pricemanagement feesspecified domestic transactionsection 40a(2)(b)cup methodmaximum marginal rate

Judgments citing CIT v. Shatrunjay Diamonds

Venkatram Nanjundaiah Sridhar, Bengaluru vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- 7(2)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 1770/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Dec 2019AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevanassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Dept
Section 57

…when he borrowed the money from the Bank at a higher rate. Consequently, the claim of deduction of interest amount by the appellant has to b restricted to the amount of interest received from his wife Mrs Mukta Sridhar. 5.4 In the case of Shatrunjay Diamonds 261 ITR 258 the Hon'ble Bombay HC has held that in case of transactions u/s Page 6 of 8 40A(2)(b) the onus of proving the reasonableness of the price is on the assessee. Reliance is also placed on following judicial decisions: i. Prakash Engineering Works [2015] 54 taxmann.com (Calcutta HC) ii. S. M. Haq [2014] 46 taxmann.com 171 (Allahabad HC) iii. M.L.B.D…

Asst CIT 5(1)(2), Mumbai vs. D. Navinchandra Gems Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 4152/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S D. Navinchandra Gems Pvt. Income Tax-5(1)(2), Room Vs. Ltd., Hw-8011-B, Bharat No. 568, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Diamond Bourse, Bandrakurla Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aabcd2787R Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Satya Pinisetty, Sr.Dr Assessee By : Mr. K.A. Vaidyalingan, Ar Date Of Hearing : 15/11/2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 16/12/2019

For Appellant: Mr. K.A. Vaidyalingan, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Satya Pinisetty, Sr.DR
Section 271GSection 92Section 92CSection 92DSection 92D(3)

…D(1) without specifying the cause of such non-compliance or demonstrating how the same was reasonable. iv) Whether the Id. CIT(A) was correct in ignoring the ratio laid down in the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Shatrunjay Diamonds (261 ITR 258) holding that the initial burden was cast upon the assessee? v) The Id. CIT(A) erred in deleting the penalty for the reason that non adjustment was made to the ALP, failing to note that by not producing the material documents necessary to determine the ALP under any of the prescribed methods u/s. 92 C (1) of the Act, the assessee effectively prev…

Chemaroma Drug House, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Ward-18(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 4473/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am)

Section 40A(2)(b)

…in case of Payment to relatives, the resonableness has to be proved by the assessee and not the department :- (i) Nund & Samonta Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (SC), 78 ITR 268. (ii) CIT vs. NEPC India Ltd. (Mad), 303 ITR 271. (iii) CIT vs. Shatrunjay Diamonds (Bom), 261 ITR 258. 5. Accordingly, the AO proceeded to disallow interest paid in excess of 15% and added the same to the total income of the assessee. 6. Upon assessee’s appeal learned CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance against this order. The assessee is in appeal before the ITAT. 7. I have heard both the counsel and perused the records. Learned Counsel of the a…

The Bombay Samachar P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 5683/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Jeet Kamdar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Asghar Zain V.P, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40A(2)(b)

…Del.). 6. The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the observations of the Departmental Authorities. He also relied upon the following decisions:– i) Nund & Samont Co. P. Ltd. v/s CIT, [1970] 78 ITR 268 (SC); ii) CIT v/s Shatrunjay Diamonds, [2003] 261 ITR 258 (Bom.) and iii) Shree Laxmi Marketing (P) Ltd. V/S Acit, [2008] 119 ITD 390 (Pn.). 7. We have considered rival submissions and perused materials on record. We have also applied our mind to the decisions relied upon by both the parties. Before we proceed to decide the validity of the disallowance made under section 40A(2)(a) of the Act ITAs No. 5…

Freewings Power & Infra Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 10(1), 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)

…ard 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(1) ITA No. 2412/Del/2013 dated 19/05/2017. Sir, therefore, under the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the judicial precedents cited above, we would like to pray before to delete the disallowance of Rs.…

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)

…ments 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 predicated on percentage of increase in the payments made to the…

DCIT 5(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Interjwel P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5628/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Anand Mohan, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri K.A. Vaidyalingan, AR
Section 143(3)Section 271GSection 92CSection 92D(3)

…r the beneficial clause in section 27. Therefore, assessee cannot take shelter under the beneficial clause in section 273B. In this context, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional Mumbai High Court in the case of Shatrunjay Diamonds (261 ITR 258; 2003) wherein court has held that 'The purpose behind the legislature enacting Section 404 (2) (b) was to provide for shifting of burden on the assessee in cases where the transactions are not at arm's length. The purchases are made by the assessee from its sister concern. In such cases, the intricacies of the transactions are required to be ex…

DCIT 5(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Karp Impex P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5627/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Anand Mohan, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri K.A. Vaidyalingan, AR
Section 143(3)Section 271GSection 92CSection 92D(3)

…r the beneficial clause in section 27. Therefore, assessee cannot take shelter under the beneficial clause in section 273B. In this context, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional Mumbai High Court in the case of Shatrunjay Diamonds (261 ITR 258; 2003) wherein court has held that 'The purpose behind the legislature enacting Section 404 (2) (b) was to provide for shifting of burden on the assessee in cases where the transactions are not at arm's length. The purchases are made by the assessee from its sister concern. In such cases, the intricacies of the transactions are required to be ex…

DCIT 5(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Kiran Gems P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5626/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Anand Mohan, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri K.A. Vaidyalingan, AR
Section 143(3)Section 271GSection 92CSection 92D(3)

…r the beneficial clause in section 27. Therefore, assessee cannot take shelter under the beneficial clause in section 273B. In this context, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional Mumbai High Court in the case of Shatrunjay Diamonds (261 ITR 258; 2003) wherein court has held that 'The purpose behind the legislature enacting Section 404 (2) (b) was to provide for shifting of burden on the assessee in cases where the transactions are not at arm's length. The purchases are made by the assessee from its sister concern. In such cases, the intricacies of the transactions are required to be ex…

DCIT Cent. Cir. -6(4), Mumbai vs. Firestone International Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5304/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Anand Mohan, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri K.A. Vaidyalingan, AR
Section 143(3)Section 271GSection 92CSection 92D(3)

…r the beneficial clause in section 27. Therefore, assessee cannot take shelter under the beneficial clause in section 273B. In this context, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional Mumbai High Court in the case of Shatrunjay Diamonds (261 ITR 258; 2003) wherein court has held that 'The purpose behind the legislature enacting Section 404 (2) (b) was to provide for shifting of burden on the assessee in cases where the transactions are not at arm's length. The purchases are made by the assessee from its sister concern. In such cases, the intricacies of the transactions are required to be ex…

DCIT 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. The Bombay Samachar P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 35/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh
Section 2(22)(e)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A(2)(a)

…l.). 6. The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the observations of the Departmental Authorities. He also relied upon the following decisions:– i) Nund & Samont Co. P. Ltd. v/s CIT, [1970] 78 ITR 268 (SC); ii) CIT v/s Shatrunjay Diamonds, [2003] 261 ITR 258 (Bom.) and iii) Shree Laxmi Marketing (P) Ltd. V/S Acit, [2008] 119 ITD 390 (Pn.). 7. We have considered rival submissions and perused materials on record. We have also applied our mind to the decisions relied upon by both the parties. Before we proceed to decide the validity of the disallowance made under section 40A(2)(a) of the Act in the ass…

Avdel (India) P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3260/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm M/S Avdel (India) Private Limited Deputy Commissioner Of Income बिधम/ 169, Backbay Reclamation, Tax-1(1), Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aabca3977E (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Alok Saksena, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 36(2)Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

…0% of the related party expenses i.e Rs. 10,66,596/- made under Se. 40A(2)(a). Before parting, we may herein observe that the reliance placed by the CIT(A) on the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT(A) Vs. Shatrunjay Diamonds (2003)261 ITR 258 (Bom), to support his view that under Sec. 40A(2)(a) the reasonableness of a related party expenditure is to be proved by the assessee and not by the department, has been misconceived by him in the backdrop of the observations arrived at by the Hon’ble High Court. We find that in the case before the High Court, the A.O on comparing the price of t…

Perstorp Chemicals India P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO 10(2)(2), Mumbai

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4364/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2018AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Mayur KisnadwalaFor Respondent: S/Shri V. Jenardhanan -DR
Section 254(1)Section 92

…ads trading material purchased Rs.3.25 lakhs and sale of goods Rs.14.lakhs.We find that while dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee the FAA has referred to two cases of Aztec Software and Technology Services Limited (107 ITD 141)and Shatrunjay Diamonds (261 ITR 258).He has not dealt with argument raised before him by the assessee .Therefore, we are restoring the issue back to file of FAA for fresh adjudication. He is directed to decide the issue after hearing the assessee.Effective ground of appeal is partly allowed. 9.Last ground of appeal in all the appeals is about initiation of penalty u/s.271(1)(c)of t…

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

…rson 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 Assessing Officer failed to discharge the onus that was lying upon him as per the mandate of the provisions of Section 40A(2…

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

…rson 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 Assessing Officer failed to discharge the onus that was lying upon him as per the mandate of the provisions of Section 40A(2…

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

…rson 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 Assessing Officer failed to discharge the onus that was lying upon him as per the mandate of the provisions of Section 40A(2…

DCIT Cen Cir 2(1), Mumbai vs. Dhanera Diamonds, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 6310/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Asst. Cit-5(1)(2), Mumbai, M/S D. Navinchandra Exports Pvt. Ltd., बिधम/ Room No. 568, 5Th Floor, 210 Prasad Chambers, Opera House, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 004 Mumbai-400 020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan No. Aadcp6855C (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) :

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri V. Jenardhanan, D.R
Section 271G

…ndra Gems Pvt. Ltd – ITA 6303/Mum/2016 Dy. CIT Vs. M/s Dhanera Diamonds- ITA 6310/Mum/2016 Dy. CIT Vs. M/s Akshar Impex Pvt. Ltd. –ITA 6292/Mum/2016 the TPO taking support of the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Shatrnaj Diamonds (261 ITR 258) which was in context of discharge of the statutory obligation cast upon the assessee as per Sec. 40A(2)(b) for establishing that the price paid to the related parties was not excessive as against that paid for similar services to the independent parties, therein concluded that the assessee had failed to discharge its onus to benchmark the transa…

Asst CIT 5(1)(2), Mumbai vs. D. Navinchandra Exports P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 6304/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Asst. Cit-5(1)(2), Mumbai, M/S D. Navinchandra Exports Pvt. Ltd., बिधम/ Room No. 568, 5Th Floor, 210 Prasad Chambers, Opera House, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 004 Mumbai-400 020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan No. Aadcp6855C (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) :

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri V. Jenardhanan, D.R
Section 271G

…ndra Gems Pvt. Ltd – ITA 6303/Mum/2016 Dy. CIT Vs. M/s Dhanera Diamonds- ITA 6310/Mum/2016 Dy. CIT Vs. M/s Akshar Impex Pvt. Ltd. –ITA 6292/Mum/2016 the TPO taking support of the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Shatrnaj Diamonds (261 ITR 258) which was in context of discharge of the statutory obligation cast upon the assessee as per Sec. 40A(2)(b) for establishing that the price paid to the related parties was not excessive as against that paid for similar services to the independent parties, therein concluded that the assessee had failed to discharge its onus to benchmark the transa…

DCIT 5(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Akshar Impex P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 6292/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Asst. Cit-5(1)(2), Mumbai, M/S D. Navinchandra Exports Pvt. Ltd., बिधम/ Room No. 568, 5Th Floor, 210 Prasad Chambers, Opera House, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 004 Mumbai-400 020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan No. Aadcp6855C (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) :

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri V. Jenardhanan, D.R
Section 271G

…ndra Gems Pvt. Ltd – ITA 6303/Mum/2016 Dy. CIT Vs. M/s Dhanera Diamonds- ITA 6310/Mum/2016 Dy. CIT Vs. M/s Akshar Impex Pvt. Ltd. –ITA 6292/Mum/2016 the TPO taking support of the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Shatrnaj Diamonds (261 ITR 258) which was in context of discharge of the statutory obligation cast upon the assessee as per Sec. 40A(2)(b) for establishing that the price paid to the related parties was not excessive as against that paid for similar services to the independent parties, therein concluded that the assessee had failed to discharge its onus to benchmark the transa…

Second Leasing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 2412/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiay. 2009-10 M/S Second Leasing Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, Circle-8(1), Flat No. N, Sagar Apartment, Vs. New Delhi 6, Tilak Marg, New Delhi – 11 001 (Pan: Aabcs6609R) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Ms. RanoFor Respondent: Sh. N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 142(3)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…Keventer (Private) Ltd. (1978) 1151TR 149 (SC). VI. Similar view is held by the Madras HighCourt in Cl'F 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. Shatrunjay Diamonds (2003) 261 ITR 258 (Bom). 7- Further it is submitted that, the scope of Section 40A (2) as explained by CBDT in Circular No. 6P, dated 6thJuly, 1968. The CBOT clarified that while examining the reasonableness of 13 expenditure the Assessing Officer is expected to exercise his judgment in a reasonable and fair manner. It should be borne in mind that the provision…