CIT v. Siya Ram Garg (HUF) (237 CTR 321)

KKR AGRO MILLS P. LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 328/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2010-11 Kkr Agro Mills Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, Iii/678, Kkr Building, Okkal Kalady, Circle – 1(2), Ernakulam – 683 550. Kochi. Pan : Aabck 6542 K Assessee Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR

Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(a)

…cern, since the sister concern was also paying tax at higher rate and hence the disallowance made u/s 40A(2)(a) was deleted. The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has also expressed similar view in the case of CIT Vs. Siya Ram Page 3 of 19 Garg (HUF) (2011)(237 CTR 321). In para 15 of the Judgment it is observed- "15. On this issue, we find that indeed, the details filed by the assessee showed that its sister concerns were being taxed at the same rate at which the assessee was being taxed, proving that there was no reason for the assessee to show higher rate purchases made by the assessee from its sister concer…

DCIT CIR 4(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S SHCIL SERVICES LTD, MUMBAI

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1811/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1811/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri M. M. Galvala, DRFor Respondent: Shri T. S. Khalsa, AR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 194J

…expressed identical view in the case of V.S. Dempo & Co. (P) Ltd (336 ITR 209) also. The Hon’ble Punjab 15 I.T.A. No. 1811/Mum/2019 M/s SHCIL Services Ltd & Haryana High Court has also expressed similar view in the case of CIT Vs. Siya Ram Garg (HUF) (2011)(237 CTR 321)”. Respectfully following the said order, we hold that the provisions of Sec. 194H are attracted to the payments made towards sub-brokerage but not the provisions of Sec. 194J and we reverse the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in holding that provisions of Sec. 40A(2) are attracted. The grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. 10. Therefore, respect…

ACIT, C-7, LUDHIANA vs. M/S CEIGALL INDIA LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 291/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: The Appeal Is Finally Heard Or Disposed Off.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. C. Chandrakanta, CIT

Section 133ASection 145(3)Section 69C

…arginal rate of tax and as such, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs M/s Glaxo SmithKline Asia (P) Ltd. as reported in236 CTR 113 and in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs Siya Ram Gargas reported in 237 CTR 321of Punjab & Haryana High Court, that no addition could be made u/s 40 (a) (2b), if the both concerns are assessed at the maximum rate of tax, since the same has been audited and a report u/s 44AB has been given by the Chartered Accountant and the return has been filed on the basis of such books of accounts. 15. It is further submitted that M/s 3C…

M/S SALT LAKE SOCIETY FOR HOTEL MANAGEMENT,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-43(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals are allowed

ITA 156/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

Section 1Section 131Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)(a)

…making necessary clarification to this effect as considered in hon'ble Bombay high court’s decision in CIT vs. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P) Ltd (2009) 310 ITR 306 (Bom), V.S Dempo & Co. (D) Ltd. vs. CIT 336 ITR 209 (Bom) and CIT vs. Siya Rans Garg (2011) 237 CTR 321 (P&H). He then refers to the two payee’ income tax returns acknowledgements indicating both of them to have declared respective taxable income(s) of ₹70,30,744/- and ₹38,07,614/- in former assessment year 2011-12. The same sufficiently indicates that the two payee(s) are assessed as maximum rate of tax. The factual position is no different in lat…

M/S SALT LAKE SOCIETY FOR HOTEL MANAGEMENT,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-43(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeals are allowed

ITA 155/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

Section 1Section 131Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)(a)

…making necessary clarification to this effect as considered in hon'ble Bombay high court’s decision in CIT vs. Indo Saudi Services (Travel) (P) Ltd (2009) 310 ITR 306 (Bom), V.S Dempo & Co. (D) Ltd. vs. CIT 336 ITR 209 (Bom) and CIT vs. Siya Rans Garg (2011) 237 CTR 321 (P&H). He then refers to the two payee’ income tax returns acknowledgements indicating both of them to have declared respective taxable income(s) of ₹70,30,744/- and ₹38,07,614/- in former assessment year 2011-12. The same sufficiently indicates that the two payee(s) are assessed as maximum rate of tax. The factual position is no different in lat…

ITO, WARD-2(1)(3),, AHMEDABAD vs. HEMATO ONCOLOGY CLINIC (AHMEDABAD)P.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 3411/AHD/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…MGS Hos Hospitalities, Delhi Bench of ITAT It has been held that in absence of any inquiry about fair market value of services rendered by Shri Anil Gupta and comparable case, the disallowance u/s. 40A(2)(b) was not justified. • CIT Vs. Siya Ram Garg, HUF [237 CTR 321) [PH] It is held that in view of the sister concerns were being taxed at the same rate, there was no reason for the assessee to show higher rate for purchases made by it from them. ITO Vs. Hemato Oncology Clinic Assessment year: 2012-13 Page 4 of 6 • DCIT Vs. Meet Heat Engineers [ITA No. 3654/07 dt. 23/07/2010] • ITO Vs. Cello Paper Co. [ITA N…

SCHIL SERVICES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 4(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 5743/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No. 5743 /Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 M/S. Shcil Services Ltd., The Acit-4(2), बनाम/ C/O Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Army & Navy Bldg., Mumbai-400 020 3Rd Floor, 148, M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 01 आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No. 6019 /Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 The Acit-4(2), M/S. Shcil Services Ltd., बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, C/O Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Army & Navy Bldg., 148, M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 01 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aajcs 5661H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Assessee By: Shri F.V. Irani & Shri Zareer N. Mehta Shri Manjunatha Swamy ""यथ" क" ओर से/Revenue By:

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani &

Section 194HSection 194JSection 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…urther notice that the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has expressed identical view in the case of V.S. Dempo & Co. (P) Ltd (336 ITR 209) also. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has also expressed similar view in the case of CIT Vs. Siya Ram Garg (HUF) (2011)(237 CTR 321)”. Respectfully following the said order, we hold that the provisions of Sec. 194H are attracted to the payments made towards sub-brokerage but not the provisions of Sec. 194J and we reverse the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in holding that provisions of Sec. 40A(2) are attracted. The grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. 6. Coming to the Reven…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5720/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs. Additional Cit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Range-6, Vasant Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacm0829Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Neeraj Jain, Rohit Jain, Adv. Romit Katyal & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Cas Department By:Shri Amrendra Kumar, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. NeerajFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT(DR)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH “I-1” NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR AND SHRI L.P. SAHU Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., vs. Additional CIT, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Range-6, Vasant Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. (PAN: AAACM0829Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Neeraj Jain, Rohit Jain, Adv. Romit Katyal & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, CAs Department by:Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT(DR) C O R R I G E N D U M It has come to our notice that there are few typographical mistakes in the Order dated 20.5.2016 of the ITAT, which needs…

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, HISAR

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

ITA 3128/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. C.M. Garg & Sh. O.P. Kant

Section 143(3)Section 263

…e as the Hon’ble Court was not having benefit of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of Ponni Sugar and Chemicals (supra). Further, the assessee submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. Siyaram Garg (HUF), 237 CTR 321 has followed the judgment in the case of Ponni Sugar and Chemical Limited (supra) and subsidy received for setting up of industrial unit in backward area was held as capital receipt. Further, the assessee submitted that the action proposed by CIT under section 263 of the Act was beyond the jurisdiction as twin conditions of the order being errone…

JINDAL STEEL POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, HISAR

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

ITA 3283/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. C.M. Garg & Sh. O.P. Kant

Section 143(3)Section 263

…e as the Hon’ble Court was not having benefit of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of Ponni Sugar and Chemicals (supra). Further, the assessee submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. Siyaram Garg (HUF), 237 CTR 321 has followed the judgment in the case of Ponni Sugar and Chemical Limited (supra) and subsidy received for setting up of industrial unit in backward area was held as capital receipt. Further, the assessee submitted that the action proposed by CIT under section 263 of the Act was beyond the jurisdiction as twin conditions of the order being errone…

SCHIL SERVICES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1777/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.1777/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Shcil Services Ltd., The Dcit-4(2)(1), बनाम/ C/O Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Army & Navy Bldg., Mumbai-400 020 3Rd Floor, 148 M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 आयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.1669/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Dcit-4(2)(1), M/S. Shcil Services Ltd., बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, C/O Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Army & Navy Bldg., 3Rd Floor, 148 M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 आयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.5004/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Shcil Services Ltd., The Dcit-4(2)(1), बनाम/ C/O Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Army & Navy Bldg., Mumbai-400 020 3Rd Floor, 148 M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aajcs 5661H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Assesee By: Shri F.V. Irani Shri Z. Mehta ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Manjunatha Swamy Shri R.A. Dhyani

For Respondent: Shri Manjunatha Swamy

Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 194JSection 271(1)(c)Section 40A(2)(b)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ , मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ I.TA No.1777/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. SHCIL Services Ltd., The DCIT-4(2)(1), बनाम/ C/o Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Army & Navy Bldg., Mumbai-400 020 3rd Floor, 148 M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 आयकर अपील सं/ I.TA No.1669/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 The DCIT-4(2)(1), M/s. SHCIL Services Ltd., बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, C/o Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, Vs. Mumbai-400…

EDWISE CONSULTANTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 4(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 4121/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.5376/Mum/2011 & I.T.A. No.4121/Mum/2014 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2010-11) बनाम/ Edwise Consultants Pvt.Ltd., Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 4(3), Room No.649, Jer Mahal, Vs. 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Opp. Metro Cinema, M K Road, Dhobi Talav, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400002 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

Section 40A(2)(a)

…urther notice that the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has expressed identical view in the case of V.S. Dempo & Co. (P) Ltd (336 ITR 209) also. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has also expressed similar view in the case of CIT Vs. Siya Ram Garg (HUF) (2011)(237 CTR 321). 21. We notice that in the instant cases also, identical position is obtaining, i.e., the directors are also paying tax at higher rate in all the three years under consideration. The Total income declared by the three directors is tabulated below, for the sake of convenience:- Name AY-2008-09 AY-2009-10 AY-2010-11 a. Assan H Rs.in Lakhs Rs.in…

EDWISE CONSULTANTS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 4(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 594/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.5376/Mum/2011 & I.T.A. No.4121/Mum/2014 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2010-11) बनाम/ Edwise Consultants Pvt.Ltd., Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 4(3), Room No.649, Jer Mahal, Vs. 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Opp. Metro Cinema, M K Road, Dhobi Talav, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400002 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

Section 40A(2)(a)

…urther notice that the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has expressed identical view in the case of V.S. Dempo & Co. (P) Ltd (336 ITR 209) also. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has also expressed similar view in the case of CIT Vs. Siya Ram Garg (HUF) (2011)(237 CTR 321). 21. We notice that in the instant cases also, identical position is obtaining, i.e., the directors are also paying tax at higher rate in all the three years under consideration. The Total income declared by the three directors is tabulated below, for the sake of convenience:- Name AY-2008-09 AY-2009-10 AY-2010-11 a. Assan H Rs.in Lakhs Rs.in…

EDWISE CONSULTANTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 5376/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.5376/Mum/2011 & I.T.A. No.4121/Mum/2014 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2010-11) बनाम/ Edwise Consultants Pvt.Ltd., Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 4(3), Room No.649, Jer Mahal, Vs. 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Opp. Metro Cinema, M K Road, Dhobi Talav, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400002 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

Section 40A(2)(a)

…urther notice that the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has expressed identical view in the case of V.S. Dempo & Co. (P) Ltd (336 ITR 209) also. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has also expressed similar view in the case of CIT Vs. Siya Ram Garg (HUF) (2011)(237 CTR 321). 21. We notice that in the instant cases also, identical position is obtaining, i.e., the directors are also paying tax at higher rate in all the three years under consideration. The Total income declared by the three directors is tabulated below, for the sake of convenience:- Name AY-2008-09 AY-2009-10 AY-2010-11 a. Assan H Rs.in Lakhs Rs.in…

CIT v. Siya Ram Garg (HUF)

Judgments citing CIT v. Siya Ram Garg (HUF)

KKR AGRO MILLS P. LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

DCIT CIR 4(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S SHCIL SERVICES LTD, MUMBAI

ACIT, C-7, LUDHIANA vs. M/S CEIGALL INDIA LTD., LUDHIANA

M/S SALT LAKE SOCIETY FOR HOTEL MANAGEMENT,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-43(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

M/S SALT LAKE SOCIETY FOR HOTEL MANAGEMENT,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-43(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITO, WARD-2(1)(3),, AHMEDABAD vs. HEMATO ONCOLOGY CLINIC (AHMEDABAD)P.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

SCHIL SERVICES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 4(2), MUMBAI

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, HISAR

JINDAL STEEL POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, HISAR

SCHIL SERVICES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

EDWISE CONSULTANTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 4(3), MUMBAI

EDWISE CONSULTANTS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 4(3), MUMBAI

EDWISE CONSULTANTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(3), MUMBAI