CIT v. Walchand & Co.

65 ITR 381Supreme Court of India1967#246 most cited

What is CIT v. Walchand & Co. authority for?

The necessity and reasonableness of business expenditure, including the utilization of borrowed funds, must be judged from the perspective of a businessman based on commercial expediency, and cannot be dictated by revenue authorities. The onus is on the assessee to demonstrate the business purpose and commercial expediency.

314

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,842 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Walchand & Co. · 65 ITR 381 · Section 40A(2) · Section 40A(3) · business expediency · commercial expediency · reasonableness of expenditure · necessity of expenditure · businessman's point of view · onus on assessee · disallowance of expenditure · revenue dictating expenses

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 148Section 147Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(3)Section 142(1)Section 142(2A)

Issues it is cited on

section 40(3)short deduction of tdsinterest on interestsection 40a(2)(b)closely held companyshort deduction of taxbusiness expediencysection 40a(2)accumulated profitsrelated party transactioncommercial expediencysection 194j

Judgments citing CIT v. Walchand & Co.

Prayag Polytech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 7, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6625/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2019AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A No. 6625/Del/2019 (A.Y 2016-17)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…relied upon the following decisions: a) S.A. Builders Ltd. vs. CIT(A), Civil appeal No.5811 of 2005 with 5812 of 2006, (2007) 288 ITR 1 (SC). b) CIT vs. Panipat Woollen & General Mills Co. Ltd. [1976] 103 ITR 66 (SC). c) CIT vs. Walchand & Co. P. Ltd. (1967) 65 ITR 381 (SC). d) CIT vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. (2012) 345 ITR 241 (Del. HC) e) Upper India Publishing House Pvt. Ltd., 117 ITR 569 (SC). f) Motilal Laxmichand Sanghavi vs. ACIT in ITA No.3110/Mum/2018 dated 26.07.2019. g) Harparshad and Company Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT in ITA No.1128/Del/2017 dated 14.10.2019. The Ld. AR further submitted that without prejudice t…

ACIT Central Circle, Salem vs. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt. Ltd., Salem

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2283/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

…ed and Helsby Cables Ltd. v. Athertonh [1926] AC 205; and (d) beyond that no hard and fast rule can be laid down to explain what is meant by the word "solely ". Further, subsequently the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Walchand and Co. Pvt Ltd, 65 ITR 381 had held that while applying the test of commercial expediency whether the expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be judged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the Revenue. It is further observed that the ITA Nos.2280-83 /2018 :- 68 -: rule that exp…

ACIT Central Circle, Salem vs. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt. Ltd., Salem

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2282/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

…ed and Helsby Cables Ltd. v. Athertonh [1926] AC 205; and (d) beyond that no hard and fast rule can be laid down to explain what is meant by the word "solely ". Further, subsequently the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Walchand and Co. Pvt Ltd, 65 ITR 381 had held that while applying the test of commercial expediency whether the expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be judged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the Revenue. It is further observed that the ITA Nos.2280-83 /2018 :- 68 -: rule that exp…

ACIT Central Circle, Salem vs. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt. Ltd., Salem

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2281/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

…ed and Helsby Cables Ltd. v. Athertonh [1926] AC 205; and (d) beyond that no hard and fast rule can be laid down to explain what is meant by the word "solely ". Further, subsequently the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Walchand and Co. Pvt Ltd, 65 ITR 381 had held that while applying the test of commercial expediency whether the expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be judged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the Revenue. It is further observed that the ITA Nos.2280-83 /2018 :- 68 -: rule that exp…

ACIT Central Circle, Salem vs. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt. Ltd., Salem

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2280/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

…ed and Helsby Cables Ltd. v. Athertonh [1926] AC 205; and (d) beyond that no hard and fast rule can be laid down to explain what is meant by the word "solely ". Further, subsequently the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Walchand and Co. Pvt Ltd, 65 ITR 381 had held that while applying the test of commercial expediency whether the expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be judged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the Revenue. It is further observed that the ITA Nos.2280-83 /2018 :- 68 -: rule that exp…

Shreeji Chemical Industries, Ahmedabad vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Bharuch

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

ITA 1729/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O. P. Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.1729/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Shreeji Chemical Industries, V. Assistant Commissioner Of C/O Ketan H Shah, Advocate Income Tax 903, Sapphire Complex Circle-2, Bharuch-394116. Navrangpura, Ahmedabad - 380009. [Pan: Aajfs 6791 D] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 133(6)

…Shreeji Chemical Industries v. ACIT- Bharuch/ I.T.A.No. 1729/AHD/2016/A.Y.:12-13 1 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,सुरत "यायपीठ, सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O. P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.1729/AHD/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Shreeji Chemical Industries, V. Assistant Commissioner of C/O Ketan H Shah, Advocate Income Tax 903, Sapphire Complex Circle-2, Bharuch-394116. Navrangpura, Ahmedabad - 380009. [PAN: AAJFS 6791 D] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से Assessee by Shri Ketan H Shah, Ad…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sentia Power Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, ITA number 146/Del/2016 filed by the learned assessing officer for assessment year 2012 – 13 is dismissed

ITA 1461/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishisentia Power Ltd, Vs. Ito, (Formerly Known As Indiabulls Ward-11(4), Cseb Bhiyathan Power Ltd), New Delhi M-62 & 63, 1St Floor, Connaught Place, New Delhi Pan: Aabci8901M (Appellant) (Respondent) The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Sentia Power Ltd, Income Tax (Formerly Known As Circle 23(2) Indiabulls Cseb Bhiyathan New Delhi Power Ltd), M-62 & 63, 1St Floor, Connaught Place, New Delhi Pan: Aabci8901M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr DR

…ion with the ongoing project and that they have been incurred for the purpose of its business, it is to be allowed as revenue expenses. In support of its argument, the assessee had relied upon the following case laws: i. CIT vs. Walchand & Co. (P) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 ii. Titanium Products Ltd. vs. CIT [1966] 60 ITR 227 (SC) iii. Sasson J. David & Co. (P) Ltd. vs. CIT [1979] 118 ITR 261 (SC) iv. Cargo Holding Private Workers Pool vs. DCIT (ITAT Vizag) v. Khalid Automobiles vs. Union of India (1995) Further, vide questionnaire dated 07/02/2014, the assessee was further asked the following: 1. The complete detail…

M/S. Sentia Power Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, ITA number 146/Del/2016 filed by the learned assessing officer for assessment year 2012 – 13 is dismissed

ITA 3498/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishisentia Power Ltd, Vs. Ito, (Formerly Known As Indiabulls Ward-11(4), Cseb Bhiyathan Power Ltd), New Delhi M-62 & 63, 1St Floor, Connaught Place, New Delhi Pan: Aabci8901M (Appellant) (Respondent) The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Sentia Power Ltd, Income Tax (Formerly Known As Circle 23(2) Indiabulls Cseb Bhiyathan New Delhi Power Ltd), M-62 & 63, 1St Floor, Connaught Place, New Delhi Pan: Aabci8901M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr DR

…ion with the ongoing project and that they have been incurred for the purpose of its business, it is to be allowed as revenue expenses. In support of its argument, the assessee had relied upon the following case laws: i. CIT vs. Walchand & Co. (P) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 ii. Titanium Products Ltd. vs. CIT [1966] 60 ITR 227 (SC) iii. Sasson J. David & Co. (P) Ltd. vs. CIT [1979] 118 ITR 261 (SC) iv. Cargo Holding Private Workers Pool vs. DCIT (ITAT Vizag) v. Khalid Automobiles vs. Union of India (1995) Further, vide questionnaire dated 07/02/2014, the assessee was further asked the following: 1. The complete detail…

Shri Surinder Singh Deceased, Amritsar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Amritsar

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 357/ASR/2016[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Jul 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora

For Appellant: Sh. Jatinder Nagpal (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. S. S. Negi (D.R.)
Section 131(1)Section 143(3)Section 148(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (SMC) BEFORE SH. SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 357/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2002-03 Surinder Singh (Deceased) vs. The Income Tax Officer, (through LR, Jatinder Kaur), Ward-5(4), Amritsar c/o Hotel New Bharat, 11- Link Road, Amritsar [PAN: ABQPS 7481J] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Jatinder Nagpal (Adv.) Respondent by: Sh. S. S. Negi (D.R.) Date of Hearing: 14.05.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 31.07.2019 ORDER Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Assessee directed against the Order by the Commissioner of I…

Anilaben Ambalal Patel, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 24(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2010-2011

ITA 3841/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Smt. Anilaben Ambalal Patel, The Assistant Commissioner Of 2Aj Laxmi Industrial Estate, Income Tax – 24(3), New Link Road, Andheri (West), Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Mumbai - 400053 Vs. Building No. C-11, Pan: Aabpp4814C Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400050 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjay R. Parikh (Ar) Revenue By : Shri Satishchandra Rajore (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 26/07/2019

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Parikh (AR)For Respondent: Shri Satishchandra Rajore (DR)
Section 143Section 57

…the Act. So far as the observations of the authorities below, that assessee cannot borrow at higher rate and invest at lower rate the Ld. counsel placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Walchand & Company Pvt. Ltd. 65 ITR 381 (SC), JK Woolen Manufacturing vs. CIT 72 ITR 612 (SC) and CIT vs. Panipat Woolen and General Mills Company Ltd. 103 ITR 66 (SC) submitted that AO cannot direct the assessee to carry on its business in a particular manner. The Ld. counsel further pointed out that during the AY 2009-10 the assessee claimed the set off of the bank term loan interest…

Jas Forwarding Worldwide Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3296/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year:2007-08

For Respondent: Shri Robin Rawan, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…(3) and have been held to be at arm’s length for the relevant year and no adverse inference has been drawn.  Assessee placed reliance on the following judgments- Case Law Citation DLF Commercial Project Corporation 379 ITR 538 Walchand & Co. Private Limited 65 ITR 381 J.K. Woolen manufactures Limited 72 ITR 612 EKL Appliances Limited 24 taxman 199 29. Ld. CIT (DR) on the other hand relied on the order of the Ld. CIT (A), specifically pages 20 to 23, para 5.1 to 5.3 of the order. 30. We have heard the rival submission and have perused the material placed before us which includes the submissions filed by both t…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Jas Forwarding World Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3222/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year:2007-08

For Respondent: Shri Robin Rawan, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…(3) and have been held to be at arm’s length for the relevant year and no adverse inference has been drawn.  Assessee placed reliance on the following judgments- Case Law Citation DLF Commercial Project Corporation 379 ITR 538 Walchand & Co. Private Limited 65 ITR 381 J.K. Woolen manufactures Limited 72 ITR 612 EKL Appliances Limited 24 taxman 199 29. Ld. CIT (DR) on the other hand relied on the order of the Ld. CIT (A), specifically pages 20 to 23, para 5.1 to 5.3 of the order. 30. We have heard the rival submission and have perused the material placed before us which includes the submissions filed by both t…

Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1351/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Amount of Proposed international
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C

…to the facts of the case. We now proceed to answer whether 65 the action of the Assessing Officer in disallowing the expenditure on the ground of commercial expediency is justified. 13.23. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Walchand & Co [1967] 65 ITR 381 in the context of deductibility of expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] held as under: “In applying the test of commercial expediency for determining whether the expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of the business, reasonablen…

Woodward India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 916/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2009-10 Woodward India Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, (Formerly Known As Woodward Circle-18(1), Governor India Ltd.,), 12Th Floor, New Delhi. Vs Building No. 5, Dlf Cyber Terraces, Dlf Cyber City, Phase-Iii, Gurgaon-122002 Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Vishal Kalra, Adv. Shri S.S. Tomer, Adv. Department By: Shri H.K. Choudary, C.I.T. Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.03.2019

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudary, C.I.T. DR
Section 92Section 92C

…s person and assume a role to decide whether a particular expenditure needs to be incurred or not. Reliance in this regard was placed on the following decisions: • CIT vs. Dhanrajgirji Raja Narasingir (1973) 91 ITR 544 (SC) • CIT vs. Walchand and Co (P) Ltd. (65 ITR 381)(SC) • CIT vs. Dalmia Cement Ltd (254 ITR 377)(Del) • S.A. Builders Ltd. vs. CIT and Anr. (289 ITR 26)(SC) • EKL Appliances Limited vs. CIT [2012] 345 ITR 241 (Del) 17 | P a g e 3.20 Lastly, the Ld AR drew our attention to the fact that similar royalty and technical payments have been accepted by the AO/TPO in subsequent years. In this regard, h…

M/S. Src Aviation Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1065/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Vs. Src Aviation Pvt. Ltd, Circle-22(2), 507, G-5, Building, New Delhi Terminal1, Igi Airport, New Delhi Pan: Aabcs2455F (Appellant) (Respondent) Src Aviation Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, 507, G-5, Building, Circle-22(2), Terminal1, Igi Airport, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aabcs2455F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Atul Puri, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rinku Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143

…T) 1187 (Del-HC) :(2012) 341 ITR 0563. Loyal Motor Service Co. Ltd vs CIT (1946) 14 TTR 647 (Bombay), Metplast Pvt. Ltd vs DCIT (2012) 341 ITR 563)(Delhi), S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT (2006) 289 ITR 26 , Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Walchand & Co. etc.. (1967) 65 ITR 381 In the case of the assessee itself, the Hon’ble ITAT had directed the AO to look into similar payment and the AO, during the A. Y. had found the payment commensurate to the market price and allowed the same in full.(Copy of the relevant portion of the order of the Hon’ble '.TAT and the AO enclosedAnnexure-15 14.2 I have carefully considered the s…

Terex Equipment Pvt. Ltd., Tamil Nadu vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4123/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2010-11]

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)

…Court is deciding a question under Section 12(2) of the Income Tax Act". It was further held in this case that "it is not necessary to show that the expenditure was a profitable one or that in fact any profit was earned". In CIT v. Walchand & Co. etc., (1967) 65 ITR 381, it was held by the Supreme Court that in applying the test of commercial expediency for determining whether the expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be judged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the Revenue. It was further observed that the rule that…

M/S. Bright Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Jalandhar vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Jalandhar

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

ITA 126/ASR/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Sh. Ravish Soodita No.354/Asr./2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No.126/Asr./2015 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 M/S Bright Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Mbd House, Railway Road, Tax, Central Circle-Ii, Jalandhar Jalandhar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacb9469K Assessee By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Pawan K. Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.01.2019 Order Per N. K. Saini: These Two Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Dated 08.05.2014 & 15.01.2015 Of The Ld. Cit(A)-5, Ludhiana For The Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2012-13 Respectively. 2. Since, The Issues Involved Are Common & The Appeals Were Heard Together, So These Are Being Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Pawan K. Kumar, CIT DR
Section 40A(2)(b)Section 4G

…penditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of the business. Reliance is placed on the following judgments: ITA No. 354/Asr./2014 11 Bright Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. • Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay v M/s Walchand & Co. (Pvt.) Ltd., Bombay 65 ITR 381 (1967) (SC) (discussed above) • CIT v Dhanrajgirji Raja Narasirgirji 91 ITR 544 (1973) (SC) (discussed above) • CIT v Panipat Woolen and General Mills 103 ITR 66 (1976)(SC) (discussed above) • In the case of Hive Communication (P.) Ltd. v CIT 201 Taxman 99 (2011), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held as under: "The legitimate business needs of the…

M/S Bright Enterprises Pvt. Ltd, Jalandhar vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Jalandhar

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

ITA 354/ASR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Sh. Ravish Soodita No.354/Asr./2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No.126/Asr./2015 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 M/S Bright Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Mbd House, Railway Road, Tax, Central Circle-Ii, Jalandhar Jalandhar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacb9469K Assessee By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Pawan K. Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.01.2019 Order Per N. K. Saini: These Two Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Dated 08.05.2014 & 15.01.2015 Of The Ld. Cit(A)-5, Ludhiana For The Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2012-13 Respectively. 2. Since, The Issues Involved Are Common & The Appeals Were Heard Together, So These Are Being Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Pawan K. Kumar, CIT DR
Section 40A(2)(b)Section 4G

…penditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of the business. Reliance is placed on the following judgments: ITA No. 354/Asr./2014 11 Bright Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. • Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay v M/s Walchand & Co. (Pvt.) Ltd., Bombay 65 ITR 381 (1967) (SC) (discussed above) • CIT v Dhanrajgirji Raja Narasirgirji 91 ITR 544 (1973) (SC) (discussed above) • CIT v Panipat Woolen and General Mills 103 ITR 66 (1976)(SC) (discussed above) • In the case of Hive Communication (P.) Ltd. v CIT 201 Taxman 99 (2011), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held as under: "The legitimate business needs of the…

Uma Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Centrl Circle-3, New Delhi

ITA 1484/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S S Rana CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 143Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…any assessee so as to question its rationality, prudence or acceptability from a common sense point of view [see S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 288 ITR 1 (S.C); CIT Vs. Dhanraj Girji Raja Narasingherji (1973) 91 ITR 544 (SC); CIT Vs. Walchand and Co. (1967) 65 ITR 381 (SC)]. So long as the transaction meets the specific conditions laid down in the Act, an attempt to negate it or interpret it by applying the yardsticks of rationality, prudence etc., which in any case is highly subjective, would not meet the ends of justice and basic tenets of judicial interpretation or tax administration. xiii. The Hon‘ble Cour…

Ritu Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

ITA 1481/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S S Rana CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 143Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…any assessee so as to question its rationality, prudence or acceptability from a common sense point of view [see S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 288 ITR 1 (S.C); CIT Vs. Dhanraj Girji Raja Narasingherji (1973) 91 ITR 544 (SC); CIT Vs. Walchand and Co. (1967) 65 ITR 381 (SC)]. So long as the transaction meets the specific conditions laid down in the Act, an attempt to negate it or interpret it by applying the yardsticks of rationality, prudence etc., which in any case is highly subjective, would not meet the ends of justice and basic tenets of judicial interpretation or tax administration. xiii. The Hon‘ble Cour…