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 367,837 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.

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S. Angel Infrastructure Private Limited, Jaipur

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

ITA 761/JPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Dec 2018AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta
Section 147Section 151

…question the transaction on the ground that the same was not prudent and consequently held as sham. The ld. counsel has supported his contention with the following decisions: (i) CIT Vs. Malayalam Plantations Ltd. 53 ITR 140 (SC) (ii) CIT Vs. Walchand & Co. 65 ITR 381 (SC). 18. On the other hand, the ld CIT-DR has submitted that the loss claimed by the assessee is not permissible as per the provisions of the Act as the basic nature of the transaction does not imply as transfer of capital asset or short term capital loss. In fact, it is forfeiture of the money paid by the assessee for allotment of shares as…

M/S Angel Infrastructure (P) Ltd., Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

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

ITA 464/JPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Dec 2018AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta
Section 147Section 151

…question the transaction on the ground that the same was not prudent and consequently held as sham. The ld. counsel has supported his contention with the following decisions: (i) CIT Vs. Malayalam Plantations Ltd. 53 ITR 140 (SC) (ii) CIT Vs. Walchand & Co. 65 ITR 381 (SC). 18. On the other hand, the ld CIT-DR has submitted that the loss claimed by the assessee is not permissible as per the provisions of the Act as the basic nature of the transaction does not imply as transfer of capital asset or short term capital loss. In fact, it is forfeiture of the money paid by the assessee for allotment of shares as…

Nissin Brake India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 3, Gurgaon

ITA 6366/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: S/Shri Himanshu Sinha &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay I. Bara, CIT DR
Section 143Section 144CSection 234BSection 271(1)(c)

…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. Terex Equipment Private Limited, Noida vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1882/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2009-10] Terex Equipment Pvt. Ltd Vs. The A.C.I.T [Formerly Terex Vectra Equipment Company Circle 18)(1) Private Limited] New Delhi Plot No. 22, Udyog Vihar Greater Noida, Po Surajpur. Pan : Aabct 8105 H [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 25.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.11.2018

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ramanjaneyulu, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘I-1’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER [A.Y 2009-10] Terex Equipment Pvt. Ltd Vs. The A.C.I.T [Formerly Terex Vectra Equipment Company Circle 18)(1) Private Limited] New Delhi Plot No. 22, Udyog Vihar GREater Noida, PO Surajpur. PAN : AABCT 8105 H [Appellant] [Respondent] Date of Hearing : 25.10.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 14.11.2018 Assessee by : Shri Ved Jain, Adv Shri Rishabh Jain, CA Shri Ashish Chadha, CA Revenue by : Shri Ramanjaneyulu, Sr. DR ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTA…

Reebok India Company, Gurugram vs. JCIT (OSD), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1406/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Dr. Mitha Lal Meena(Ita No.1406/Del/2018) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Reebok India Company, V. Jcit (Osd), The Arena Plot No.53, Sector- New Delhi. 32, Institutional Area, Gurugram, Haryana. Tan/Pan: Aaacr 3007K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri Ravi Sharma & AnubhavFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Chaudhary, CIT-DR
Section 254

…that it is a settled law that the Revenue cannot sit into the shoe of the assessee and decide what is prudent for the business. In this regard.,we place reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Walchand & Co. (P.) Ltd [1967 ]65 ITR 381, wherein it was held that "in applying the test of commercial expediency for determining whether an expenditure was wholly and exclusively for business, the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of revenue". 14.13 We further note that it is on the basis of the same agreement the royalty was paid in earli…

The Income-Tax Officer, Amritsar vs. Sh Jagjit Singh S/O. Sh. Amrik Singh, Amritsar

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

ITA 363/ASR/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Oct 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. No. 363/(Asr)/2011 Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Deb (D.R.)For Respondent: Sh. P. N. Arora (Adv.)
Section 143(3)

…clarify that our decision, in answering the issue arising, is guided primarily by, apart from the decision in the case of Kapurchand Shrimal (supra), with which judgment the impugned order is in conflict, the decision in CIT v. Walchand & Co. Pvt. Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 (SC), clarifying that the tribunal is to deal with and determine all the questions which arise out of the subject matter of the appeal, in light of the evidence and consistently with the justice of the case (pg. 384). Tax proceedings, it may be noted, are not adversarial in nature. 5.5 We decide accordingly. 6. In the result, the Revenue’s appea…

Cairn India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 263/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2011-12] & [A.Y 2012-13] Cairn India Ltd., Vs. The A.C.I.T, Dlf Atria Building, Circle-1(1), Jacaranda Marg, N Block, Gurgaon. Dlf City Phase Ii, Gurgaon. [Pan: Aaccc 8799D] [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 17.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.10.2018 Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv Shri Ravi Sharma, Adv

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Srinivasa Rao, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘I-1’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER [A.Y 2011-12] & [A.Y 2012-13] Cairn India Ltd., Vs. The A.C.I.T, DLF Atria Building, Circle-1(1), Jacaranda Marg, N Block, Gurgaon. DLF City Phase II, Gurgaon. [PAN: AACCC 8799D] [Appellant] [Respondent] Date of Hearing : 17.10.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 24.10.2018 Assessee by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv Shri Ravi Sharma, Adv Revenue by : Shri Srinivasa Rao, Sr. DR ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, The above two appeals by the assessee pre…

DCIT, Cir-11, Kolkata vs. M/S Sika India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part and in appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 402/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Oct 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi]

Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…action. The Hon'ble High Court after examining the facts of the case held as under: 10 I.T.A. No. 402/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10 I.T.A. No. 393/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Sika India Pvt. Ltd "19...... 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. . . 22. Even Rule 10B(1)(a) does not autho…

Sika India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-11, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part and in appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 393/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Oct 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi]

Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…action. The Hon'ble High Court after examining the facts of the case held as under: 10 I.T.A. No. 402/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10 I.T.A. No. 393/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Sika India Pvt. Ltd "19...... 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. . . 22. Even Rule 10B(1)(a) does not autho…

DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. at & S India Pvt. Ltd., Mysore

In the result, all three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 975/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. J.Sudhakar Reddy & Sh. A.T.Varkey

…alue of an international transaction to nil when he was supposed to have determined the arm's length price of the international transaction. The Hon'ble High Court after examining the facts of the case held as under: "19…… 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. 22. Even Rule 10B(1)(a) does not authoriz…

DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata vs. M/S at & S Pvt. Ltd., Karnataka

In the result, all three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 515/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Oct 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Sh. J.Sudhakar Reddy & Sh. A.T.Varkey

…alue of an international transaction to nil when he was supposed to have determined the arm's length price of the international transaction. The Hon'ble High Court after examining the facts of the case held as under: "19…… 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. 22. Even Rule 10B(1)(a) does not authoriz…

Kirloskar Brothers Limited, Pune vs. DCIT, Range 11(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 2612/PUN/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 2611 & 2612/Pun/2012 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2002-03 & 2003-04 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri Sharad ShahFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha
Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण बी” "यायपीठ पुणे म" । आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण बी बी "यायपीठ पुणे म" । "यायपीठ पुणे म" । "यायपीठ पुणे म" । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE "ी डी डी डी. क"णाकरा राव डी लेखा सद"य, एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी, "याियक सद"य के सम" "ी "ी "ी क"णाकरा राव क"णाकरा राव,लेखा सद"य क"णाकरा राव लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी "याियक सद"य के सम" "याियक सद"य के सम" "याियक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos. 2611 & 2612/PUN/2012 आयकर अपील सं आयकर…

Kirloskar Brothers Limited, Pune vs. DCIT, Circle 11(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 2611/PUN/2012[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 2611 & 2612/Pun/2012 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2002-03 & 2003-04 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri Sharad ShahFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha
Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण बी” "यायपीठ पुणे म" । आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण बी बी "यायपीठ पुणे म" । "यायपीठ पुणे म" । "यायपीठ पुणे म" । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE "ी डी डी डी. क"णाकरा राव डी लेखा सद"य, एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी, "याियक सद"य के सम" "ी "ी "ी क"णाकरा राव क"णाकरा राव,लेखा सद"य क"णाकरा राव लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी "याियक सद"य के सम" "याियक सद"य के सम" "याियक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos. 2611 & 2612/PUN/2012 आयकर अपील सं आयकर…

M/S. Eaton Power Quality Private Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 1373/PUN/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Vishal KalraFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 143(3)

…laced on the following case laws wherein the Courts !Tribunals have consistently have consistently held that the Revenue cannot question the commercial expediency of the assessee:  SA Builders Ltd vs CIT [2007] 288 ITR 1 (SC)  CIT vs Walchand & Co Ltd [1967]65 ITR 381 (SC)  CIT vs B. Dalmia Cement Ltd [2002] 254 ITR 377 (Del)  CIT vs Dhanrajgiri Raja Narasingirji [1973] 91 ITR 544 (SC)  CIT vs Oracle India (P) Ltd [2011] 199 TAXMAN 181 (Delhi)  Hive Communication Private Ltd vs CIT [2013]353 ITR 200 (Del) 4.13 It may also be pointed out that recently the CBDT vide notification G.S.R. 557(E) dated 7th June,…

M/S Eaton Power Quality P.Ltd., Pune vs. ACIT, Pune

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 119/PUN/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Vishal KalraFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 143(3)

…laced on the following case laws wherein the Courts !Tribunals have consistently have consistently held that the Revenue cannot question the commercial expediency of the assessee:  SA Builders Ltd vs CIT [2007] 288 ITR 1 (SC)  CIT vs Walchand & Co Ltd [1967]65 ITR 381 (SC)  CIT vs B. Dalmia Cement Ltd [2002] 254 ITR 377 (Del)  CIT vs Dhanrajgiri Raja Narasingirji [1973] 91 ITR 544 (SC)  CIT vs Oracle India (P) Ltd [2011] 199 TAXMAN 181 (Delhi)  Hive Communication Private Ltd vs CIT [2013]353 ITR 200 (Del) 4.13 It may also be pointed out that recently the CBDT vide notification G.S.R. 557(E) dated 7th June,…

ACIT, Circle-1 vs. Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 374/DEL/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2018AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Smt Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shefali Swaroop, CIT- DR

…chair of the business man and decide how much expenditure is reasonable having regard to the circumstances of the case. For this proposition, we draw support from the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the following cases : 1. CIT vs. Walchand & Co.: 65 ITR 381 (SC) 2. J.K. Woollen Manufacturers vs. CIT: 72 ITR 612 (SC) 3. Hero Cycles Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 379 ITR 347 (SC) 46. As mentioned elsewhere, similar additions were deleted by the first appellate authority in earlier A.Y and also in subsequent A.Y. Considering the facts in totality, we do not find any error or infirmity in the findings of the CIT(…

Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, Range-I

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 357/DEL/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2018AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Smt Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shefali Swaroop, CIT- DR

…chair of the business man and decide how much expenditure is reasonable having regard to the circumstances of the case. For this proposition, we draw support from the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the following cases : 1. CIT vs. Walchand & Co.: 65 ITR 381 (SC) 2. J.K. Woollen Manufacturers vs. CIT: 72 ITR 612 (SC) 3. Hero Cycles Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 379 ITR 347 (SC) 46. As mentioned elsewhere, similar additions were deleted by the first appellate authority in earlier A.Y and also in subsequent A.Y. Considering the facts in totality, we do not find any error or infirmity in the findings of the CIT(…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jammu vs. M/S Kashmir Steel Rolling Mills, Jammu

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for AY 2006-07 is allowed, while that of the Revenue for AY 2005-06, dismissed

ITA 571/ASR/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 Jul 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 544/(Asr)/2016 Assessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. R. K. Gupta (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Bhawani Shankar (D.R.)
Section 154Section 80Section 80I

…e larger objectives for which the refund stands granted. Implicit therein is the treatment of the refund as a separate and independent source of receipt, an issue which is largely factual. Even though the Apex Court in CIT v. Walchand and Co. (P.) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 (SC) explained that the tribunal is to deal with and determine all the questions which arise out of the subject matter of appeal, in light of the evidence and consistently with the justice of the case, we do not, for that reason, consider it proper to raise this aspect of the matter. We, accordingly, have no hesitation in accepting the assessee’s…

Kashmir Steel Rolling Milss., Jammu vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax .Central Circle, Jammu

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for AY 2006-07 is allowed, while that of the Revenue for AY 2005-06, dismissed

ITA 544/ASR/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 544/(Asr)/2016 Assessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. R. K. Gupta (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Bhawani Shankar (D.R.)
Section 154Section 80Section 80I

…e larger objectives for which the refund stands granted. Implicit therein is the treatment of the refund as a separate and independent source of receipt, an issue which is largely factual. Even though the Apex Court in CIT v. Walchand and Co. (P.) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 (SC) explained that the tribunal is to deal with and determine all the questions which arise out of the subject matter of appeal, in light of the evidence and consistently with the justice of the case, we do not, for that reason, consider it proper to raise this aspect of the matter. We, accordingly, have no hesitation in accepting the assessee’s…

M/S. Hyderabad Distilleries & Wineries Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad

Appeal are allowed

ITA 740/HYD/2012[2008-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2018AY 2008-19

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Ms Suchitra Kamblem/S Hyderabad Distilleries & Vs Acit Wineries Pvt. Ltd. A-4, Ida, Uppal Circle-2(2) Hyderabad-39 Hyderabad Aaach2679B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 5

…. CIT 118 ITR 200 (SC) 9ITA No 740/Del/2012 • S. A. Builders Ltd. vs. CIT 288 ITR 1 (SC) The Ld. AR also relied upon the following decisions in reference to reasonableness of expenditure to be seen from point of view of business: • CIT vs. Walchand & Co. 65 ITR 381 (SC) • J. K. Woollen Manufacturers vs. CIT 72 ITR 612 (SC) • Aluminium Corpn. Of India Ltd. vs. CIT 86 ITR 11 (SC) The Ld. AR submitted that the tests that have evolved for determining the nature of income derived from netting of assets on a distinguishing of the decisions referred hereinabove may be stated as under: (i) no precise test can be l…