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.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Walchand & Co.?

314 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Walchand & Co. (65 ITR 381), spanning 2008 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Walchand & Co. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 14A, Section 148, Section 147, Section 40A(2)(b), Section 40A(3).

CIT v. Walchand & Co. (65 ITR 381)

DCIT, Corporate Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. Gridco Limited, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 346/CTK/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack20 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2013-14 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Dcit, Dcit, Corporate Circle Corporate Circle - Vs. Grid Corporation Of O Grid Corporation Of Orissa 1(1), Bhubaneswar. 1(1), Bhubaneswar. Ltd., Ltd., Janapath, Janapath, Bhubanesw Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aabcg 5398 P (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri Ved Jain/P. Venugopal Rao, Ars Venugopal Rao, Ars Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/0 02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/0 /02/2023 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: S/Shri Ved Jain/P. Venugopal Rao, ARsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam

…e Company has not acted as a prudential businessman as per the ratio P a g e 5 | 12 Assessment Year : 2013-14 laid down in the cases of Voltamp Transformers (P) Ltd. vs. CIT [1981) 129 ITR 105/5 Taxman 253 (Guj.); and CIT vs. Walchand & Co. (P.) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 (SC) where it was observed that yardstick will have to be taken from the businessman point of view but the businessman must be a prudent businessman. 29. The Commercial expediency would include such purpose as is expected by the assessee to advance its business interest and may include measures taken for preservation, protection or advancement of…

ACIT Cir -4(2) (1), Thane vs. M/S. Mukti Gold Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose and the assessee’s C

ITA 1804/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1804/Mum/2022 (A.Y. 2017-18) ACIT, Cir-4(2)(2), Mumbai M/s Mukti Gold Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 642, A-103,104,105, 6th Floor, Glitz mall, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Kalbadevi Road, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020 99, Vithalwadi, Mumbai-400002 PAN AAHCM9068J (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 116/Mum/2022 (A.Y. 2017-18) M/s Mukti Gold Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Cir-4(2)(2), Mumbai A-103,104,105, Room No. 642, Glitz mall, 6th Floor, Kalbadevi Road, Aaykar Bhavan, 99, Vithalwadi, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400002 Mu…

Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Jabalpur vs. Shri Deepak Singh Banafer, Jabalpur

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed on the aforesaid terms

ITA 92/JAB/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur11 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Sh. L.L. Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Shiv Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 54B

…ssue, if necessary, appropriate directions to the authority against whose decision the appeal is preferred to (even) dispose of the whole or any part of the matter afresh. Even otherwise, the Tribunal is, as explained in CIT v. Walchand & Co. (P.) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 (SC), bound to, in deciding a matter before it, deal with and determine the questions that arise out of the subject-matter of the appeal in the light of the evidence, and consistently with the justice of the case. This aspect, it would be noted, is related to the agricultural income being the assessee’s only source of income, a ‘fact’ that found f…

Thrivei Earthmovers Pvt. Ltd., Salem vs. ACIT, Central Circle (I/C), Salem

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 674/CHNY/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: Shri R. Mohan Reddy, CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

…ted 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 rule that expenditure can only be justified if t…

M/S Toyota Kirloskar Motors (P) Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Ltu Circle-1, Bangalore

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

ITA 150/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Sri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Sunil Kumar Singh, D.R

Section 40A(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.150/Bang/2017 & 320/Bang/2019 Assessment Year : 2012-2013 & 2014-2015 M/s. Toyota Kirloskar Motor (P) Ltd. Plot No.21, Bidadi Industrial Area Ramanagar District ACIT LTU Circle-1 Vs. Bngalore 562 109 Bangalore PAN NO : AAACT5415B APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Sri Padam Chand Khincha, A.R. Respondent by : Sri Sunil Kumar Singh, D.R. Date of Hearing : 27.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 02.12.2022 O R D E R PER LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEM…

DCIT-2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. The Indian Hotels Company Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3022/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Kanchan Kaushal, Sh. PratikFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 92C

…ining whether the expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of the business the reasonableness of the expenditure has to be judged from the point of view of the businessman and not the Revenue [See CIT v. Walchand and Co. (P) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 (SC); J.K. Woollen Manufacturers u. CIT [1969] 72 ITR 622 (SC); Aluminimum Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT [1972] 86 TTR 11 (SC) and CIT v. Panipat Woollen and General Mills Co. Ltd. [1976] 103 ITR 66 (SC)]." 45. Above principles are fully applicable to the facts of the present case. Further there is nothing to show that agreement to advance loan…

The Indian Hotels Company Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir. 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2308/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Kanchan Kaushal, Sh. PratikFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 92C

…ining whether the expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of the business the reasonableness of the expenditure has to be judged from the point of view of the businessman and not the Revenue [See CIT v. Walchand and Co. (P) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 (SC); J.K. Woollen Manufacturers u. CIT [1969] 72 ITR 622 (SC); Aluminimum Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT [1972] 86 TTR 11 (SC) and CIT v. Panipat Woollen and General Mills Co. Ltd. [1976] 103 ITR 66 (SC)]." 45. Above principles are fully applicable to the facts of the present case. Further there is nothing to show that agreement to advance loan…

Shri Vijay Kumar Rohda, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(4), Raipur

In the result appeal of the assessee allowed

ITA 54/RPR/2018[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Oct 2022AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.54/Rpr/2018 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014) Shri Vijay Rohra, Vs Ito, Ward-1(4), Raipur Prop. M/S Laxmi Finance, Shop No.15, Dharam Market, Station Road, Raipur Pan No. : Acmpr 6057 J (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N.Singh, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)

…expended 'not 8 of necessity' and with a view to a direct and immediate benefit to the trade, but voluntarily and on the ground of commercial expediency, and in order indirectly to facilitate the carrying on of the business." 2.8. Walchand & Co Pvt Ltd (1967) 65 ITR 381 (SC) and reiterated that in commercial expediency for determining whether an expenditure was wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business, the reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from die pods of view of the business and not of the revenue as held in JK Steel & Industries Ltd (1978) 112 ITR 215 (Cal). The above disallowance…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Jabalpur vs. Smt. Sheela Rani Jain, Jabalpur

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

ITA 195/JAB/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur10 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Sh. Shiv Kumar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: None

Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 263Section 54B

…fact-finding body under the Act, and is to, accordingly, deal with and determine questions which arise out of the subject-matter of the appeal in the light of the evidence, and consistently with the justice of the case (CIT v. Walchand & Co. (P.) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 (SC)). The Tribunal is, thus, in deciding an appeal before it, not confined to the grounds set forth in the memorandum of appeal or even that taken with its leave (rule 11 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963). As explained by the Apex Court in Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 232 (SC), even rules 11 & 27 of the Tribunal Ru…

Asst CIT Cir 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. The Indian Hotels Companies Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2408/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. Kanchan Kaushal, Sh. PratikFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 92C

…ining whether the expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of the business the reasonableness of the expenditure has to be judged from the point of view of the businessman and not the Revenue [See CIT v. Walchand and Co. (P) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 (SC); J.K. Woollen Manufacturers u. CIT [1969] 72 ITR 622 (SC); Aluminimum Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT [1972] 86 TTR 11 (SC) and CIT v. Panipat Woollen and General Mills Co. Ltd. [1976] 103 ITR 66 (SC)]." Above principles are fully applicable to the facts of the present case. Further there is nothing to show that agreement to advance loan wa…

The Indian Hotels Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2348/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. Kanchan Kaushal, Sh. PratikFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 92C

…ining whether the expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of the business the reasonableness of the expenditure has to be judged from the point of view of the businessman and not the Revenue [See CIT v. Walchand and Co. (P) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 (SC); J.K. Woollen Manufacturers u. CIT [1969] 72 ITR 622 (SC); Aluminimum Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT [1972] 86 TTR 11 (SC) and CIT v. Panipat Woollen and General Mills Co. Ltd. [1976] 103 ITR 66 (SC)]." Above principles are fully applicable to the facts of the present case. Further there is nothing to show that agreement to advance loan wa…