CITVs T.S. HajeeMoosa& Co. (Mad) 153 ITR 422; Mysore Kirloskar Ltd. v. CIT(Kar)

122 ITR 839High Court1980#4182 most cited

What is CITVs T.S. HajeeMoosa& Co. (Mad) 153 ITR 422; Mysore Kirloskar Ltd. v. CIT(Kar) authority for?

Expenditure incurred for promoting business and earning profits is deductible under Section 37(1) even if not strictly necessary. The terms 'wholly' and 'exclusively' pertain to the quantum and purpose of expenditure, respectively, allowing tax authorities to examine the motive.

28

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Siddho Mal & Sons v. CIT · 122 ITR 839 · Section 37(1) · wholly and exclusively · business expenditure · motive of expenditure · quantum of expenditure · promoting business · earning profits · necessity of expenditure

Sections most often in play

Section 37Section 37(1)Section 80ICSection 115BBESection 131Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 80ib(4)section 115beproximate nexussection 153a proceedingsexplanation to section 37section 158bdprohibited by lawgoing concernbusiness expediencysection 91initial assessment yearsection 30

Judgments citing CITVs T.S. HajeeMoosa& Co. (Mad) 153 ITR 422; Mysore Kirloskar Ltd. v. CIT(Kar)

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(2), MUMBAI, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI vs. AGV CONSULTANTS , BORIVALI (E), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue\nstands dismissed

ITA 4878/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2025AY 2020-21
Section 131Section 133ASection 250Section 68

…e. The\nword \"wholly\" here refers to the quantum of expenditure. The word\n\"exclusively\" refers to the motive, objective and purpose of the expenditure\nand gives jurisdiction to the taxing authorities to examine these matters\n[Siddho Mal & Sons V/s. CIT 122 ITR 839, 844 (Del); Amritlal & Co.\nPr. Ltd. V/s. CIT 108 ITR 719, 729 (Bom)]. The expression \"wholly and\nexclusively\" in section 37(1) does not mean \"necessarily\". Ordinarily, it is\nfor the assessee to decide whether any expenditure should be incurred in\nthe course of its or his business. Such expenditure even may be incurred\nvoluntarily and wit…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(2), MUMBAI, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI vs. AGV CONSULTANTS , BORIVALI (E), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4872/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 131Section 133ASection 250Section 68

…assessee. The word "wholly" here refers to the quantum of expenditure. The word "exclusively" refers to the motive, objective and purpose of the expenditure and gives jurisdiction to the taxing authorities to examine these matters [Siddho Mal & Sons V/s. CIT 122 ITR 839, 844 (Del); Amritlal & Co. Pr. Ltd. V/s. CIT 108 ITR 719, 729 (Bom)]. The expression "wholly and exclusively" in section 37(1) does not mean "necessarily". Ordinarily, it is for the assessee to decide whether any expenditure should be incurred in the course of its or his business. Such expenditure even may be incurred voluntarily and without any…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(2), MUMBAI, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI vs. AGV CONSULTANTS , BORIVALI (E), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue\nstands dismissed

ITA 4866/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2025AY 2021-22
Section 131Section 133ASection 250Section 68

…e. The\nword \"wholly\" here refers to the quantum of expenditure. The word\n\"exclusively\" refers to the motive, objective and purpose of the expenditure\nand gives jurisdiction to the taxing authorities to examine these matters\n[Siddho Mal & Sons V/s. CIT 122 ITR 839, 844 (Del); Amritlal & Co.\nPr. Ltd. V/s. CIT 108 ITR 719, 729 (Bom)]. The expression "wholly and\nexclusively" in section 37(1) does not mean \"necessarily". Ordinarily, it is\nfor the assessee to decide whether any expenditure should be incurred in\nthe course of its or his business. Such expenditure even may be incurred\nvoluntarily and withou…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 5(2), MUMBAI, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI vs. AGV CONSULTANTS , BORIVALI (E), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4865/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 131Section 133ASection 250Section 68

…assessee. The word "wholly" here refers to the quantum of expenditure. The word "exclusively" refers to the motive, objective and purpose of the expenditure and gives jurisdiction to the taxing authorities to examine these matters [Siddho Mal & Sons V/s. CIT 122 ITR 839, 844 (Del); Amritlal & Co. Pr. Ltd. V/s. CIT 108 ITR 719, 729 (Bom)]. The expression "wholly and exclusively" in section 37(1) does not mean "necessarily". Ordinarily, it is for the assessee to decide whether any expenditure should be incurred in the course of its or his business. Such expenditure even may be incurred voluntarily and without any…

JAJOO ENTERPRISES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CC 4(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal for A

ITA 6343/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosainvs. Acit, Cc – 4(3) Jajoo Enterprises Ltd Flat No. 42/B, Jaihind Estate, 3Rd Floor, Ld.Dr. A.M Road, Maharashtra – 400002. Pan/Gir No. Aaacj9939L (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 145(3)Section 250Section 37(1)

…laim of interest on expending that amount. The mere fact that payment has been made under contract or agreement is not conclusive that the expenditure being paid off wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business." 8.15. In the case of Siddho Mal & Sons, 122 ITR 839, the Hon'ble Delhi HC has held as under:- "4. The word "wholly" in the above provision refers to the quantum of expenditure but the word "exclusively" appears to refer to the motive, objective, and propose of the expenditure and in our opinion gives jurisdiction to the concerned authorities to examine the expenditure from this stand point..." 8…

DCIT, DEHRADUN vs. M/S INSTITUTE OF CLINICAL RESEARCH (INDIA) SOCIETY,, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3927/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun15 Jan 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Rana, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 13Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 68

…rvices. Therefore, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that 70% of the fee collected paid as service charges was not excessive. The ld. counsel for the assessee relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Siddhomal & Sons 122 ITR 839. 13. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. We find that the ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition by relying upon similar deletion of disallowance in A.Y 2006-07 by the ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 25.06.2010 who held that the payment was reasonable. We find that the question of commercial expediency of…

INSTITUTE OF CLINICAL RESEARCH (INDIA) SOCIETY,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4207/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun15 Jan 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Rana, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 13Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 68

…rvices. Therefore, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that 70% of the fee collected paid as service charges was not excessive. The ld. counsel for the assessee relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Siddhomal & Sons 122 ITR 839. 13. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. We find that the ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition by relying upon similar deletion of disallowance in A.Y 2006-07 by the ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 25.06.2010 who held that the payment was reasonable. We find that the question of commercial expediency of…

SHRI RAMPRIYA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1946/HYD/2017[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Aug 2024AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1946/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 1999-2000) Shri Rampriya Developers Vs. Dy. C. I. T. (P) Ltd Circle 3(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aajcs6629P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/08/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ice of shares of SVCL. We, therefore, concentrate our examination and finding on this issue only. For examining this issue, we would like to have a discussion referring the following judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of Siddho Mal & Sons vs ITO (Delhi) 122 ITR 839 (Delhi) held as under: “The words falling for interpretation in the above provision are “… expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business….” -It may be recalled that the aforesaid words were borrowed and employed in the Indian Act by the Indian Income Tax (Amendment) Act, 1939, from the English Income Tax Act, 1918, corresponding…

SUBHASH CHANDER SEHGAL,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 19 (1) & (2), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7426/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3814/Del/2015 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 बनाम Dcit Subhash Chander Sehgal, Circle 19(1) Vs. Block A-3, Lsc, Janakpuri, New Delhi. Delhi. Pan No.Aatps8259C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 80ISection 8Q

…I.T.A.Nos.3814/Del/2015, 5420 & 7426/Del/2017 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3814/Del/2015 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 बनाम DCIT Subhash Chander Sehgal, Circle 19(1) Vs. Block A-3, LSC, Janakpuri, New Delhi. Delhi. PAN No.AATPS8259C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5420/Del/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 बनाम Subhash Chander Sehgal, DCIT Block A-3, LSC, Janakpuri, Vs. Circle 19(1) & 19(2) C/o RRA TAXINDIA, D-28, New Delhi. South Exten…

SUBHASH CHANDER SEHGAL,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 19(1) & 19(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5420/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3814/Del/2015 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 बनाम Dcit Subhash Chander Sehgal, Circle 19(1) Vs. Block A-3, Lsc, Janakpuri, New Delhi. Delhi. Pan No.Aatps8259C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 80ISection 8Q

…I.T.A.Nos.3814/Del/2015, 5420 & 7426/Del/2017 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3814/Del/2015 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 बनाम DCIT Subhash Chander Sehgal, Circle 19(1) Vs. Block A-3, LSC, Janakpuri, New Delhi. Delhi. PAN No.AATPS8259C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5420/Del/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 बनाम Subhash Chander Sehgal, DCIT Block A-3, LSC, Janakpuri, Vs. Circle 19(1) & 19(2) C/o RRA TAXINDIA, D-28, New Delhi. South Exten…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. SUBHASH CHANDER SEHGAL, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3814/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3814/Del/2015 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 बनाम Dcit Subhash Chander Sehgal, Circle 19(1) Vs. Block A-3, Lsc, Janakpuri, New Delhi. Delhi. Pan No.Aatps8259C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 80ISection 8Q

…I.T.A.Nos.3814/Del/2015, 5420 & 7426/Del/2017 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3814/Del/2015 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 बनाम DCIT Subhash Chander Sehgal, Circle 19(1) Vs. Block A-3, LSC, Janakpuri, New Delhi. Delhi. PAN No.AATPS8259C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5420/Del/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 बनाम Subhash Chander Sehgal, DCIT Block A-3, LSC, Janakpuri, Vs. Circle 19(1) & 19(2) C/o RRA TAXINDIA, D-28, New Delhi. South Exten…

GANESH GANPAT ALIM,MAHARASHTRA vs. ITO WASRD-3(3)(1), SURAT

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 41/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.40/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Ganesh Ganpat Alim, Vs. The Ito, B-205, Mahashakti Appartment, Ward -1(1)(1), Jai Shree Jahannath, Nr. Manvel Panda Surat. Road, Nr. Mahak City Virar East, Mumbai, Maharashtra – 401305. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ambpa5834F आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.41/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) Ganesh Ganpat Alim, Vs. The Ito, B-205, Mahashakti Appartment, Ward -3(3)(1), Jai Shree Jahannath, Nr. Manvel Panda Surat. Road, Nr. Mahak City Virar East, Mumbai, Maharashtra – 401305. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ambpa5834F Appellant By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) With Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr 22/03/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 08/05/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13, Are Directed Against The Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”], Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 144 R.W.S 147 & A Penalty Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”).

Section 144Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…siness. The word ‘wholly’ refer to the quantum of expenditure. The word ‘exclusively’ refer to the motive object and purpose of the expenditure. As per the ratio laid down in the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Siddhe mal & Sons vs CIT reported in 122 ITR 839 the Assessing Authorities are empowered to examine the expenditure from the aforesaid stand points. The law does not prescribe any quantitative test to find out whether the onus in a particular case has been duly discharged. It all depends on facts and circumstances of the case as laid down in the decision of Gauhati High court in the case of Ass…

GANESH GANPAT ALIM,MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), SURAT

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 40/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.40/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Ganesh Ganpat Alim, Vs. The Ito, B-205, Mahashakti Appartment, Ward -1(1)(1), Jai Shree Jahannath, Nr. Manvel Panda Surat. Road, Nr. Mahak City Virar East, Mumbai, Maharashtra – 401305. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ambpa5834F आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.41/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) Ganesh Ganpat Alim, Vs. The Ito, B-205, Mahashakti Appartment, Ward -3(3)(1), Jai Shree Jahannath, Nr. Manvel Panda Surat. Road, Nr. Mahak City Virar East, Mumbai, Maharashtra – 401305. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ambpa5834F Appellant By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) With Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr 22/03/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 08/05/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13, Are Directed Against The Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”], Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 144 R.W.S 147 & A Penalty Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”).

Section 144Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…siness. The word ‘wholly’ refer to the quantum of expenditure. The word ‘exclusively’ refer to the motive object and purpose of the expenditure. As per the ratio laid down in the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Siddhe mal & Sons vs CIT reported in 122 ITR 839 the Assessing Authorities are empowered to examine the expenditure from the aforesaid stand points. The law does not prescribe any quantitative test to find out whether the onus in a particular case has been duly discharged. It all depends on facts and circumstances of the case as laid down in the decision of Gauhati High court in the case of Ass…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BPTP LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2665/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2663/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 2664/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 2665/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Acit, Vs M/S Bptp Ltd., Central Circle-23, M-11, Middle Circle, Connaught Place, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccb2442A Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Bhagwani, Ca Revenue By : Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.04.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Bhagwani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR
Section 132(4)Section 132ASection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

…point of view of businessman has to be a prudent and reasonable point of view which is free from an apparent taint of excessiveness, collusiveness or colorable discretion. This is what Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held in the case of Siddho Mal & Sons vs. CIT 122 ITR 839 (Del). There are a number of other decisions of the Apex Court and the jurisdictional and other High Courts which support the view being taken by me on the facts and circumstances of the case.” 23. The AO relied on the seized documents which revealed payment of Rs. 27 lacs in cash as part of basic sale price (BSP) ITA Nos. 2663, 2664 & 2665/De…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BPTP LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2663/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2663/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 2664/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 2665/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Acit, Vs M/S Bptp Ltd., Central Circle-23, M-11, Middle Circle, Connaught Place, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccb2442A Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Bhagwani, Ca Revenue By : Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.04.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Bhagwani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR
Section 132(4)Section 132ASection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

…point of view of businessman has to be a prudent and reasonable point of view which is free from an apparent taint of excessiveness, collusiveness or colorable discretion. This is what Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held in the case of Siddho Mal & Sons vs. CIT 122 ITR 839 (Del). There are a number of other decisions of the Apex Court and the jurisdictional and other High Courts which support the view being taken by me on the facts and circumstances of the case.” 23. The AO relied on the seized documents which revealed payment of Rs. 27 lacs in cash as part of basic sale price (BSP) ITA Nos. 2663, 2664 & 2665/De…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(3)(6), SURAT vs. SHRI ABHISHEK NAVNITKUMAR DOSHI, SURAT

In the result the ground No

ITA 38/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 21/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) Abhishek Navnitkumar Doshi, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), 204/205, 2Nd Floor, 6/1911-12, Surat. Jin Shanti Building, Jada Khadi, Mahidharpura – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afhpd0064M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.38/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2012-13) The Ito, Ward-2(3)(6), Vs. Abhishek Navnitkumar Doshi, 204/205, 2Nd Floor, 6/1911-12, Surat. Jin Shanti Building, Jada Khadi, Mahidharpura – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afhpd0064M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28/12/2022 09/01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148

…eir relation to the fact of the particular case. The word 'exclusively' refers to the motive object and purpose of the expenditure. As per the ratio laid down in the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Siddho Mal & Sons Vs. CIT reported in 122 ITR 839 the Assessing Authorities are empowered to examine the expenditure. The law does not prescribe any quantitative test to find out whether the onus in a particular case has been duly discharged. It all depends on facts and circumstances of the case as laid down in the decision of Guwahati High Court in the case of Assam Pesticides and Agro Chemical…

ABHISHEK NAVNITKUMAR DOSHI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD. 2(3)(7), SURAT

In the result the ground No

ITA 21/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 21/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) Abhishek Navnitkumar Doshi, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), 204/205, 2Nd Floor, 6/1911-12, Surat. Jin Shanti Building, Jada Khadi, Mahidharpura – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afhpd0064M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.38/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2012-13) The Ito, Ward-2(3)(6), Vs. Abhishek Navnitkumar Doshi, 204/205, 2Nd Floor, 6/1911-12, Surat. Jin Shanti Building, Jada Khadi, Mahidharpura – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afhpd0064M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28/12/2022 09/01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148

…eir relation to the fact of the particular case. The word 'exclusively' refers to the motive object and purpose of the expenditure. As per the ratio laid down in the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Siddho Mal & Sons Vs. CIT reported in 122 ITR 839 the Assessing Authorities are empowered to examine the expenditure. The law does not prescribe any quantitative test to find out whether the onus in a particular case has been duly discharged. It all depends on facts and circumstances of the case as laid down in the decision of Guwahati High Court in the case of Assam Pesticides and Agro Chemical…

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 328/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…the act behind the expenditure. Unless such motive is solely for promoting the business, the expenditure will not qualify for deduction CITVs T.S. HajeeMoosa& Co. (Mad) 153 ITR 422; Mysore Kirloskar Ltd. Vs CIT(Kar) 166 ITR 836; Siddho Mal & Sons Vs ITO (Del) 122 ITR 839. • Burden on assessee to prove that expenses were laid out wholly and exclusively for purposes of business. The words "Expenditure incurred" used in 37 relates to expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for purposes of business. Goodlas Nerolac Paints Ltd. Vs ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru Page 33 of 41 CIT(Bom) 137…

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 327/BANG/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…the act behind the expenditure. Unless such motive is solely for promoting the business, the expenditure will not qualify for deduction CITVs T.S. HajeeMoosa& Co. (Mad) 153 ITR 422; Mysore Kirloskar Ltd. Vs CIT(Kar) 166 ITR 836; Siddho Mal & Sons Vs ITO (Del) 122 ITR 839. • Burden on assessee to prove that expenses were laid out wholly and exclusively for purposes of business. The words "Expenditure incurred" used in 37 relates to expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for purposes of business. Goodlas Nerolac Paints Ltd. Vs ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru Page 33 of 41 CIT(Bom) 137…

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 326/BANG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…the act behind the expenditure. Unless such motive is solely for promoting the business, the expenditure will not qualify for deduction CITVs T.S. HajeeMoosa& Co. (Mad) 153 ITR 422; Mysore Kirloskar Ltd. Vs CIT(Kar) 166 ITR 836; Siddho Mal & Sons Vs ITO (Del) 122 ITR 839. • Burden on assessee to prove that expenses were laid out wholly and exclusively for purposes of business. The words "Expenditure incurred" used in 37 relates to expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for purposes of business. Goodlas Nerolac Paints Ltd. Vs ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru Page 33 of 41 CIT(Bom) 137…

Showing 1–20 of 28 · Page 1 of 2