DCIT v. Bharat C. Gandhi

46 SOT 258Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2011#15882 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144B Section 250 Section 37(1)Section 436 Section 483

Judgments citing DCIT v. Bharat C. Gandhi

Nirman Sonestaa Developers, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1536/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sri Subramanian, D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 37Section 37(1)

…CIT [17 DTR 281 (P&H HC)] – Routine business lapses not involving moral turpitude not hit by Explanation to Section 37(1). Kaira Can Company Ltd. [32 DTR 485] – Regularization charges not considered penal and hence allowable. DCIT v. Bharat C. Gandhi [(2011) 46 SOT 258 (Mum).]. EON Hadapsar Infrastructure (P) Ltd. [(2016) 159 ITD 532 (Pune-Trib.)] Dr. T.A. Qureshi v. CIT [(2006) 287 ITR 547 (SC)] – Supreme Court distinguished between business loss and penal expense; Explanation to Sec.37 applies only to expenses and not to loss under ordinary business principles. 7. The CIT(A) has erred in equating municipal re…

ACIT, Circle - 1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Rungta Sons (P) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2200/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jun 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble] I.T.A. No. 2200/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cc-1(3), Kolkata............................................……....…..Appellant Vs. M/S. Rungta Sons Pvt. Ltd......……………...................…..…………………………………………....…..Respondent 8A, Express Tower 42A, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata – 700 017 [Pan : Aabcr 2356 N]

Section 250Section 37Section 4Section 72

…loading of wagons and therefore, they are in the nature of normal business expenditure allowable u/s.37. The Ld. AR has relied on the following case laws I.T.A. No. 2200/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/s. Rungta Sons Pvt. Ltd. l.DCIT Vs Bharat Gandhi (46 SOT 258) Mumbai IT AT’ 2. Western Coalfields Ltd. Vs ACIT(124 TTJ 659) Nagpur l.DCIT Vs Bharat Gandhi (46 SOT 258) Mumbai IT AT’ 2. Western Coalfields Ltd. Vs ACIT(124 TTJ 659) Nagpur l.DCIT Vs Bharat Gandhi (46 SOT 258) Mumbai IT AT’ 2. Western Coalfields Ltd. Vs ACIT(124 TTJ 659) Nagpur ITAT, 3) Agrawal Roadlines P Ltd. Vs DCIT(129 TTJ 49) Ah ITAT, 3) A…

Venkatesh Logistics Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. JCIT, Range - 5, Kolkata

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 233/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37

…traffic authority for having transported the goods in question beyond the specified dimensional vehicles. They hold the impugned claim to be in the nature of penalty payment not allowable u/s 37 of the Act. This tribunal’s co-ordinate bench’s decision (2011) 46 SOT 258 (Mum) DCIT vs. Bharat C. Gandhi holds similar cases and fines as necessary business expenditure not in the nature of penalty. I therefore delete the impugned disallowance / addition of ₹18,11,509/-. This first substantive ground is accepted. 4. The assessee’s second substantive ground seeks to delete vehicle trip expense disallowance of ₹81,20,30…

DCIT 2(2), Mumbai vs. Paresh Construction & Foundations P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6850/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal - DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण यकर अपीलीय अिधकरण यकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई यकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “सी मुंबई सी सी” ” ” ” खंडपीठ सी खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal “C” Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"", लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं रा मलाल नेगी, "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं रा रामलाल नेगी रा मलाल नेगी मलाल नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य Before S/Sh. Rajendra, Accountant Member & Ramlal Negi, Judicial Member आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A. No. 6850/Mum/2012, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year:2008-09 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण…

Lift & Shift India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 4521/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

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

…art of assessee’s business itself but it is not in the nature of penalty / fine falling explanation to section 37(1) of the Act. We find that this issue has to be considered by Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. Bharat C. Gandhi (2011) 46 SOT 258 (Mum) reads as under “8. We have considered the issue. As rightly considered by the CIT(A) fees paid is not in violation of law but an option given to the assessee to pay compounding fees for transporting over dimensional consignments generally termed as over loading charges. This issue was elaborately discussed by the ITAT in the case of M/s. Cha…

Lift & Shift India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT Cen -IV, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 5606/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

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