Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

379 ITR 347Supreme Court of India2015#208 most cited

What is Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

The Revenue cannot substitute its judgment for that of a businessman regarding the necessity or reasonableness of an expenditure. If an expense is incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes, it is deductible, and the Revenue cannot question its commercial expediency.

361

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT · 379 ITR 347 · 16 SCC 359 · Section 36(1)(iii) · commercial expediency · business expediency · disallowance of expenditure · interest-free advances · corporate guarantee · wholly and exclusively for business · Revenue's armchair approach · sales promotion expenditure

Also reported as

16 SCC 359

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 147Section 1961Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 132Section 142(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

interest free advancescommercial expediencysection 36(1)(iii)corporate guaranteebusiness expediencysection 36book profitssection 36(1)arm's length pricetransfer pricing adjustmentassociated enterprisessection 92c

Judgments citing Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

M/S Overseas Leathers, Ranipet vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 962/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 962/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Overseas Leathers, Deputy Commissioner Of No. 131, Sidco Industrial V. Income-Tax, Estates, Central Circle -3(3), Sipcot, Ranipet, Ranipet New No. 46, Old No. 108, District – 632 403 Mahatma Gandhi Road, [Pan: Aaafo-0375-L] Chennai – 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. D. Anand, Advocate : Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2023

For Appellant: Shri. D. Anand, Advocate
Section 115BSection 69B

…e assessee. Therefore once commercial expediency for giving the advance is established, no part of the interest expenditure can be disallowed in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of S.A. Builders 288 ITR 1 and Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 379 ITR 347 where it was held that the Revenue cannot justifiably claim to put itself in the arm- chair of the businessman or in the position of the Board of Directors and assume the role to decide how much is reasonable expenditure having regard to the circumstances of the case. If further held that no businessman can be compelled to maximize his profit and…

ACIT, Circle- 5(1), New Delhi vs. Blue Coast Hotels Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 287/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2016-17 Acit, Vs. Blue Coast Hotels Ltd., Circle-5(1), 415-417, Antriksh Bhawan, New Delhi. 22, Kg Marg, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacm0037G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate & Shri Aman Garg, Ca Revenue By : Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2023 Order Per C.M. Garg, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-2, New Delhi, Dated 21.10.2019, For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Whether The Ld Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Appreciating The Fact That There Was No Commercial Expediency Due To Which The Assessee Had Granted Interest Free Loans To Its Subsidiaries & Bore The Burden Of Interest For Their Sake. 2. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Whether The Ld Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.10,20,24,116/- Made U/S 14A Of The It Act, 1961 Without Appreciating The Facts Mentioned By The Ao For Disallowing Such Amount On The

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT, DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 ACIT, Vs. Blue Coast Hotels Ltd., Circle-5(1), 415-417, Antriksh Bhawan, New Delhi. 22, KG Marg, New Delhi. PAN: AAACM0037G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate & Shri Aman Garg, CA Revenue by : Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 16.01.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 17.03.2023 ORDER PER C.M. GARG, JM: This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-2, New Delhi, dated 2…

M/S. Rmz Hotels Private Limited, Bangalore vs. National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 954/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 234Section 255Section 255(3)Section 36

…sed by the subsidiary for some business purposes, the assessee would, in our opinion, ordinarily be entitled to deduction of interest on its borrowed loans.” (v) Decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of M/s. Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. reported in 379 ITR 347, wherein held as under: “A perusal of the order passed by the High Court would reveal! that the High Court has not at all discussed the facts which were established on record pertaining to the interest free advance given to subsidiary company as well as loans given to its own Directors at interest at the rate of 10 per cent (para 9). On the othe…

DCIT 3 (1), Bhopal vs. M/S Narmada Switchgear P Ltd, Bhopal

Accordingly, this ground is also dismissed

ITA 307/IND/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2013-14 Dcit-3(1) M/S Narmada Switchgear Bhopal Pvt. Ltd., बनाम/ Plot No.3, Industrial Estate, Govindpura Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aabcn0635N Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ca Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 09.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 03.02.2023

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 DCIT-3(1) M/s Narmada Switchgear Bhopal Pvt. Ltd., बनाम/ Plot No.3, Industrial Estate, Govindpura Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) PAN: AABCN0635N Assessee by Shri S.S. Deshpande, CA Revenue by Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 09.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement 03.02.2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 31.08.2020passed by lear…

Global Consultants & Designers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 11(4), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 1424/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.1424/Del/2019, A.Y. 2015-16

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…r business expediency of incurring any expenditure is to be seen from the assessee’s point of view and the Revenue cannot justifiably put itself in the arm-chair of the businessman 9. SA Builders v. CIT : 288 ITR 1 (SC) 10. Hero Cycles Limited v. CIT (SC) : 379 ITR 347 (SC) 11. J.K. Woollen Manufacturers v. CIT : 72 ITR 612 (SC) Re: Tribunal can give finding or direction in relation to other assessment year 12. JCIT v. Mukund Ltd. : 291 ITR 249 (AT) (Mum) 13. Perfect Equipments v. DCIT : 85 ITD 50 (Ahd.) 14. MMTC Limited v. ACIT : ITA No. 5147, 5166/Del/2016 (Del Trib.) ITA No. 1424.Del.2019 M/s. Global…

Akkavila Sajeenan Aggregates, Kollam vs. The ACIT Central Circle, Kollam

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 694/COCH/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 30Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH : COCHIN BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Ms. PADMAVATHY S., ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.693 & 694/Coch/2022 Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 Akkavila Sajeenan Aggregates, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner TP/IX/531-538, Mukathala, of Income Tax, Kollam – 691 577. Central Circle, PAN : AAXFA 8136C Kollam. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Surendranath Rao, CA Revenue by : Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR Date of hearing : 12.01.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 20.01.2023 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S, Accountant Member: These two appeals are against the common…

Akkavila Sajeenan Aggregates, Kollam vs. The ACIT Central Circle, Kollam

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 693/COCH/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 30Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH : COCHIN BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Ms. PADMAVATHY S., ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.693 & 694/Coch/2022 Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 Akkavila Sajeenan Aggregates, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner TP/IX/531-538, Mukathala, of Income Tax, Kollam – 691 577. Central Circle, PAN : AAXFA 8136C Kollam. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Surendranath Rao, CA Revenue by : Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR Date of hearing : 12.01.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 20.01.2023 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S, Accountant Member: These two appeals are against the common…

Jwil Infra Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-13(2), New Delhi

ITA 7789/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

Section 143(3)

…as bidder and subsidiary company was merely executing the project then that was sufficient explanation of the commercial expediency. Reliance was also placed on the following judgment : “1. S.A.Builders Vs. CIT 288 ITR 1 (SC) 2. Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 379 ITR 347 (SC) 3. CIT vs. Orissa Cement Ltd. 252 ITR 878 (Del.) 4. CIT vs. Tin Box Co. 260 ITR 637 (Del) 5. PCIT vs. Basti Sugars Mills Ltd. 408 ITR 184 (Delhi)] 6. DCIT vs. Raghuvir Singh Synthetics Ltd. 397 ITR 1 7. CIT (LTU) Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. 410 ITR 466 8. CIT vs. Vegetable Products Ltd. 88 ITR 192(SC) 6. Giving thoughtful consideratio…

M/S. Sahyog Homes Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 1922/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Rifaur Rahman (

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40

…essee further contended that the said transaction was carried out through banking channel and relied upon the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court 8 Sahyog Homes Ltd ITAs 1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 & 1922/M/2021 in case of Hero Cycles P. Ltd vs CIT (2015) 379 ITR 347 (SC). The Ld.AR for the assessee further contended that it was an inadvertent error on the part of the assessee to reflect the same in the books of account and as such disallowance confirmed by Ld.CIT(A) is liable to be deleted. 12. The Ld.DR for the Revenue to repel argument advanced by Ld.AR for the assessee contended that the interest alleged…

M/S. Sahyog Homes Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 1921/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Rifaur Rahman (

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40

…essee further contended that the said transaction was carried out through banking channel and relied upon the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court 8 Sahyog Homes Ltd ITAs 1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 & 1922/M/2021 in case of Hero Cycles P. Ltd vs CIT (2015) 379 ITR 347 (SC). The Ld.AR for the assessee further contended that it was an inadvertent error on the part of the assessee to reflect the same in the books of account and as such disallowance confirmed by Ld.CIT(A) is liable to be deleted. 12. The Ld.DR for the Revenue to repel argument advanced by Ld.AR for the assessee contended that the interest alleged…

M/S. Sahyog Homes Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT -11(1) (2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 1920/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Rifaur Rahman (

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40

…essee further contended that the said transaction was carried out through banking channel and relied upon the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court 8 Sahyog Homes Ltd ITAs 1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 & 1922/M/2021 in case of Hero Cycles P. Ltd vs CIT (2015) 379 ITR 347 (SC). The Ld.AR for the assessee further contended that it was an inadvertent error on the part of the assessee to reflect the same in the books of account and as such disallowance confirmed by Ld.CIT(A) is liable to be deleted. 12. The Ld.DR for the Revenue to repel argument advanced by Ld.AR for the assessee contended that the interest alleged…

M/S. Sahyog Homes Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 1919/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Rifaur Rahman (

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40

…essee further contended that the said transaction was carried out through banking channel and relied upon the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court 8 Sahyog Homes Ltd ITAs 1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 & 1922/M/2021 in case of Hero Cycles P. Ltd vs CIT (2015) 379 ITR 347 (SC). The Ld.AR for the assessee further contended that it was an inadvertent error on the part of the assessee to reflect the same in the books of account and as such disallowance confirmed by Ld.CIT(A) is liable to be deleted. 12. The Ld.DR for the Revenue to repel argument advanced by Ld.AR for the assessee contended that the interest alleged…

M/S. Sahyog Homes Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (A) -8(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 1918/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Rifaur Rahman (

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40

…essee further contended that the said transaction was carried out through banking channel and relied upon the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court 8 Sahyog Homes Ltd ITAs 1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 & 1922/M/2021 in case of Hero Cycles P. Ltd vs CIT (2015) 379 ITR 347 (SC). The Ld.AR for the assessee further contended that it was an inadvertent error on the part of the assessee to reflect the same in the books of account and as such disallowance confirmed by Ld.CIT(A) is liable to be deleted. 12. The Ld.DR for the Revenue to repel argument advanced by Ld.AR for the assessee contended that the interest alleged…

M/S Kulkarni & Sahu Buildcon Pvt.Ltd., Bhilai(Cg) vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax 1(1), Bhilai(Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms our aforesaid observations

ITA 30/BIL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri G D Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.30/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2012-13 M/S. Kulkarni & Sahu Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. B-495, Cross Street-25, Smriti Nagar, Bhilai-490020 (C.G.) Pan :Aaeck3160C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nilesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Choudhary N.C Roy, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69

…e assessee. Therefore once commercial expediency for giving the advance is established, no part of the interest expenditure can be disallowed in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of S.A. Builders 288 ITR 1 and Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 379 ITR 347 where it was held that the Revenue cannot justifiably claim to put itself in the armchair of the businessman or in the position of the Board of Directors and assume the role to decide how much is reasonable expenditure having regard to the circumstances of the case. If further held that no businessman can be compelled to maximize his profit and t…

Geetanjali Hotels & Promoters Pvt Ltd, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

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

ITA 299/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya ( Adv.) &For Respondent: Ms. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)a
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 251(2)Section 36(1)(iii)

…e order preferred an Appeal before the ITAT who upheld the order of the CIT (Appeals) and dismissed the Appeal of the Revenue. From the order of the ITAT, the Revenue approached this Court by way of an Appeal.” 6.3.8 Hero Cycle P. Ltd vs. CIT (2015) 128 DTR 1/379 ITR 347 (SC) also directly supports the case of the assessee. “In that case, the company had given Loans & Advances of Rs.34 lacs to its directors and charged interest @ 10% only, whereas it availed the loan @ 18% hence, disallowance was made by the AO saying that the money borrowed by the assessee can’t be treated for the purposes of the business of ass…

Geetanjali Hotels & Promoters Pvt Ltd, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

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

ITA 298/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya ( Adv.) &For Respondent: Ms. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)a
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 251(2)Section 36(1)(iii)

…e order preferred an Appeal before the ITAT who upheld the order of the CIT (Appeals) and dismissed the Appeal of the Revenue. From the order of the ITAT, the Revenue approached this Court by way of an Appeal.” 6.3.8 Hero Cycle P. Ltd vs. CIT (2015) 128 DTR 1/379 ITR 347 (SC) also directly supports the case of the assessee. “In that case, the company had given Loans & Advances of Rs.34 lacs to its directors and charged interest @ 10% only, whereas it availed the loan @ 18% hence, disallowance was made by the AO saying that the money borrowed by the assessee can’t be treated for the purposes of the business of ass…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1(2), Pune vs. M/S. Phadins Clinic Private Limited, Pune

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1666/PUN/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Srishti Securities Pvt. Ltd. reported in [2009] 183 Taxman 159 (Bombay), in the case of Phil Corpn. Ltd. reported in [2011] 14 taxmann.com 58 (Bombay) and in the case of Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. reported in [2015] 379 ITR 347 (SC) of Hon’ble Supreme Court, argued that interest payable on borrowed funds which are 10 ITA No. 1666/PUN/2018, A.Y. 2011-12 utilized for purchase of shares both by way of investment as well as stock in trade is allowable deduction. On perusal of the impugned order, we note that the CIT(A) examined every detail involving the facts of the case…

Asst CIT 28(3), Navi Mumbai vs. M/S Shagun Reality, Navi Mumbai

ITA 687/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi
Section 143(3)Section 69

…settled law that where the transaction is genuine, revenue cannot appropriate the right to decide what is reasonable expenditure that businessman should incur for the purposes of his business. The Hon. Supreme Court in the case of Hero Cycles (P) Ltd. Vs CIT, 379 ITR 347 (SC) (2015) has pointed out that the IT authorities must put themselves in the shoes of the assessee and see how a prudent businessman would act. The authorities must not look at the matter from their own view point but that of a prudent businessman. There is one more aspect to this addition. The appellant has not claimed deduction for the land c…

Allen Career Institute, Jaipur vs. JCIT, Kota

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

ITA 246/JPR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Aug 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 244ASection 36(1)(iii)

…(2017) 151 DTR 0089 (SC), East India Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v/s CIT (1997) 139 CTR 0372 (SC), Munjal Sales Corporation v/s CIT (2008) 298 ITR 298 (SC), CIT vs. HDFC Bank LTD. (2016) 284 CTR 0409 (Bom) (DPB 64-70), Hero Cycle P. Ltd vs. CIT (2015) 128 DTR 1/379 ITR 347 (SC), SEL Manufacturing Co. Ltd. vs. DCIT 206 TTJ 937 (Chd.), Alkali & Chemical Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT (1986) 50 CTR 139 (Kol HC) and CIT v/s M/s. Vijay Solvex Ltd. (2015) 274 CTR 384 (Raj.)) 3.5 Further the case of Abhishek Industries has already been impliedly overruled in Munjal sales (supra) and was also so considered in the case…

Addl . CIT, Special Range- 4, New Delhi vs. Gaursons Realty Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2662/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Gupta, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…see for the non-business purposes they do not exceed the funds available with the assessee without interest. 17. The above view also find support from the decision of Honourable Supreme court in [2015] 63 taxmann.com 308 (SC)/[2016] 236 Taxman 447 (SC)/[2015] 379 ITR 347 (SC)/[2015] 281 CTR 481 (SC) Hero Cycles P Ltd V CIT where in it is held that Once it is established that there is nexus between expenditure and purpose of business revenue cannot justifiably claim to put itself in arm-chair of businessman or in position of Board of Directors and assume role to decide how much is reasonable expenditure having reg…