How many judgments cite Hive Communication (P.) Ltd. v. CIT?

30 judgments on BharatTax cite Hive Communication (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (353 ITR 200), spanning 2016 to 2023.

Hive Communication (P.) Ltd. v. CIT

353 ITR 200High Court2013#3973 most cited

What is Hive Communication (P.) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

When examining the reasonableness of expenditure under Section 40A(2), tax officers must exercise fair and objective judgment, considering the perspective of a prudent businessman, to prevent tax evasion without causing hardship in genuine cases.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2023.

Also referred to as

Hive Communication · Section 40A(2) · reasonableness of expenditure · closely held company · associate concerns · fair market value · prudent businessman · objective decision · tax evasion · hardship

Also reported as

201 Taxmann 9912 Taxmann.com 287

Issues it is cited on

section 40a(2)(a)legal expenses closely held company management fees section 40a(2)(b)section 40a(2)maximum marginal rate enduring benefit section 30 section 40a fair market value rule 46a

Judgments citing Hive Communication (P.) Ltd. v. CIT

Second Leasing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 2412/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiay. 2009-10 M/S Second Leasing Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, Circle-8(1), Flat No. N, Sagar Apartment, Vs. New Delhi 6, Tilak Marg, New Delhi – 11 001 (Pan: Aabcs6609R) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Ms. RanoFor Respondent: Sh. N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 142(3)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…tor. In our view, the Tribunal was clearly in error in holding that only a part of the increased remuneration for the assessment year in question should be allowed. " III. In the case of Hive Communication Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner Of Income Tax [2013] 353 ITR 200 (Del). Hon'ble Delhi High Court Decided the question in favour of the assessee and in the negative holding that the Tribunal was not correct in law in upholding disallowance of Rs. 13.20 lacs out of remuneration paid to Mr. Sushil Pandit (director) by invoking the provisions of Section 40A(2) of the Act. IV. Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in Ab…

ITO 4(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Sunvin Industries P.Ltd, Thane

ITA 2309/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & C. N. Prasadआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./2309/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year:2010-11 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Income Tax Officer M/S. Sunvin Industries Pvt.Ltd. Room No.637, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Nadinaka, Mithpada, Behind Sainik Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Hospital Parol Rd. Bhiwandi, Thane-421 302. Pan:Aaecs 3087 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Ms. Arju Goradia-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: Ms. Usha Gopalan सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30/03/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 05.04.2017 लेखा सद"य सद"य, राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार/ Per Rajendra A.M.- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 13/02/2015 Of Cit(A)-9,Mumbai, The Assessing Officer (Ao)Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee-Company,Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing Of Textiles & Handloom,Filed Its Return Of Income On 27/09/2010,Declaring Total Income Of Rs.Nil.The Ao Completed The Assessment U/S. 143(3) On 13.3.2013,Determining Its Income At Rs.90.88 Lakhs.

For Appellant: Ms. Usha GopalanFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Goradia-DR

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई मुंबई “जेजेजेजे” खंडपीठ खंडपीठ म"म"म"म" आयकर आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“J”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं सी सी. एन एन. "साद "साद, "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं सी सी एन एन "साद "साद "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and C. N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./2309/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year:2010-11 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Income ta…

Sunvin Industries P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 4(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2893/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: T.A. Khan (Sr.DR)

Section 143(3)Section 253Section 254(1)Section 40A(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2893/Mum/2015 for (Assessment Year : 2010-11) Sunvin Industries Private Limited, ITO 4(3)(4), 21, Vitthal Chambers, 3rd Floor, Mumbai. 65, Kazi Sayyed Street, Vs. Mumbai-400002 PAN: AAECS3087L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None Revenue by : T.A. Khan (Sr.DR) Date of hearing : 01.12.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 09.12.2016 Order Under Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JM: 1. This appeal u/s 253 of the Income-tax Act (‘Act’) is directe…

Mhatre Engineering P.Ld, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO WD 10(3)(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2187/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year: 2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(a)

…at it is merely a tax neutral and in subsequent year the Assessing Officer himself accepted more income and place reliance upon the decision in the case of CIT vs Indo Saudi Services (Travel) Pvt. Ltd. 310 ITR 306(Bom.) and Hive Communication Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT 353 ITR 200 (Del.). This factual assertion was not controverted by the Shri S.K. Mishra, ld. DR. 2.1. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts, in brief, are that the assessee, a private limited company, engaged in the business of manufacturing of engineering goods, declared total income of Rs.7,53,130/…

Hind Airlink Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 2634/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddyay: 2011-12 Hind Airlink P.Ltd. Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle 12(1) A -1, Okhla Industrial Area New Delhi Phase I, New Delhi 110 020

For Appellant: Sh. M.P.Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: None (Adjournment Application rejected)

Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…ter concern was also paying tax at higher rate and copies of the assessment orders of the sister concern were taken on record by the Tribunal.” (Emphasis ours). 12.7. The Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Hive Communications P.Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 353 ITR 200 (Delhi) referred to the CBDT Circular no.6P dated 6.7.1968 at para 11 as under. “11. We may also refer to the scope of S.40A(2) as explained by CBDT in Circular no.6P, dated 6.7.1968. The CBDT clarified that while examining the reasonableness of expenditure the AO is expected to exercise his judgement in a reasonable and fair manner. It should be…

M/S. Showa India Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 166/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Smt. Beena A. Pillaii.T.(Tp) No.166/Del.2013 (Assessment Year 2008-09) M/S. Showa India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle 8(1), 23-32, Sector 58, New Delhi Faridabd, Haryana-121002 Gir / Pan :Aabce5725G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Aseem Chawla, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT DR

Section 133(6)Section 271Section 92ASection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘I’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.(TP) No.166/Del.2013 (Assessment Year 2008-09) M/s. Showa India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. DCIT, Circle 8(1), 23-32, Sector 58, New Delhi Faridabd, Haryana-121002 GIR / PAN :AABCE5725G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by :Shri Aseem Chawla, Adv. Ms. Priyanka Mongia, CA Respondent by :Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT DR Date of hearing: 17.06.2016 Date of Pronouncement: 30.06.2016 ORDER PER BEENA A. PILLAI, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the orde…

Amserve Consultants Ltd., New Delhi vs. ADIT, New Delhi

In the result both the appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 6059/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddyay: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. C.S.Agarwal, Sr.AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ravi Jain, CIT, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…taken on ITA 6059/Del/2013 M/s Amserve Consultants Ltd. ITA 6090/Del/13 M/s Amsure Insurance Agency Ltd. A.Y. 2009-10 record by the Tribunal.” (Emphasis ours). 12.7. The Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Hive Communications P.Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 353 ITR 200 (Delhi) referred to the CBDT Circular no.6P dated 6.7.1968 at para 11 as under. “11. We may also refer to the scope of S.40A(2) as explained by CBDT in Circular no.6P, dated 6.7.1968. The CBDT clarified that while examining the reasonableness of expenditure the AO is expected to exercise his judgement in a reasonable and fair manner. It should be…

E.I. Dupont India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 4774/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 May 2016AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Tolani, AdvFor Respondent: S/Shri Anand Kumar Kedia &

…Hon’ble Delhi ITAT in the case of Avery Dennison India P. Ltd. vs. ACIT (ITA no. 4869/Del/2014) – Para 33. The copy of the order was submitted to Your Honors during the hearing. Reliance should also be placed in the judgment in the case of Hive Communication [353 ITR 200] by Delhi High Court dated July 8, 2011 and EKL Appliances [345 ITR 241] by Delhi High Court dated March 29, 2012. Services are actually shareholder or stewardship activities  o It is humbly submitted that none of the services have been received from shareholder. Thus, there is no question of shareholder activity. Without prejudice to this, it i…

Ge Money Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result ground, no

ITA 6282/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Sachit Jolly, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amendra Kumar, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 32Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 92C

…G E Money Financial Services Pvt Limited A Y ITA No 5882/Del/2010 5816/Del/2011 & 6282/Del/2012 2006-07 2007-08 & 2008-09 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I-1”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI A.T.VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5816/Del/2011(Assessment Year: 2007-08) GE Money Financial ACIT, Services Pvt. Ltd., Circle-12(1), Vs. 401, 402, 4th Floor, C.R.Building, Aggarwal Millennium New Delhi Tower, E-1,2,3, Netaji Subhash Place, Pitampura, New Delhi PAN:AAACC0642F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Sachit Jolly, Adv Sh. Rahul Sateja, Adv Sh. Gautam Swanib…

Ge Money Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result ground, no

ITA 5882/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Sachit Jolly, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amendra Kumar, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 32Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 92C