J.J. Enterprises v. CIT

254 ITR 216Supreme Court of India2002#2591 most cited

What is J.J. Enterprises v. CIT authority for?

Disallowances of expenses cannot be made based on mere suspicion or unsubstantiated statements of higher expenses; tangible evidence is required to justify additions.

45

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

J.J. Enterprises v. CIT · 254 ITR 216 · disallowance of expenses · mere suspicion · tangible evidence · commercial expediency · assessment · Assessing Officer

Sections most often in play

Section 10AASection 195Section 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 80IA(8)Section 90

Issues it is cited on

section 256(2)section 80ia(8)section 9(1)(vii)(b)section 195(2)section 40a(2)(a)section 256fees for included servicessection 90(2)commercial expediencybusiness connectionsection 9(1)(vii)interest u/s 234b

Judgments citing J.J. Enterprises v. CIT

Aniket Singal, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Chandigarh

In the result, all the above appeals are allowed

ITA 1146/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 939/Chd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Shri Aniket Singal बनाम The DCIT 4, Amritashergil Marg, New Delhi- 110003 Central Circle-1 Chandigarh स्थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: CZCPS6126E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1145/Chd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Smt. Aarti Singal बनाम The DCIT 53, Jor Bagh, New Delhi-110003 Central Circle-1 Chandigarh स

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar & Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.A’sFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69C

…is also settled law that suspicion, howsoever strong, cannot take the place of hard proof and that assessment under the Act has to be made on the basis of mere material/evidence and not on the basis of assumptions/presumptions [refer J.J. Enterprises vs. CIT 254 ITR 216 (SC), Assam Tea Co. vs. ITO: 92 ITD 85 (Asr.) (SB), Faqir Chand Chaman Lal vs. ACIT: (2004) 1 SOT 914 (Asr.) (Appeal dismissed by P&H High Court in 262 ITR 295 and SLP dismissed by SC in 268 ITR), CIT vs. Paras Cotton Co.: 288 ITR 211 (Raj.)] 33. In the present case, the entire case of the Assessing Officer is based on merely conjectures and surm…

Aarti Singal, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Chandigarh

In the result, all the above appeals are allowed

ITA 1145/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 939/Chd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Shri Aniket Singal बनाम The DCIT Central Circle-1 Chandigarh 4, Amritashergil Marg, New Delhi- 110003 स्थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: CZCPS6126E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1145/Chd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Smt. Aarti Singal बनाम The DCIT Central Circle-1 Chandigarh 53, Jor Bagh, New Delhi-110003 स

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar & Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.A’sFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69C

…is also settled law that suspicion, howsoever strong, cannot take the place of hard proof and that assessment under the Act has to be made on the basis of mere material/evidence and not on the basis of assumptions/presumptions [refer J.J. Enterprises vs. CIT 254 ITR 216 (SC), Assam Tea Co. vs. ITO: 92 ITD 85 (Asr.) (SB), Faqir Chand Chaman Lal vs. ACIT: (2004) 1 SOT 914 (Asr.) (Appeal dismissed by P&H High Court in 262 ITR 295 and SLP dismissed by SC in 268 ITR), CIT vs. Paras Cotton Co.: 288 ITR 211 (Raj.)] 33. In the present case, the entire case of the Assessing Officer is based on merely conjectures and surm…

Deepavali Balu Mahendra, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1715/HYD/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1715/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2023-2024 Deepavali Balu The Dcit, Vs. Mahendra, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(4), Pin – 500 096 Telangana. Hyderabad – 500 004. Pan Adspd2577N Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca, C. Maheshwar Reddy राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms Kritika Jaiswal, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: CA, C. Maheshwar ReddyFor Respondent: MS Kritika Jaiswal, Sr. AR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 69A

…1 ITA.No.1715/Hyd./2025 आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA G., ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.1715/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2023-2024 Deepavali Balu The DCIT, vs. Mahendra, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(4), PIN – 500 096 Telangana. Hyderabad – 500 004. PAN ADSPD2577N Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee by: CA, C. Maheshwar Reddy राज" व "ारा /Revenue by: MS Kritika Jaiswal, Sr. AR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 18.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 09.…

Hardayal Milk Products Private Limited, Shikohabad vs. DCIT, Circle-2(2)(1), Firozabad

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is partly

ITA 342/AGR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 Hardayal Milk Products Private Vs. DCIT, Circle 2(2)(1), Limited, 318, Shambhoo Nagar, Firozabad. Shikohabad. PAN :AABCH7576E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Sahib P. Satsangee, C.A. Department by Sh. R.P. Maurya, CIT (A)-1/DR Date of hearing 16.12.2025 Date of pronouncement 29.12.2025 ORDER PER : S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The assessee has filed this appeal against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax…

DCIT, Circle-7(1), Delhi vs. Fmi Automotive Components Private Limited, Haryana

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

ITA 3489/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shris.Rifaur Rahmandcit, Circle 7 (1), Vs. Fmi Automotive Components Private Limited, Delhi. Plot No.1, Subplot 4, 5, 8 & 9 Msil, Supplier Park, Phase 3A, Imt Manesar, Gurgaon – 1222 050 (Haryana). (Pan :Aabcf1682P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By :Shri S.K. Agarwal, Ca Revenue By :Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2025 Date Of Order : 22.09.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Revenue Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 30.05.2024 For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld Nfac Has Erred In Allowing The Appeal Of The Assessee By Deleting The Addition Made By The Ao Amounting To Rs.5,90,59,019/- On Account Of Disallowance Of Foreign Exchange Loss On Account Of Plant & Machinery.

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 41

…rts of the expenses have been higher than earlier years would not be suffice enough to call for any addition. No disallowance can be made on mere suspicion. Keeping in view, the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of J.J. Enterprises vs. CIT 254 ITR 216 (SC), the disallowances made by the AO cannot be sustained. Furthermore, no disallowance on account of various heads can be made in the case of limited company as held in the case of Sayaji Engineering Works, 253 ITR 749, Guj. This has become a settled law. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the judicial prono…

Radhakishan Beniwal, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Jaipur

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

ITA 695/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT
Section 139Section 144Section 147rSection 148Section 148ASection 194CSection 251Section 68

…e of any expenditure could be made by the assessing officer without pointing out any specific inflation or unvouched expenditure. • Your Honour's kind attention is drawn to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of J J Enterprises vs CIT [2002] 254 ITR 216 (SC), wherein it was held by the Court that no reference was called for in respect of the finding of the Tribunal that additions was made partly on the basis of guess work and was unsustainable and there was also no reason to restore the matter back to the assessing officer for re-examining. • In the case of Dwarka Prasad Agarwal vs ITO [1995] 52…

Radhakishna Beniwal, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Jaipur

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

ITA 694/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT
Section 139Section 144Section 147rSection 148Section 148ASection 194CSection 251Section 68

…e of any expenditure could be made by the assessing officer without pointing out any specific inflation or unvouched expenditure. • Your Honour's kind attention is drawn to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of J J Enterprises vs CIT [2002] 254 ITR 216 (SC), wherein it was held by the Court that no reference was called for in respect of the finding of the Tribunal that additions was made partly on the basis of guess work and was unsustainable and there was also no reason to restore the matter back to the assessing officer for re-examining. • In the case of Dwarka Prasad Agarwal vs ITO [1995] 52…

Bhartiya Jan Sewa Ashram, Jaunpur vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Lucknow

ITA 200/LKW/2020[20161-7]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow10 Sept 2025

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143Section 144Section 68

…which had not qualified as 'utilization' for the objection of the Society. 5. disallowance so made/sustained by the 'Authorities below' is contrary to the principle laid down of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of J.J. Enterprises Vs. CIT reported in (2002) 254 ITR 216. 6. the material and information as referred, to above had been dealt with in Annexure - I to the 'Grounds of appeal' and the same are referred to and relied upon in support of the grounds mentioned above; 7. the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law applicable thereto and principles of natural justice." 2. It is observed that the…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Bbc World India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 3489/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shris.Rifaur Rahmandcit, Circle 7 (1), Vs. Fmi Automotive Components Private Limited, Delhi. Plot No.1, Subplot 4, 5, 8 & 9 Msil, Supplier Park, Phase 3A, Imt Manesar, Gurgaon – 1222 050 (Haryana). (Pan :Aabcf1682P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By :Shri S.K. Agarwal, Ca Revenue By :Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2025 Date Of Order : 22.09.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Revenue Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 30.05.2024 For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld Nfac Has Erred In Allowing The Appeal Of The Assessee By Deleting The Addition Made By The Ao Amounting To Rs.5,90,59,019/- On Account Of Disallowance Of Foreign Exchange Loss On Account Of Plant & Machinery.

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 41

…rts of the expenses have been higher than earlier years would not be suffice enough to call for any addition. No disallowance can be made on mere suspicion. Keeping in view, the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of J.J. Enterprises vs. CIT 254 ITR 216 (SC), the disallowances made by the AO cannot be sustained. Furthermore, no disallowance on account of various heads can be made in the case of limited company as held in the case of Sayaji Engineering Works, 253 ITR 749, Guj. This has become a settled law. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the judicial prono…

Shri Devendra Thakershibhai Thakkar, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 587/AHD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.587/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2913-14 Devendra Thakershibhai The Ito बनाम/ Thakkar Ward-3(2)(1) V/S. Prop. Of Prism Agri Ahmedabad – 380 015 Tradelink Ravjipura Nava Bazar, Bavla Tal: Dascroi Ahmedabad – 380 057 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aospt 8109 B अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR
Section 144Section 145(2)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “सी“, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ C ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD सु"ी सुिच"ा का"ले, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी मकरंद वसंत महादेवकर, लेखा सद" के सम"। ] ] BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं /ITA No.587/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2913-14 Devendra Thakershibhai The ITO बनाम/ Thakkar Ward-3(2)(1) v/s. Prop. Of PRISM AGRI Ahmedabad – 380 015 TRADELINK Ravjipura Nava Bazar, Bavla Tal: Dascroi Ahmedabad – 380 057 "थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AOSPT 8109 B अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee b…

Avtec Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT (Ltu), Circle-1, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7366/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashypa, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 234BSection 80I

…expenditure - before disallowance and relied on Sheo Bhagwan Goel v ACIT [2022] 139 Taxmann 259 (Raipur-Tri). Similarly, he stated that Mere estimation of disallowance under facts and circumstances is not permissible and relied on J.J. Enterprises vs. CIT 254 ITR 216 (SC). Th ld AR finally submitted that Company Assets used for personal purpose by employees are allowed and relied on Sayon ji Iron &Engg Co. [2002] 121 Taxmann 43 (Gujarat). 76. Per contra the ld DR relied on the authorities below. 77. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. Having heard the riv…

Avtec Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT (Ltu), Circle-1, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1008/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashypa, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 234BSection 80I

…expenditure - before disallowance and relied on Sheo Bhagwan Goel v ACIT [2022] 139 Taxmann 259 (Raipur-Tri). Similarly, he stated that Mere estimation of disallowance under facts and circumstances is not permissible and relied on J.J. Enterprises vs. CIT 254 ITR 216 (SC). Th ld AR finally submitted that Company Assets used for personal purpose by employees are allowed and relied on Sayon ji Iron &Engg Co. [2002] 121 Taxmann 43 (Gujarat). 76. Per contra the ld DR relied on the authorities below. 77. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. Having heard the riv…

Avtec Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT (Ltu), Circle-1, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8081/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashypa, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 234BSection 80I

…expenditure - before disallowance and relied on Sheo Bhagwan Goel v ACIT [2022] 139 Taxmann 259 (Raipur-Tri). Similarly, he stated that Mere estimation of disallowance under facts and circumstances is not permissible and relied on J.J. Enterprises vs. CIT 254 ITR 216 (SC). Th ld AR finally submitted that Company Assets used for personal purpose by employees are allowed and relied on Sayon ji Iron &Engg Co. [2002] 121 Taxmann 43 (Gujarat). 76. Per contra the ld DR relied on the authorities below. 77. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. Having heard the riv…

Avtec Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT (Ltu), Circle-1, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4716/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashypa, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 234BSection 80I

…expenditure - before disallowance and relied on Sheo Bhagwan Goel v ACIT [2022] 139 Taxmann 259 (Raipur-Tri). Similarly, he stated that Mere estimation of disallowance under facts and circumstances is not permissible and relied on J.J. Enterprises vs. CIT 254 ITR 216 (SC). Th ld AR finally submitted that Company Assets used for personal purpose by employees are allowed and relied on Sayon ji Iron &Engg Co. [2002] 121 Taxmann 43 (Gujarat). 76. Per contra the ld DR relied on the authorities below. 77. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. Having heard the riv…

Avtec Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT (Ltu), Circle-1, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2893/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashypa, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 234BSection 80I

…expenditure - before disallowance and relied on Sheo Bhagwan Goel v ACIT [2022] 139 Taxmann 259 (Raipur-Tri). Similarly, he stated that Mere estimation of disallowance under facts and circumstances is not permissible and relied on J.J. Enterprises vs. CIT 254 ITR 216 (SC). Th ld AR finally submitted that Company Assets used for personal purpose by employees are allowed and relied on Sayon ji Iron &Engg Co. [2002] 121 Taxmann 43 (Gujarat). 76. Per contra the ld DR relied on the authorities below. 77. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. Having heard the riv…

Avtec Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6332/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashypa, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 234BSection 80I

…expenditure - before disallowance and relied on Sheo Bhagwan Goel v ACIT [2022] 139 Taxmann 259 (Raipur-Tri). Similarly, he stated that Mere estimation of disallowance under facts and circumstances is not permissible and relied on J.J. Enterprises vs. CIT 254 ITR 216 (SC). Th ld AR finally submitted that Company Assets used for personal purpose by employees are allowed and relied on Sayon ji Iron &Engg Co. [2002] 121 Taxmann 43 (Gujarat). 76. Per contra the ld DR relied on the authorities below. 77. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. Having heard the riv…

M/S. Avtec Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1009/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashypa, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 234BSection 80I

…expenditure - before disallowance and relied on Sheo Bhagwan Goel v ACIT [2022] 139 Taxmann 259 (Raipur-Tri). Similarly, he stated that Mere estimation of disallowance under facts and circumstances is not permissible and relied on J.J. Enterprises vs. CIT 254 ITR 216 (SC). Th ld AR finally submitted that Company Assets used for personal purpose by employees are allowed and relied on Sayon ji Iron &Engg Co. [2002] 121 Taxmann 43 (Gujarat). 76. Per contra the ld DR relied on the authorities below. 77. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. Having heard the riv…

Siddhi Vinayak, Indore vs. ITO-3(1), Indore

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 260/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2015-16 Siddhi Vinayak, Income-Tax Officer, 210, Dhan Trident, 3(1), Satya Sai Square, Indore. बनाम/ Vijay Nagar, Vs. Indore. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Accfs1664A Assessee By Shri Arpit Gaur, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Final Hearing 22.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30.04.2024

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 145(3)Section 44A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, इंदौर "ायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 Siddhi Vinayak, Income-tax Officer, 210, Dhan Trident, 3(1), Satya Sai Square, Indore. बनाम/ Vijay Nagar, Vs. Indore. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) PAN: ACCFS1664A Assessee by Shri Arpit Gaur, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of final hearing 22.04.2024 Date of Pronouncement 30.04.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 13.02.2023 passed b…

The DCIT Circle 5(1), Bhopal vs. M/S L N Malviya Infra Projects P Ltd, Bhopal

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 189/IND/2023[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Jan 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanidcit, Circle 5(1) M/S. L.N. Malviya Infra Projects Bhopal Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.29, F/F Sector, Dwarka Vs. New Delhi

Section 234ASection 3(3)Section 37(1)

…idence as to how these expenses are for personal use. The AO cannot make ad-hoc disallowance of guess work. Reliance was placed on decision Page 14 of 17 ITANo.189/Ind/2023 L.N. Malviya Infra Projects P. Ltd. of Hon'ble Apex Court in JJ Enterprises vs. CIT 254 ITR 216 (SC) where it was held that addition made on basis of pure guess work is not sustainable. Reliance was also placed on decisions of Hon'ble ITAT, Lucknow Bench in cases of Kuldeep S Sethi vs. ITO in ITA No. 1446/Alld/1997 and Mukesh Kumar Mahawar vs. ITO Sitapur in ITA No. 615/LKW/2014. h) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. R. G.…

ACIT, Circle- 17(1), New Delhi vs. Modi Rubber Ltd., New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4864/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shuklaasstt. Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Maninder Kaur, Sr. Dr
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)

…tton Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd 82 ITR 166 [SC] c) Madhav Prasad Jatia Vs. CIT 118 ITR 200 [SC] 8. Reliance was also placed by the Id. counsel for the assessee on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of J.J. Enterprises Vs. CIT reported at 254 ITR 216 [SC] where, as per the ‘Head Notes’, it has been held as under: "In its principal order, the Tribunal had concluded that the addition was unsustainable because it had been made "on the basis of pure guess work". The Revenue moved the High Court under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the High Court called for a reference on the basi…