Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores v. CIT

72 ITR 612Supreme Court of India1969#721 most cited

What is Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores v. CIT authority for?

The reasonableness of an expenditure for business purposes must be assessed from the businessman's perspective, not the revenue's, and the primary motive to earn income directly is not a prerequisite for its admissibility as a deduction.

140

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,842 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores v. CIT · expenditure admissibility · business purposes · reasonableness of expenditure · businessman's viewpoint · revenue's viewpoint · section 10(2)(xv) · commercial expediency

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 147Section 14ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 142(2A)Section 2(22)(e)Section 40(a)(ia)

Issues it is cited on

section 40(3)short deduction of tdsinterest on interestclosely held companysection 40a(2)(b)short deduction of taxamp expendituresection 92baaccumulated profitstrue and full disclosurerelated party transactionbusiness expediency

Judgments citing Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores v. CIT

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed and appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5776/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: S/Shri Pradeep Dinodia & R.KFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…held in many of the judgments some of which are as under:- a. CIT Vs. Panipat Woolen & General Mills Limited 103 ITR 66 (SC) b. Sasoon J. David & NCo. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 118 ITR 261 (SC). c. CIT Vs. Walchand & Co. 65 ITR 381 (SC). d. J. K. Woolen Mills Vs. CIT 72 ITR 612 (SC). e. Aluminium Corporation Vs. CIT 86 ITR 11 (SC). f. CIT Vs. Delhi Safe Deposit 133 ITR 756 (SC). g. SA Builders Ltd. Vs. CIT 288 ITR 1 (SC). 35 ITA. .899, 1348, 1349-D-2013, 5776-D-2014, 2083-D-2015, 1704-D-2015 46. The only reason given by the Ld. AO that sales in A. Y. 2009-10 to the sister concern are covered u/s 40A (2)(b) of the Incom…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed and appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1349/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: S/Shri Pradeep Dinodia & R.KFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…held in many of the judgments some of which are as under:- a. CIT Vs. Panipat Woolen & General Mills Limited 103 ITR 66 (SC) b. Sasoon J. David & NCo. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 118 ITR 261 (SC). c. CIT Vs. Walchand & Co. 65 ITR 381 (SC). d. J. K. Woolen Mills Vs. CIT 72 ITR 612 (SC). e. Aluminium Corporation Vs. CIT 86 ITR 11 (SC). f. CIT Vs. Delhi Safe Deposit 133 ITR 756 (SC). g. SA Builders Ltd. Vs. CIT 288 ITR 1 (SC). 35 ITA. .899, 1348, 1349-D-2013, 5776-D-2014, 2083-D-2015, 1704-D-2015 46. The only reason given by the Ld. AO that sales in A. Y. 2009-10 to the sister concern are covered u/s 40A (2)(b) of the Incom…

Rochem Separation Systems (India) Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT CC 2 (4), Mumbai

The appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our order

ITA 7940/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode)

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Bansal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…n for revenue authority to sit on the armchair of a businessman so as to ascertain the quantum of deduction allowable to the assessee as held by Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT Vs. Walchand & Co. Pvt Ltd (1967; 65 ITR 381); J.K. Woollen Manufacturers Vs. CIT (1969; 72 ITR 612) and also in Hero Cycles (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015; 63 Taxmann.com 308). Another pertinent fact is that while framing assessment for AY 2013-14 (which is the first year of payment of rent), the lease rent paid the assessee as per the agreements has not been disturbed by Ld. AO. Therefore, on the facts & circumstances of the case, the revenue authorit…

M/S. Swastik Oil Industries, Tonk vs. DCIT, Circle-7, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 1180/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jun 2021AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.) &For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 145(3)

…sessee. Here, whatever decisions were taken by the assessee, has to be understood as taken out of commercial expediency. Kindly refer T.T. (P) Ltd. v/s CIT (1980) 121 ITR 551 (Kar), CIT v/s Udhoji Shrikrishnadas (1983) 139 ITR 827 (MP) JK Woolen Manufacturers 72 ITR 612 (SC). 13. It was further submitted that looking to a huge turnover of more than Rs.53.20 crores (approx), claim of expenditure is otherwise very meager. Thus such a meager claim to achieve such a huge turnover is not at all unjustified. All these expenses were incurred exclusively for businesses purpose and are under the provisions of the Act. Th…

M/S. Swastik Oil Industries, Tonk vs. DCIT, Circle-7, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 1179/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jun 2021AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.) &For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 145(3)

…sessee. Here, whatever decisions were taken by the assessee, has to be understood as taken out of commercial expediency. Kindly refer T.T. (P) Ltd. v/s CIT (1980) 121 ITR 551 (Kar), CIT v/s Udhoji Shrikrishnadas (1983) 139 ITR 827 (MP) JK Woolen Manufacturers 72 ITR 612 (SC). 13. It was further submitted that looking to a huge turnover of more than Rs.53.20 crores (approx), claim of expenditure is otherwise very meager. Thus such a meager claim to achieve such a huge turnover is not at all unjustified. All these expenses were incurred exclusively for businesses purpose and are under the provisions of the Act. Th…

Kunwar Tuli, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 43(4), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 896/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing]

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

…id out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business or profession shall be allowed in computing the income chargeable under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession". In the case of J.K. Woollen Manufacturers Vs CIT (1969) 72 ITR 612 (SC), the Apex court held that in applying the test of commercial expediency for determining whether an expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of the business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not ofthe Income-tax Department. It is, of course, open 3 ITA No…

El El Hotels & Investments Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 918/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2021AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…The expense has been incurred by the assessee to protect its interest and in lieu of the claims that could have been raised by the landlord. The incurring of eexpenditure has not been doubted by the Revenue. The Apex Court in case of J.K, Wollen v. CIT [19691 72 ITR 612 (SC) has held that in applying the test of commercial expediency for determining whether an expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of the business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the IT Department. In view of the aforesaid facts and respectfully fol…

Ins Finance & Investment P Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 12(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 9266/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal, Sr.D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(1)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & Dr. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.9266/DEL/2019 Assessment Year 2010-11 INS Finance & Investment P. v. ITO, Ward-12(3), Ltd., New Delhi. A-2/452, Sector-8, Rohini New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AABCI4418E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CA Respondent by: Shri M. Baranwal, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing: 03 09 2020 Date of pronouncement: 26 10 2020 O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 29.12.2017, passed b…

M/S Bengal Shriram Hitech City Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(1)(3), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

ITA 122/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Oct 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2012 – 13

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mallikarjuna G., D.R

…el & Sons Pvt. Ltd. 69 ITR 782 (Guj)  Raipur Mfg. Co. Ltd. (84 !TR 508,516) (Guj)  Security Printers of India Pvt. Ltd. (78 ITR 766,774) (All)  Tatasons Ltd. (18 ITR 460,467) (Born)  Walchand & Co. P. Ltd.(65 ITR 381, 385) (SC)  J.K. Woolen Manufactures (72 ITR 612) (SC)  Aluminium Corp. of India Ltd. (86 ITR 11, 17) (SC)  Orissa Cement Ltd. (73 ITR 14, 17) (Del)  CIT vs IBC Knowledge Park Pvt Ltd [2016] 385 ITR 346 (Kar) 1.8. It is also decided principle of law that once the business is set, all the expenses should be allowed. 1.9. In C/T v. Sarabhai Sons (P.) Ltd. [1973] 90 ITR 318 the Gujarat High Co…

M/S Bengal Shriram Hitech City Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

ITA 121/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Oct 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2012 – 13

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mallikarjuna G., D.R

…el & Sons Pvt. Ltd. 69 ITR 782 (Guj)  Raipur Mfg. Co. Ltd. (84 !TR 508,516) (Guj)  Security Printers of India Pvt. Ltd. (78 ITR 766,774) (All)  Tatasons Ltd. (18 ITR 460,467) (Born)  Walchand & Co. P. Ltd.(65 ITR 381, 385) (SC)  J.K. Woolen Manufactures (72 ITR 612) (SC)  Aluminium Corp. of India Ltd. (86 ITR 11, 17) (SC)  Orissa Cement Ltd. (73 ITR 14, 17) (Del)  CIT vs IBC Knowledge Park Pvt Ltd [2016] 385 ITR 346 (Kar) 1.8. It is also decided principle of law that once the business is set, all the expenses should be allowed. 1.9. In C/T v. Sarabhai Sons (P.) Ltd. [1973] 90 ITR 318 the Gujarat High Co…

Bengal Shriram Hitech City Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1341/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2012 – 13

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mallikarjuna G., D.R

…el & Sons Pvt. Ltd. 69 ITR 782 (Guj)  Raipur Mfg. Co. Ltd. (84 !TR 508,516) (Guj)  Security Printers of India Pvt. Ltd. (78 ITR 766,774) (All)  Tatasons Ltd. (18 ITR 460,467) (Born)  Walchand & Co. P. Ltd.(65 ITR 381, 385) (SC)  J.K. Woolen Manufactures (72 ITR 612) (SC)  Aluminium Corp. of India Ltd. (86 ITR 11, 17) (SC)  Orissa Cement Ltd. (73 ITR 14, 17) (Del)  CIT vs IBC Knowledge Park Pvt Ltd [2016] 385 ITR 346 (Kar) 1.8. It is also decided principle of law that once the business is set, all the expenses should be allowed. 1.9. In C/T v. Sarabhai Sons (P.) Ltd. [1973] 90 ITR 318 the Gujarat High Co…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Beawar vs. M/S Shephali Hotels & Resorts Pvt. Ltd., Beawar

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1224/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1224/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2012-13 Cuke The Ito M/S. Shephali Hotels & Resorts Pvt. Ltd Vs. Ward- 1 14-A, Ashirwad Bhawan Beawar Champa Nagar, Beawar Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@ Pan/Gir No.: Aamcs 9146 A Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri A.K. Mehla, Jcit-Dr Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Prakul Khurana, Ca Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2020 ?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 05 /03/2020 Vkns'K@ Order Per Vijay Pal Rao, Jm This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Ajmer Dated 01-08-2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds. ‘’In View Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A), Ajmer Has Erred In:- 1. Deleting Addition Of Rs. 21,5,00,000/- Made On Account Of Bogus Share Application Money Received

For Appellant: Shri Prakul Khurana, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Mehla, JCIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 68

…emium as a prudent businessman. The test of prudence by substituting its own view in place of the businessman’s has not been approved by the Supreme Court in the decisions of CIT vs Walchand & Co. (P) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 and J.K. Woollen Mfg. vs CIT [1969] 72 ITR 612 (SC).’’ 22 ITO, Ward- 1, Beawar vs M/s. Shaifali Hotels & Resorts Pvt. Ltd., Beawar In view of the facts, circumstances of the case as discussed above as well as the decisions cited (supra), we do not find any error or illegality in the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A). Thus the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 3.0 In the result, the appeal…

ITO, Ward - 2(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Height Insurance Services Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2163/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jan 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2163/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri Radhey Shyam, CITFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Tibrewal, FCA
Section 133Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.2163/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) ITO, Ward-2(3), Kolkata Vs. M/s Height Insurance Services Ltd. Kamalalaya Centre, 156A, Lenin Sarani, Room-319, 3rd Floor, Kolkata-700013 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AACCH 0943 G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT Respondent by : Shri A.K. Tibrewal, FCA सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 31/10/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 22/01/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: The captioned appeal fil…

Anilaben Ambalal Patel, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 24(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2010-2011

ITA 3841/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Smt. Anilaben Ambalal Patel, The Assistant Commissioner Of 2Aj Laxmi Industrial Estate, Income Tax – 24(3), New Link Road, Andheri (West), Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Mumbai - 400053 Vs. Building No. C-11, Pan: Aabpp4814C Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400050 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjay R. Parikh (Ar) Revenue By : Shri Satishchandra Rajore (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 26/07/2019

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Parikh (AR)For Respondent: Shri Satishchandra Rajore (DR)
Section 143Section 57

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G. MANJUNATHA (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Smt. Anilaben Ambalal Patel, The Assistant Commissioner of 2AJ Laxmi Industrial Estate, Income Tax – 24(3), New Link Road, Andheri (West), Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Mumbai - 400053 Vs. Building No. C-11, PAN: AABPP4814C Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400050 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sanjay R. Parikh (AR) Revenue by : Shri Satishchandra Rajore (DR) Date of Hearing: 15/07/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 26/07/2019 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, J…

Shri Sucha Singh Rai, Raipur (Cg) vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 239/BIL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 239/Rpr/2016 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Laskar, JCIT
Section 37

…erest. It is not open to the Department to prescribe what expenditure an assessee should incur and in what circumstances he should incur that expenditure. Further, in the case of the J.K. Woollen Manufacturers Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax reported as (1969) 72 ITR 612(SC), it was held that 10 A.Y.2012-13 reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the Income-tax Department. Reverting to the facts of the present case, it is an undisputed fact as demonstrated in the records itself that entire books of account in the form of spiral winding have been s…

Jas Forwarding Worldwide Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3296/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year:2007-08

For Respondent: Shri Robin Rawan, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…h for the relevant year and no adverse inference has been drawn.  Assessee placed reliance on the following judgments- Case Law Citation DLF Commercial Project Corporation 379 ITR 538 Walchand & Co. Private Limited 65 ITR 381 J.K. Woolen manufactures Limited 72 ITR 612 EKL Appliances Limited 24 taxman 199 29. Ld. CIT (DR) on the other hand relied on the order of the Ld. CIT (A), specifically pages 20 to 23, para 5.1 to 5.3 of the order. 30. We have heard the rival submission and have perused the material placed before us which includes the submissions filed by both the parties and the paper book placed on reco…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Jas Forwarding World Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3222/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year:2007-08

For Respondent: Shri Robin Rawan, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…h for the relevant year and no adverse inference has been drawn.  Assessee placed reliance on the following judgments- Case Law Citation DLF Commercial Project Corporation 379 ITR 538 Walchand & Co. Private Limited 65 ITR 381 J.K. Woolen manufactures Limited 72 ITR 612 EKL Appliances Limited 24 taxman 199 29. Ld. CIT (DR) on the other hand relied on the order of the Ld. CIT (A), specifically pages 20 to 23, para 5.1 to 5.3 of the order. 30. We have heard the rival submission and have perused the material placed before us which includes the submissions filed by both the parties and the paper book placed on reco…

Grameen Capital India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 12(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 7024/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 7024/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Sashank DunduFor Respondent: Shri V. Vidhyadhar
Section 143(3)

…5 I.T.A. No. 7024/Mum/2016 M/s. Grameen Capital India Ltd., and retain talented employees and it was commensurate with the duties and profile of employees. The learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of JK Woollen Manufacturers vs. CIT (1972) 72 ITR 612 (SC), wherein it is held as under: - "Commercial expediency for determining whether an expenditure was wholly and exclusively laid out for the purpose of the business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the income-tax department. An employer in fixing the remuneration of his em…

ACIT, Circle-1 vs. Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 374/DEL/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2018AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Smt Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shefali Swaroop, CIT- DR

…re is reasonable having regard to the circumstances of the case. For this proposition, we draw support from the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the following cases : 1. CIT vs. Walchand & Co.: 65 ITR 381 (SC) 2. J.K. Woollen Manufacturers vs. CIT: 72 ITR 612 (SC) 3. Hero Cycles Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 379 ITR 347 (SC) 46. As mentioned elsewhere, similar additions were deleted by the first appellate authority in earlier A.Y and also in subsequent A.Y. Considering the facts in totality, we do not find any error or infirmity in the findings of the CIT(A). Ground No. 3 stands dismissed. 47. In the result, t…

Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, Range-I

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 357/DEL/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2018AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Smt Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shefali Swaroop, CIT- DR

…re is reasonable having regard to the circumstances of the case. For this proposition, we draw support from the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the following cases : 1. CIT vs. Walchand & Co.: 65 ITR 381 (SC) 2. J.K. Woollen Manufacturers vs. CIT: 72 ITR 612 (SC) 3. Hero Cycles Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 379 ITR 347 (SC) 46. As mentioned elsewhere, similar additions were deleted by the first appellate authority in earlier A.Y and also in subsequent A.Y. Considering the facts in totality, we do not find any error or infirmity in the findings of the CIT(A). Ground No. 3 stands dismissed. 47. In the result, t…