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 367,518 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

M/S Elem Investment(P)Limited, Hyderabad vs. The Dict, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 121/HYD/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…d., purposes of the business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the revenue (Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores Vs. CIT (1974) 95 ITR 664 (Pat); J.K. Woollen Manufacturers Vs CIT (1969) 72 ITR 612 (SC). In CIT Vs. Chandulal Keshavlal & Co. (1960) 38 ITR 601 (SC), it was held by the SC that in deciding whether a payment of money is a deductible expenditure, one has to take into consideration questions of commercial expediency and the principles of ordinary commercial trading. 10.1. The Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Coca Cola India (P) Lt…

M/S Fincity Investments Pvt Ltd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 119/HYD/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…the purposes of the business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the revenue (Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores Vs. CIT (1974) 95 ITR 664 (Pat); J.K. Woollen Manufacturers Vs CIT (1969) 72 ITR 612 (SC). In CIT Vs. Chandulal Keshavlal & Co. (1960) 38 ITR 601 (SC), it was held by the SC that in deciding whether a payment of money is a deductible expenditure, one has to take into consideration questions of commercial expediency and the principles of ordinary commercial trading. 10.1. The Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Coca Cola India (P) Lt…

M/S Highgrace Investments Pvt Ltd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 114/HYD/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…d., purposes of the business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the revenue (Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores Vs. CIT (1974) 95 ITR 664 (Pat); J.K. Woollen Manufacturers Vs CIT (1969) 72 ITR 612 (SC). In CIT Vs. Chandulal Keshavlal & Co. (1960) 38 ITR 601 (SC), it was held by the SC that in deciding whether a payment of money is a deductible expenditure, one has to take into consideration questions of commercial expediency and the principles of ordinary commercial trading. 10.1. The Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Coca Cola India (P) Lt…

M/S Fincity Investments Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 591/HYD/2006[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…the purposes of the business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the revenue (Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores Vs. CIT (1974) 95 ITR 664 (Pat); J.K. Woollen Manufacturers Vs CIT (1969) 72 ITR 612 (SC). In CIT Vs. Chandulal Keshavlal & Co. (1960) 38 ITR 601 (SC), it was held by the SC that in deciding whether a payment of money is a deductible expenditure, one has to take into consideration questions of commercial expediency and the principles of ordinary commercial trading. 10.1. The Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Coca Cola India (P) Lt…

M/S Highgrace Investements Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 590/HYD/2006[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…d., purposes of the business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the revenue (Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores Vs. CIT (1974) 95 ITR 664 (Pat); J.K. Woollen Manufacturers Vs CIT (1969) 72 ITR 612 (SC). In CIT Vs. Chandulal Keshavlal & Co. (1960) 38 ITR 601 (SC), it was held by the SC that in deciding whether a payment of money is a deductible expenditure, one has to take into consideration questions of commercial expediency and the principles of ordinary commercial trading. 10.1. The Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Coca Cola India (P) Lt…

M/S Elem Investments Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 589/HYD/2006[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…d., purposes of the business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the revenue (Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores Vs. CIT (1974) 95 ITR 664 (Pat); J.K. Woollen Manufacturers Vs CIT (1969) 72 ITR 612 (SC). In CIT Vs. Chandulal Keshavlal & Co. (1960) 38 ITR 601 (SC), it was held by the SC that in deciding whether a payment of money is a deductible expenditure, one has to take into consideration questions of commercial expediency and the principles of ordinary commercial trading. 10.1. The Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Coca Cola India (P) Lt…

M/S Vecyes Investement Pvt Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 588/HYD/2006[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…the purposes of the business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the revenue (Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores Vs. CIT (1974) 95 ITR 664 (Pat); J.K. Woollen Manufacturers Vs CIT (1969) 72 ITR 612 (SC). In CIT Vs. Chandulal Keshavlal & Co. (1960) 38 ITR 601 (SC), it was held by the SC that in deciding whether a payment of money is a deductible expenditure, one has to take into consideration questions of commercial expediency and the principles of ordinary commercial trading. :- 14 -: 10.1. The Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Coca Cola Ind…

M/S High Grace Investments Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 619/HYD/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…d., purposes of the business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the revenue (Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores Vs. CIT (1974) 95 ITR 664 (Pat); J.K. Woollen Manufacturers Vs CIT (1969) 72 ITR 612 (SC). In CIT Vs. Chandulal Keshavlal & Co. (1960) 38 ITR 601 (SC), it was held by the SC that in deciding whether a payment of money is a deductible expenditure, one has to take into consideration questions of commercial expediency and the principles of ordinary commercial trading. 10.1. The Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Coca Cola India (P) Lt…

M/S Elem Investments Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 617/HYD/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…d., purposes of the business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the revenue (Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores Vs. CIT (1974) 95 ITR 664 (Pat); J.K. Woollen Manufacturers Vs CIT (1969) 72 ITR 612 (SC). In CIT Vs. Chandulal Keshavlal & Co. (1960) 38 ITR 601 (SC), it was held by the SC that in deciding whether a payment of money is a deductible expenditure, one has to take into consideration questions of commercial expediency and the principles of ordinary commercial trading. 10.1. The Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Coca Cola India (P) Lt…

M/S Fincity Investments Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 616/HYD/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…the purposes of the business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the revenue (Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores Vs. CIT (1974) 95 ITR 664 (Pat); J.K. Woollen Manufacturers Vs CIT (1969) 72 ITR 612 (SC). In CIT Vs. Chandulal Keshavlal & Co. (1960) 38 ITR 601 (SC), it was held by the SC that in deciding whether a payment of money is a deductible expenditure, one has to take into consideration questions of commercial expediency and the principles of ordinary commercial trading. 10.1. The Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Coca Cola India (P) Lt…

M/S Highgrace Investements Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 733/HYD/2006[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…d., purposes of the business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the revenue (Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores Vs. CIT (1974) 95 ITR 664 (Pat); J.K. Woollen Manufacturers Vs CIT (1969) 72 ITR 612 (SC). In CIT Vs. Chandulal Keshavlal & Co. (1960) 38 ITR 601 (SC), it was held by the SC that in deciding whether a payment of money is a deductible expenditure, one has to take into consideration questions of commercial expediency and the principles of ordinary commercial trading. 10.1. The Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Coca Cola India (P) Lt…

M/S Fincity Investments Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 732/HYD/2006[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…the purposes of the business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the revenue (Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores Vs. CIT (1974) 95 ITR 664 (Pat); J.K. Woollen Manufacturers Vs CIT (1969) 72 ITR 612 (SC). In CIT Vs. Chandulal Keshavlal & Co. (1960) 38 ITR 601 (SC), it was held by the SC that in deciding whether a payment of money is a deductible expenditure, one has to take into consideration questions of commercial expediency and the principles of ordinary commercial trading. 10.1. The Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Coca Cola India (P) Lt…

M/S Elem Investments Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of assessee for AY

ITA 731/HYD/2006[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Aug 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiahappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

…d., purposes of the business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the revenue (Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores Vs. CIT (1974) 95 ITR 664 (Pat); J.K. Woollen Manufacturers Vs CIT (1969) 72 ITR 612 (SC). In CIT Vs. Chandulal Keshavlal & Co. (1960) 38 ITR 601 (SC), it was held by the SC that in deciding whether a payment of money is a deductible expenditure, one has to take into consideration questions of commercial expediency and the principles of ordinary commercial trading. 10.1. The Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Coca Cola India (P) Lt…

M/S. Hyderabad Distilleries & Wineries Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad

Appeal are allowed

ITA 740/HYD/2012[2008-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2018AY 2008-19

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Ms Suchitra Kamblem/S Hyderabad Distilleries & Vs Acit Wineries Pvt. Ltd. A-4, Ida, Uppal Circle-2(2) Hyderabad-39 Hyderabad Aaach2679B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 5

…Builders Ltd. vs. CIT 288 ITR 1 (SC) The Ld. AR also relied upon the following decisions in reference to reasonableness of expenditure to be seen from point of view of business: • CIT vs. Walchand & Co. 65 ITR 381 (SC) • J. K. Woollen Manufacturers vs. CIT 72 ITR 612 (SC) • Aluminium Corpn. Of India Ltd. vs. CIT 86 ITR 11 (SC) The Ld. AR submitted that the tests that have evolved for determining the nature of income derived from netting of assets on a distinguishing of the decisions referred hereinabove may be stated as under: (i) no precise test can be laid down to ascertain whether income (referred to by w…

Shri Samir Trikamlal Prajapati, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Mehsana

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 882/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 882/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shri Samir Trikamlal The Ito, बनाम/ Prajapati, Ward – 3, Vs. C/O Vijay Metal & Engg. Mehsana Corporation, Block No.C/6, Kartik Complex, Melamail Compound, Mahendra Mill, Kalol – 382 721 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abipp 7876 N .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri U. S. Bhati & Abhimanyu Singh Bhati, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Uma Shankar Prasad, Sr. D.R.

For Appellant: Shri U. S. Bhati & Abhimanyu SinghFor Respondent: Shri Uma Shankar Prasad, Sr. D.R
Section 40A(2)(b)

…s turnover had quadrupled from Rs.44.62 lacs to Rs.166.44 lacs in span of mere two years. He had also reported more gross profit after even making payment of commission. It is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of J. K. Woollen Manufacturer v/s CIT 72 ITR 612 (S.C) that reasonableness of commission has to be decided from the point of view o businessman. Further, if the amount of Rs.33,62,000/- is not deductible 35 "commission" the same is otherwise allowable u/s 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 being not a capital expenditure or personal expenses and laid out for the purpose of business. The Hon'ble ITAT…

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

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2266/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2011-12 Income Tax Officer, V/S. M/S Height Insurance Ward-2(3), R/No.10/21, Services Ltd., Room 7Th Floor, Aayakar No.319,3Rd Floor, Bhawan, P-7, Kamalaya Centre, 156A, Chowringhee Square, Lenin Sarani, Kolakta-13 Kolkata-69 [Pan No.Aacch 0943 G] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Md. Usman, Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A.K. Tibrewal, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 31-05-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 08-06-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2011-12 Arises Against Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-14, Kolkata’S Order Dated 31.08.2016 In Case No. 188/Cit(A)-14/Wd-1(1)/2015-16, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. 2. The Revenue’S Solitary Grievance Pleaded In The Instant Appeal Seeks To Revive Section 37 R.W 40(A)(Ia) Disallowances / Addition Of ₹66,18,00,000/- Pertaining To Assessee’S Service Charges Paid To M/S Golden Trust Financial Services (Gtfs) Hereafter For Having Acted As Its Agent. It’S Next Two Averments Are That The Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Examining Assessee’S Exclusive Method Of Accounting In Service Tax Receivable On Output Services As Against Inclusive Method Of Service Tax

Section 143(3)Section 37

…the purposes of the business, reasonableness of the expenditure has to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the revenue (Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores Vs. CIT (1974) 95 ITR 664 (Pat); J.K. Woolllen Manufacturers Vs CIT (1969) 72 ITR 612 ((SC). In order for an expenditure to be admissible as a deduction under section 10(2) (xv), it is not necessary that the primary motive in incurring it has to be directly to earn income thereby (Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 207 (SC). ITA No.2266/Kol/2016 A.Y.2011-12 ITO Wd-2(3) Kol. Vs. M/s Height Insurance Services Ltd. Page…

Bhinmal Contractors Property & Land Developers P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals are allowed in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 7207/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 80Section 80I

…support the of the contention that the Assessing Officer cannot made arbitrary addition without any evidence :- M/s. Bhinmal Contractors Property & Land Developers P. Ltd • CIT V Chandanlal Keshawlal & Co. (1960) 38 ITR 601 (SC) • JK Woolen Mfrs V CIT (1969) 72 ITR 612 (SC) • Alluminium Corp of India Ltd V CIT (1972) 86 ITR 11 (SC) • OMKAR SAHAY MOHEMMAD SAIL 37 ITR 151 (SC) • Kishanchand Chelaram vs CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) • Friends Clearing Agency (P) Ltd V CIT 237 CTR 464/332 ITR 269 • CIT v. SSP (P) Ltd {2011] 202 Taxman 386/14 taxmann.com 87(Punj & Har) • CIT Faridabad vs.S.S.P. (P.) Ltd. [2011] 14 taxmann.com…

Grameen Capital India Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT 12(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5231/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sashank Dundu, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pooja Swaroop, D.R
Section 143(3)

…sel before us, that the salary paid was in order to contract 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 e…

Oil Field Instrumentation (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl. CIT RG. 1(2) & CIT (OSD), Mumbai

ITA 2233/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shrir. C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2233/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2011-12)

For Appellant: Sh. M. C. OmiFor Respondent: Dr. K. Shivaram & Shri
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 40A(2)

…s not mean ‘necessarily’. So long as there is a reasonable nexus between the expenditure and the business, the expenditure will be regarded as having been incurred for the purpose of the business. In the case of case J. K. Wollen Manufacturers Vrs. CIT (1972) 72 ITR 612 (SC), it is held that commercial expediency should be seen from the businessman’s point of view and in the case of CIT Vrs. Sales Magnesite (P) Ltd. (1995) 214 ITR 1 (Bom HC), it is held that where the director was assessed to tax at the maximum marginal rate and there is no evasion of tax by the assessee, then there is no reason for disallowance.…

M/S. Volvo India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1353/BANG/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Lalit Kumarm/S.Volvo India Private Limited, Yalachahally Village, Tavarakere Post, Hoskote, Bangalore – 562 122. Pan: Aaacv 6747N … Appellant Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltu, … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 234CSection 234DSection 92C

…ally benefits the appellant. In support of these contentions, he placed reliance on a catena of following decisions :- - CIT vs. Malayalam Plantations Limited: 53 ITR 140 (SC) - CIT v. Walchand & Co. etc. (1967) 65 ITR 381 - J K Woollen Manufacturers v. CIT: 72 ITR 612(SC) - CIT v. Birla Cotton Spg. And Wvg. Mills Ltd.: 82 ITR 166 (SC) - Madhav Prasad Jatia v. CIT U.P.: 118 ITR 200 (SC) - S.A. Builders Ltd. vs. CIT : 288 ITR 1 (SC) - CIT V. Bharti Televentures Ltd: 331 ITR 502 (Del) Page 15 - CIT vs. Padmani Packaging (P) Ltd.: 155 Taxmann 268 (Del) - CIT v. Rockman Cycle Industries Ltd.: 331 ITR 401 (P&H) (FB)…