P Ltd. 214 ITR 1; CIT vs. Panipat Woolen & General Mills Co. Ltd. 103 ITR 66 SC; CIT v. Associated Electrical Agencies

266 ITR 63High Court2004#13939 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2018.

Judgments citing P Ltd. 214 ITR 1; CIT vs. Panipat Woolen & General Mills Co. Ltd. 103 ITR 66 SC; CIT v. Associated Electrical Agencies

DRISHTI MARINE SOLUTIONS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 5(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2803/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2803/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Drishti Marine Solutions Pvt. Ltd. The Income Tax Officer 5 (1)-3, बनाम/ Top Floor, Mehta Mahal, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400 020 15, Mathew Road, Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacl 6405 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Dr. K. Shivam ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ram Tiwari सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 16.01.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 20.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 11.03.2014 & Pertains To Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: 1. The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Disallowing The Claim Of Deduction Of Interest Paid Of Rs.30,834/- On Pt, Vat & Service Tax.

For Appellant: Dr. K. ShivamFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari

…) 214 ITR i (Bom.)(HC)(PG.6)(Pg. No.363-369)(rel pg.s67) Shahzada Nand & Sons v. CIT (1977) 108 ITR 358 (SC) (366)(Pg. No. 370 - 379) For deciding the commercial expediency, contractual obligation is not required. CIT vs. Associated Electrical Agencies (2004) 266 ITR 63 (Mad)(HC)(38o- 387)(rel Pg.386) 12. Goa Lifeguarding Contract: Work performed by Drishti Special Response Services Pvt Ltd Bid won by Dristiti Drishti Marine Solutions Pvt Ltd Adventure Sports supplied Equipment Pvt. Ltd and provided Goa Mainteannce andSpares Contract > The tender was bid by Drishti Adventure Sports Pvt Ltd and the Work Order wa…

ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SRI VARALAKSHMI JUTE TWINE MILLS PVT. LTD,, RAJAM

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 458/VIZ/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Feb 2018AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bledcit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Visakhapatnam. Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Rajam (Po), Srikakulam District. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Vs. Ito, Ward-3, Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Srikakulam. Rajam (Po), Srikakulam Dist. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Acit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Visakhapatnam. Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Rajam (Po), Srikakulam District. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Vs. Dcit, Circle-4(1), Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Visakhapatnam. Rajam (Po), Srikakulam Dist. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L (Appellants) (Respondents)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A. Thar &For Respondent: Shri T. Satyanandam – Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…e expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the trade CIT vs. Delhi Safe Deposit Co. Ltd. (13 ITR 756 SC); CIT vs. Sales Magnesite P Ltd. 214 ITR 1; CIT vs. Panipat Woolen & General Mills Co. Ltd. 103 ITR 66 SC; CIT vs. Associated Electrical Agencies 266 ITR 63 (Mad); Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. 224 CTR 32 SC; Adidas India Marketing P Ltd. 10 Taxmann.com 18. It was contended that expediency of the expenditure is not for the Revenue to consider and relied on the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in Amarjothi Pictures vs. CIT 69 ITR 755, and CIT vs. Gobald Motor Services P Ltd. 100 ITR 240 (Mad). It wa…

SRI VARALAKSHMI JUTE TWINE MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED,,RAJAM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 404/VIZ/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Feb 2018AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bledcit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Visakhapatnam. Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Rajam (Po), Srikakulam District. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Vs. Ito, Ward-3, Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Srikakulam. Rajam (Po), Srikakulam Dist. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Acit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Visakhapatnam. Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Rajam (Po), Srikakulam District. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Vs. Dcit, Circle-4(1), Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Visakhapatnam. Rajam (Po), Srikakulam Dist. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L (Appellants) (Respondents)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A. Thar &For Respondent: Shri T. Satyanandam – Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…e expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the trade CIT vs. Delhi Safe Deposit Co. Ltd. (13 ITR 756 SC); CIT vs. Sales Magnesite P Ltd. 214 ITR 1; CIT vs. Panipat Woolen & General Mills Co. Ltd. 103 ITR 66 SC; CIT vs. Associated Electrical Agencies 266 ITR 63 (Mad); Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. 224 CTR 32 SC; Adidas India Marketing P Ltd. 10 Taxmann.com 18. It was contended that expediency of the expenditure is not for the Revenue to consider and relied on the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in Amarjothi Pictures vs. CIT 69 ITR 755, and CIT vs. Gobald Motor Services P Ltd. 100 ITR 240 (Mad). It wa…

SRI VARALAKSHMI JUTE TWINE MILLS PVT. LTD.,,RAJAM vs. THE ITO,, SRIKAKULAM

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 349/VIZ/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Feb 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bledcit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Visakhapatnam. Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Rajam (Po), Srikakulam District. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Vs. Ito, Ward-3, Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Srikakulam. Rajam (Po), Srikakulam Dist. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Acit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Visakhapatnam. Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Rajam (Po), Srikakulam District. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Vs. Dcit, Circle-4(1), Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Visakhapatnam. Rajam (Po), Srikakulam Dist. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L (Appellants) (Respondents)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A. Thar &For Respondent: Shri T. Satyanandam – Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…e expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the trade CIT vs. Delhi Safe Deposit Co. Ltd. (13 ITR 756 SC); CIT vs. Sales Magnesite P Ltd. 214 ITR 1; CIT vs. Panipat Woolen & General Mills Co. Ltd. 103 ITR 66 SC; CIT vs. Associated Electrical Agencies 266 ITR 63 (Mad); Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. 224 CTR 32 SC; Adidas India Marketing P Ltd. 10 Taxmann.com 18. It was contended that expediency of the expenditure is not for the Revenue to consider and relied on the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in Amarjothi Pictures vs. CIT 69 ITR 755, and CIT vs. Gobald Motor Services P Ltd. 100 ITR 240 (Mad). It wa…

THE DCIT,, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SRI VARALAKSHMI JUTE MILLS PVT LTD,, SRIKAKULAM

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 340/VIZ/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Feb 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bledcit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Visakhapatnam. Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Rajam (Po), Srikakulam District. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Vs. Ito, Ward-3, Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Srikakulam. Rajam (Po), Srikakulam Dist. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Acit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Varalakshmi Jute Visakhapatnam. Twine Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Rajam (Po), Srikakulam District. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L Sri Varalakshmi Jute Twine Vs. Dcit, Circle-4(1), Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bobbili Road, Visakhapatnam. Rajam (Po), Srikakulam Dist. Pan No. Aadcs 1167 L (Appellants) (Respondents)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A. Thar &For Respondent: Shri T. Satyanandam – Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…e expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the trade CIT vs. Delhi Safe Deposit Co. Ltd. (13 ITR 756 SC); CIT vs. Sales Magnesite P Ltd. 214 ITR 1; CIT vs. Panipat Woolen & General Mills Co. Ltd. 103 ITR 66 SC; CIT vs. Associated Electrical Agencies 266 ITR 63 (Mad); Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. 224 CTR 32 SC; Adidas India Marketing P Ltd. 10 Taxmann.com 18. It was contended that expediency of the expenditure is not for the Revenue to consider and relied on the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in Amarjothi Pictures vs. CIT 69 ITR 755, and CIT vs. Gobald Motor Services P Ltd. 100 ITR 240 (Mad). It wa…

KNIGHT RIDERS SPORTS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 29, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1307/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm M/S Knight Riders Sports Acit, Central Circle-29, Private Limited, Deepvan बिधम/ Mumbai. Anand Vihar Society, 20Th Vs. Road, Khar (W), Mumbai-400 052 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aadck3118M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Mr. J.D. Mistry, A.RFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Yadav, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32(1)(ii)Section 37(1)

…ompted by commercial expediency in the course of the business of the assessee, therefore, the same was allowable as an expenditure, relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT Vs. Associated Electrical Agencies and Anr (2004) 266 ITR 63 (Mad) and the Judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Maina Ore Transport (2008) 324 ITR 100 (Bom). P a g e | 55 ITA No.1307/Mum/2013 AY: 2009-10 Knight Riders Sports Private Limited Vs. ACIT-Central Circle-29 37. The ld. A.R further adverting to the adhoc disallowance of an expenditure of Rs.1,08,33,592/- by the A.O, whic…

ACIT CIR 25(3), MUMBAI vs. RUKMINI IYER, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6242/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2009-10 Acit 25(3) Ms. Rukmini Iyer, R.No.308, C-11, 1002, Doll Apartment Bhatt बनाम/ Bandra Kurla Complex Lane, Vs. Bandra (E) Kandivali (W) Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400067 (Revenue) (Respondent) P.A. No.Aaapi7916F Revenue By Shri Chandra Vijay (Dr) Respondent By Shri Haresh P. Shah (Ar)

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 4O

…ently following the mercantile system of accounting and the liability existing at the year end, has been properly booked as expenditure. f) The assessee relies on the following judgments in support of his claim – i) CIT v Associated Electrical Agencies {2004} 266 ITR 63 (Mad.) The claim has to be judged in the light of commercial expediency. As such if the payment is made out of commercial expediency, despite there was no legal compulsion, the same is allowable. ii) Metal Box Co. of India Ltd. v Their Workmen [1969J 73 ITR 53 (SC) Accrued but undischarged liability must be allowed under mercantile system. It was…

P Ltd. 214 ITR 1; CIT vs. Panipat Woolen & General Mills Co. Ltd. 103 ITR 66 SC; CIT v. Associated Electrical Agencies (266 ITR 63) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax