PCIT v. R.G. Buildwell Engineers Ltd.

99 Taxmann.com 284Supreme Court of India2018#1593 most cited

What is PCIT v. R.G. Buildwell Engineers Ltd. authority for?

The Assessing Officer cannot make ad-hoc disallowances of expenditure without proper justification, rejection of the assessee's books of accounts, or detailed examination of supporting evidence, merely based on conjectures or an increase in expenses. The Supreme Court upheld the deletion of such arbitrary additions.

71

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. R.G. Buildwell Engineers Ltd. · 99 Taxmann.com 284 · Supreme Court 2018 · Section 37(1) · Section 143(3) · Section 145(3) · ad-hoc disallowance · expenditure disallowance · rejection of books of accounts · justification for disallowance · arbitrary addition · conjectures and surmises

Also reported as

99 Taxmann 284

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234CSection 145(3)Section 10AASection 115JBSection 195

Issues it is cited on

section 250(2)tds on commissionsection 80ia(8)section 9(1)(vii)(b)section 195(2)section 269tsection 131(1)section 153a(1)(b)right to receivefees for included servicesstatement under section 132(4)retracted statement

Judgments citing PCIT v. R.G. Buildwell Engineers Ltd.

Kyal Agencies Private Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. ITO Ward-1(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 120/CTK/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack17 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2017-18 Kyal Agencies Private Ltd., Kyal Agencies Private Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Income Tax Officer, Ward- 7341/10158, 7341/10158, Adimata Adimata 1(1), Bhubaneswar. 1(1), Bhubaneswar. Colony, Near Sainik School, Colony, Near Sainik School, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aafck 2829 R (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mohit Sheth Mohit Sheth Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 17/11 11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 17/11 11/2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Mohit ShethFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2017-18 Kyal Agencies Private Ltd., Kyal Agencies Private Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Income Tax Officer, Ward- 7341/10158, 7341/10158, Adimata Adimata 1(1), Bhubaneswar. 1(1), Bhubaneswar. Colony, Near Sainik School, Colony, Near Sainik School, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. PAN/GIR No. PAN/…

Bhikari Charan Meher, Sambalpur vs. DCIT/ACIT.Circle-1(1), Sambalpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is stands allowed

ITA 111/CTK/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack17 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2017-18 Bhikari Bhikari Charan Charan Meher, Meher, Vs. Dcit/Acit, Dcit/Acit, Circle Circle 1(1), 1(1), Marwaripara, Sambalpur Marwaripara, Sambalpur Sambalpur Sambalpur Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Ackpm 3263 D (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Ar P.K.Mishra, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 17/11 11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 17/11 11/2022 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi , National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi , National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 24.4.2022 In Appeal No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1042823186(1) 23/1042823186(1) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 18. 2. Shri P.K.Mishra, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Shri P.K.Mishra, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Shri P.K.Mishra, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri S.C.Mohanty, Ld Sr Dr Appeared For The Revenue. S.C.Mohanty, Ld Sr Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2017-18 Bhikari Bhikari Charan Charan Meher, Meher, Vs. DCIT/ACIT, DCIT/ACIT, Circle Circle 1(1), 1(1), Marwaripara, Sambalpur Marwaripara, Sambalpur Sambalpur Sambalpur PAN/GIR No. PAN/GIR No.ACKPM 3263 D (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.K.Mishra, AR P.K.…

Mr. Nagaraj Narayana vs. M/S. Alpine Housing Development

Appeals are allowed;

CMP/343/2019HC Karnataka16 Aug 2022

Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

Section 260

…1 ITA No. 343 of 2019 C/W ITA No. 342 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.G.SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 343 OF 2019 C/W INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 342 OF 2019 IN I.T.A NO. 343 OF 2019 BETWEEN: SHRI MUKESH GUPTA NO.32, ASHAGEET SHESHADRI ROAD HOTEL SUPRABHAT COMPLEX SHESHADRI IYEDR ROAD ANANDRAO CIRCLE BENGALURU-560 009. PAN:AANPG1383P …APPELLANT (BY SHRI. ANNAMALAI, ADV…

Sahajanand Laser Technology Ltd., Gandhinagar vs. The ITO, Ward-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1431/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Ms. Arti Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 10ASection 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…were at no point of time rejected by the Assessing Officer and these miscellaneous expenses were disallowed on adhoc basis without giving any justification to that extent. The Ld. A.R. relied upon the decision of Pr. CIT vs. R.G. Buildwell Engineers Limited, 99 Taxmann.com 284 (SC). 16. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials available on record. From the perusal of the assessment order, it can be seen that the basis of making this addition was not demonstrated by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order. In fact, books were also now rejected by the Assessing Officer. Thus, me…

The Dy. CIT, Circle-8, Ahmedabad vs. Sahajanand Laser Technology Limited, Gandhinagar

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 496/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Ms. Arti Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 10ASection 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…were at no point of time rejected by the Assessing Officer and these miscellaneous expenses were disallowed on adhoc basis without giving any justification to that extent. The Ld. A.R. relied upon the decision of Pr. CIT vs. R.G. Buildwell Engineers Limited, 99 Taxmann.com 284 (SC). 16. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials available on record. From the perusal of the assessment order, it can be seen that the basis of making this addition was not demonstrated by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order. In fact, books were also now rejected by the Assessing Officer. Thus, me…

M/S. Skf Technologies (India) Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 1773/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri K.R Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Narayana K.R, Addl.CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…that the details submitted were not considered by the lower authorities who went on to make adhoc disallowance. The ld.AR in this regard placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. R.G Buildwell Engineers Ltd. (2018) 99 Taxmann.com 284. 8.3. The ld.DR relied on the written submission. 8.4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials on record. We notice that the AO and the CIT(A) have made the disallowance on adhoc basis at 50% without going into the details of the expenditure and by merely relying on the narrations given in the ledger extract. We also…

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

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

ITA 584/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2016-17

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘I-1’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2016-17 FMI Automotive Vs. DCIT, Components Pvt. Ltd., Circle-7(1), Plot No. 1, Sub-Plot -4,5,8 New Delhi and 9 MSIL, Supplier Park, Phase-3A, IMT Manesar, Gurgaon, Haryana PAN :AABCF1682P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Himanshu S. Sinha, Adv. Sh. Bhuwan Dhoopar, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Surender Pal, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 06.09.2021 Date of pronouncement 24.09.2021 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, AM: This appeal by the…

M/S Swan Silk Private Limited vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, we do not find any merit in the

ITA/1033/2017HC Karnataka30 Jun 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 260Section 260ASection 37Section 40

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR I.T.A. NO.1033 OF 2017 BETWEEN: M/S. SWAN SILK PRIVATE LIMITED REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI. K.S. MANJUNATH POST BOX 25210, "SWAN HOUSE" #40, 4TH CROSS, RESIDENCY ROAD BENGALURU-560025 PAN:AACCS4515R. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. S. ANNAMALAI, ADV.,) AND: THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-12(3), BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA 6TH BLOCK BENGALURU-560095. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.,) - - - T…

Khetan Twist Net P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 12(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3031/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Nov 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Smt. Arati Vissanji, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Deshpande, DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Khetan Twist Net Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer-12(3)(2), Room No. 147A, 1st Floor, Aayakar B-204, Hetal Arch, Opp: Natraj Vs. Market, S.V. Road, Malad (West), Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400064. Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AABCK4794N Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Smt. Arati Vissanji, AR Revenue by : Shri Sunil Deshpande, DR : 05/11/2020 Date of Hearing Date of pronouncement : 23/11/2020 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, A.M. This is an appeal filed…

Sri. Krishnan Ranjith, Kochi vs. The ACIT, Kochi

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

ITA 141/COCH/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jun 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.K.GopiFor Respondent: Sri.B.Sajjive, Sr.AR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri George George K, Judicial Member ITA No.141/Coch/2020 : Asst.Year 2008-2009 Sri.Krishnan Ranjith The Asst.Commissioner of 2A, Chackolas Water Scapes Vs. Income-tax, Cir.2(2) Pandit Karuppan Road Range -2 Thevara Kochi. Cochin – 682 013. PAN : ADLPR2984G. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.K.Gopi Respondent by : Sri.B.Sajjive, Sr.AR Date of Pronouncement : 15.06.2020 Date of Hearing : 11.06.2020 O R D E R This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A), dated 27.11.2019. The relevant assess…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore vs. M/S Rns Infrastructure Ltd, Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by revenue stands dismissed

ITA 290/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri. Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Addl. CIT – DR
Section 14Section 40

…decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Pr. CIT vs. M/s. R.G Buildwell Engineers Ltd., reported in (2018) 99 Taxmann.com 283 which has been approved by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Pr. CIT vs. M/s. R.G Buildwell Engineers Ltd., reported in (2018) 99 Taxmann.com 284, wherein identical situation arose. 9 We have perused submissions advanced by both sides in light of records placed before us. Assessee also placed reliance upon order dated 11/09/09 passed by this Tribunal in assessee’s own case for assessment year 2004-05 in ITA No. 929 and 930/B/2008, wherein identical disallowance made by Ld. AO stood…