Raipur Manufacturing Co. Ltd. 19 STC 1 (SC), Director of Supplies and Disposal v. Member, Board of Revenue

Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner Income Tax (Exemptions)-2(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri N. K. Pradhan, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4326/Mum/2017, 4327/Mum/2017, 4329/Mum/2017, 4331/Mum/2017, 4332/Mum/2017, 4475/Mum/2017 & 4476/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2007–08, 2008–09, 2009–10, 2010–11,2012–13,2013–14 &, 2014–15) Maharashtra Industrial Development Assistant Commissioner Of Income Corporation Tax (Exemptions) 2(1) Udyog Sarathi, Piramal Chambers, बिाम/ Mahakali Caves Road, Lalbaug, Vs. Andheri (East) Mumbai – 400012 Mumbai – 400093 स्थामी रेखा सं./जीआइआय सं ./Pan/Gir No. Aaacm3560C (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri V. Sridharan & S. Sriram प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Singh (Cit–Dr)

…aiourMfg. Co. [1967] 19 STC 1(SC), Director of Supplies & Disposal V/s. Member, Board of Revenue [1967] 20STC 398(SC) and 17 ITA 4326, 4327, 4329, 4331, 4332, 4475 &4476/Mum/ 2017 Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation Mrs.Sarojini Rajah V/s CZT[19691 71 ITR 504 (Mad) to explain the terms "trade, commerce or business". Referring to the concept and principle of "economic activity" 18. that has gained some acceptability in European Union and England it was explained that the said principle is applicable to Sales Tax, Value added tax, Excise duty etc. because these are not taxes on income but the taxable eve…

Sistas P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD) 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sistas Private Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of 101, Mahatma Gandhi Vs. Income Tax (Ods)-2(3), Road, 3Rd Floor, Shetty Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. House Mumbai-400023. Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacs5758E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Prasad Bapat, Ar Revenue By : Mr. V. Justin, Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/05/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 22/06/2018

…l Corporation Ltd. v. CIT (1935) 3 ITR 350, 355 (Mad); CIT v. Bharat Nidhi Ltd., (1966) 60 ITR 520 (Punj); Inderchand Hari Ram v. CIT, (1953) 23 ITR 437, 442-3 (All); Karsondas Ranchhoddass v. CIT, (1972) 83 ITR 1, 20 (Bom); Mrs. Sarojini Rajah v. CIT, (1969) 71 ITR 504 (Mad). Sistas Private Ltd. squarely applies to the instant case. In the instant case, while making the disallowance of expenses neither the AO nor the Ld. CIT(A) has bothered to look into the specific accounts and find fault with it. The books of the accounts of the appellant which are audited have not been rejected before making the disallowance…

Sistas P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (OSD)2(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sistas Private Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of 101, Mahatma Gandhi Vs. Income Tax (Ods)-2(3), Road, 3Rd Floor, Shetty Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. House Mumbai-400023. Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacs5758E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Prasad Bapat, Ar Revenue By : Mr. V. Justin, Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/05/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 22/06/2018

…l Corporation Ltd. v. CIT (1935) 3 ITR 350, 355 (Mad); CIT v. Bharat Nidhi Ltd., (1966) 60 ITR 520 (Punj); Inderchand Hari Ram v. CIT, (1953) 23 ITR 437, 442-3 (All); Karsondas Ranchhoddass v. CIT, (1972) 83 ITR 1, 20 (Bom); Mrs. Sarojini Rajah v. CIT, (1969) 71 ITR 504 (Mad). Sistas Private Ltd. squarely applies to the instant case. In the instant case, while making the disallowance of expenses neither the AO nor the Ld. CIT(A) has bothered to look into the specific accounts and find fault with it. The books of the accounts of the appellant which are audited have not been rejected before making the disallowance…

Bakhtawar Construction Co. P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singh

…incurred the expenditure wholly and exclusively which is allowable expenses. In support of his submissions the ld. AR for the assessee filed a long list of following decision. (i) CIT Vs Baharat Nidhi Ltd , 60 ITR 520 (Punjab), (ii) Mrs Sarojini Rajah Vs CIT 71 ITR 504 (Madras), (iii) V.VE. Vairavan Chettiar Vs. CIT, 72 ITR 114(Madras), (iv) Karsondas Ranchhoddass Vs. CIT, 83 ITR 1 (Bombay), (v) Hindustan Chemical Works Ltd. Vs. CIT, 124 ITR 561 (Bombay), (vi) CIT vs. Ganga Properties Ltd, 199 ITR 94 (Calcutta), (vii) Lakshmi Narayan Board Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, 205 CTR 359 (Kerala), 3 ITA No. 6915/M/11 & 51…

Dolphin Offshore Shipping Ltd, Belapur vs. Asst CIT 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s Dolphin Offshore Shipping Ltd., Vs. The ACIT, 5(1), LIC Bldg, Plot N. 54, Mumbai Sector II, Belapur-400614 PAN No. AAACP2682G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Mr. M. Subramanian, AR Revenue by: Mr. M.C. Omi Ningshen, DR Date of Hearing : 24/03/2017 Date of pronouncement: 28/04/2017 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, A.M This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 2009-10. The appeal is directed against the or…

Ambience Business Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 6(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu (Am) & Shri. Ram Lal Negi (Jm)

…t to do should not disqualify him from pleading that the expenditure that he had incurred was expended for the purposes of his business.'' 10. Much the same view was also taken in a recent decision of the Madras High Court, Mrs. Sarojini Rajah vs. CIT (1969) 71 ITR 504 (Mad) : TC12R.897, where also a long interval of time had resulted in the Tribunal holding that the assessee had ceased to be a dealer in shares. Veeraswami, J. (now the Chief Justice), after referring to the nature and relevant considerations in the report of the Royal Commission on the Taxation of Profits and Income, 1955, in England, held at pa…

DCIT Cen Cir 6(1), Mumbai vs. Ambience Advertising P. Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu (Am) & Shri. Ram Lal Negi (Jm)

…t to do should not disqualify him from pleading that the expenditure that he had incurred was expended for the purposes of his business.'' 10. Much the same view was also taken in a recent decision of the Madras High Court, Mrs. Sarojini Rajah vs. CIT (1969) 71 ITR 504 (Mad) : TC12R.897, where also a long interval of time had resulted in the Tribunal holding that the assessee had ceased to be a dealer in shares. Veeraswami, J. (now the Chief Justice), after referring to the nature and relevant considerations in the report of the Royal Commission on the Taxation of Profits and Income, 1955, in England, held at pa…

DCIT Cen Cir 6(1), Mumbai vs. Ambience Advertising P. Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu (Am) & Shri. Ram Lal Negi (Jm)

…t to do should not disqualify him from pleading that the expenditure that he had incurred was expended for the purposes of his business.'' 10. Much the same view was also taken in a recent decision of the Madras High Court, Mrs. Sarojini Rajah vs. CIT (1969) 71 ITR 504 (Mad) : TC12R.897, where also a long interval of time had resulted in the Tribunal holding that the assessee had ceased to be a dealer in shares. Veeraswami, J. (now the Chief Justice), after referring to the nature and relevant considerations in the report of the Royal Commission on the Taxation of Profits and Income, 1955, in England, held at pa…

ITO 6(1)(3), Mumbai vs. Ambience Business Services P. Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu (Am) & Shri. Ram Lal Negi (Jm)

…t to do should not disqualify him from pleading that the expenditure that he had incurred was expended for the purposes of his business.'' 10. Much the same view was also taken in a recent decision of the Madras High Court, Mrs. Sarojini Rajah vs. CIT (1969) 71 ITR 504 (Mad) : TC12R.897, where also a long interval of time had resulted in the Tribunal holding that the assessee had ceased to be a dealer in shares. Veeraswami, J. (now the Chief Justice), after referring to the nature and relevant considerations in the report of the Royal Commission on the Taxation of Profits and Income, 1955, in England, held at pa…