How many judgments cite S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT?

1,484 judgments on BharatTax cite S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT (288 ITR 1), spanning 2008 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 36(1)(iii), Section 14A, Section 1961, Section 148, Section 147.

S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT

288 ITR 1Supreme Court of India2007#26 most cited

What is S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Interest paid on borrowed funds cannot be disallowed merely because the assessee made interest-free advances, provided those advances were made for business purposes and commercial expediency. The Revenue cannot dictate a businessman's commercial decisions, but the assessee bears the onus to prove the business expediency.

1,484

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT · 288 ITR 1 · Section 36(1)(iii) · commercial expediency · business expediency · interest-free advances · disallowance of interest · onus to prove business purpose · borrowed funds · Revenue interference

Also reported as

158 Taxmann 74158 Taxmann.com 74

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 14A Section 1961 Section 148 Section 147 Section 40(a)(ia)Section 142(1)

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

commercial expediency interest free advances section 36(1)(iii)business expediency disallowance of interest expenditure section 36(1)section 36 revenue expenditure section 37(1)section 37 capital expenditure section 14a

Judgments citing S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT

M/S.Thiruvalluvar Textiles Pvt. Ltd., Rasipuram vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for A

ITA 1735/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. Y.Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 11

…es are made for capital account or revenue account. 18. In support of the above arguments, ld.AR rely on the following judicial pronouncements: 19. Apart from relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of S A Buildiers ltd reported in 288 ITR 1 (SC), the ld.AR placed reliance in the case of Madhav Prasad Jantia vs CIT UP AIR 1979 SC 1291, it was held that the expression “for the purpose of business occurring under this provision is wider in scope than the expression “for the purpose of earning income, profit or gains”. Similar view has been expressed in the case of CIT vs Malayalam Pl…

M/S. Thiruvalluvar Textiles Pvt. Ltd., Rasipuram vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for A

ITA 1734/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. Y.Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 11

M/S. Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

ITA 26/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. M. Mahesh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "C" BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.21 to 26/Bang/2024 Assessment Years : 2013-14 to 2018-19 M/s. Barbeque-Nation Hospitality Ltd., Vs. DCIT, Saket Callipolis, Unit No. 601 & 602, 6th Floor, Doddakannalli Village, Varthur Hobli, Sarjapur Road, Bengaluru – 560035. PAN : AAKCS3053N APPELLANT Circle - 2(2), Bangalore. RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. Advocate Revenue by : Shri. K. M. Mahesh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing : 18.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 31.10.2025…

M/S. Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

ITA 25/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Respondent: Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. Advocate

Section 132Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "C" BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.21 to 26/Bang/2024 Assessment Years : 2013-14 to 2018-19 M/s. Barbeque-Nation Hospitality Ltd., Vs. DCIT, Saket Callipolis, Unit No. 601 & 602, 6th Floor, Doddakannalli Village, Varthur Hobli, Sarjapur Road, Bengaluru – 560035. PAN : AAKCS3053N APPELLANT Assessee by Circle - 2(2), Bangalore. RESPONDENT : Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. Advocate Revenue by : Shri. K. M. Mahesh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing : 18.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 31.10.2025 O…

M/S. Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 24/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. M. Mahesh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.21 to 26/Bang/2024 Assessment Years : 2013-14 to 2018-19 M/s. Barbeque-Nation Hospitality Ltd., Vs. DCIT, Saket Callipolis, Unit No. 601 & 602, Circle – 2(2), 6th Floor, Doddakannalli Village, Bangalore. Varthur Hobli, Sarjapur Road, Bengaluru – 560035. PAN : AAKCS3053N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. Advocate Revenue by : Shri. K. M. Mahesh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing : 18.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025 O…

M/S. Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Officer, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

ITA 23/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "C" BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.21 to 26/Bang/2024 Assessment Years : 2013-14 to 2018-19 M/s. Barbeque-Nation Hospitality Ltd., Saket Callipolis, Unit No. 601 & 602, 6th Floor, Doddakannalli Village, Varthur Hobli, Sarjapur Road, Bengaluru – 560035. PAN : AAKCS3053N Vs. APPELLANT DCIT, Circle - 2(2), Bangalore. RESPONDENT Assessee by Revenue by Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. Advocate Shri. K. M. Mahesh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing Date of Pronouncement 18.09.2025 31.10.2025 Per B…

M/S. Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 22/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. M. Mahesh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

M/S. Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 21/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. M. Mahesh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 153ASection 234ASection 250

Sms Smelters Limited, Naharlagun vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Guwahati

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 100/GTY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36

…very small interest rates, to any sister concern. This would require to be enquired into and investigated afresh so that there is no ambiguity about the factual matrix of this case. We are also mindful of the judgment in the case of S.A. Builders reported in 288 ITR 1 (SC) where such an issue has been conclusively dealt by the Hon’ble Apex Court and in this case law there is also the dictum that the AO must not place himself in the shoes of the businessman to decide what is commercially expedient or not. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order for this issue and remand the same back to the Ld. AO for fresh…

DCIT Central Circle-06, New Delhi vs. Praveen Kumar Jolly, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in No

ITA 1654/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Dcit, Vs Praveen Kumar Jolly, Central Circle-06, 39/1, East Patel Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi-110008. Pan-Aagpj0144C Appellant Respondent

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…ITA No.1654/Del/2023 & C.O-134/Del/2023 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “A” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2011-12] DCIT, vs Praveen Kumar Jolly, Central Circle-06, 39/1, East Patel Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi-110008. PAN-AAGPJ0144C APPELLANT RESPONDENT C.O.No.-134/Del/2023 [In ITA No.1654/Del/2023] [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Praveen Kumar Jolly, vs DCIT, 39/1, East Patel Nagar, Central Circle-06, New Delhi-110008. New Delhi PAN-AAGPJ0144C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Revenue by Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr.DR Assessee b…

Te Connectivity India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Office of the Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2346/BANG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Darpan Kriplani, CAFor Respondent: Dr. KJ Dhivya, CIT (DR)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.2346/Bang/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 TE Connectivity India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of RMZ NXT Campus 2A Income Tax, Survey No.24/1, 24/2, 25/2, 3, Circle – 7(1)(1), 1st Floor, Sonnenahalli K.R Puram, Hobli, Bangalore. Bangalore. PAN – AABCT 7374 C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Darpan Kriplani, CA Revenue by : Dr. KJ Dhivya, CIT (DR) Date of hearing : 22.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 09.10.2025 O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT…

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Gujarat Apollo Industries Limited, Mehsana

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 407/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalthe Assistant Commissioner Gujarat Apollo Industries Ltd., Vs. Of Income Tax, Block No.486,487, 488, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad Mehsana Highway, Ahmedabad. Opp. Water Park, Dholasan, Mehsana-382732. [Pan :Aaacg7248 P] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Bp Srivastava, Sr. Dr Respondent By: Shri Mehul K Patel, Ar Date Of Hearing 06.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09.10.2025 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-:-

For Appellant: Shri BP Srivastava, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Mehul K Patel, AR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER The Assistant Commissioner Gujarat Apollo Industries Ltd., Vs. of Income Tax, Block No.486,487, 488, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad Mehsana Highway, Ahmedabad. Opp. Water Park, Dholasan, Mehsana-382732. [PAN :AAACG7248 P] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri BP Srivastava, Sr. DR Respondent by: Shri Mehul K Patel, AR Date of Hearing 06.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 09.10.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- This appeal is filed by the Revenue agains…

JCIT(OSD) Central Circle 1, Jhandewalan vs. Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd., Lucknow

ITA 1085/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…Jwala Prasad Radha Kishan vs. CIT 198 ITR 415 (Alld) 2. Highway Construction Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 111 CTR 143 (Guwahati). 3. CIT vs. Motor Credit Co. Pvt. Ltd, 127 ITR 572 (Mad.). 4. CIT vs. Devi Films (P) Ltd. 143 ITR 386 (Mad.) 5. S.A. Builders Ltd. vs. CIT(A) 288 ITR 1 (SC). 6. CIT vs. Hotel Savera 239 ITR 795 For the proposition that if no interest has been charged in the preceding year, the same cannot be considered during the year and the inquiries has to be limited to the increase in current year only. For the above proposition, the appellant would like to place reliance on the following cases:- 1. CIT vs. Sr…

Virinchi Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle 8(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1185/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1185/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22) M/S. Virinchi Ltd Vs. Dy.Cit Hyderabad Circle 8(1) Pan:Aaacv6672N Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Mrs. U Mini Chandran, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 25/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 24/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 09/10/2024 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(3) Of The Act, In Pursuant To The Directions Of The Drp Dated 19/09/2024 Passed U/S 144C(5) Of The Act For The A.Y 2021-22. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Mrs. U Mini Chandran, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 144C(5)Section 153

…High Court in the case of Ray-Ban Sun Optics India Ltd v. CIT (2017) 84 taxmann.com 24 (Del.) 8) ITAT Pune in the case of Renishaw Metrology Systems Ltd vs. DCIT (2022) 139 Taxmann.com 287 9) Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SA Builders Ltd vs. CIT (2007) 158 Taxmann 74 (S.C) 9. The learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the TPO has accepted an identical international transaction at ALP in the preceding year and even for the immediately preceding year i.e. 2020-21. 10. On the other hand, the learned DR has submitted that the TPO has issued a show cause notice to the assessee to submit the proof…

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

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

ITA 3489/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shris.Rifaur Rahmandcit, Circle 7 (1), Vs. Fmi Automotive Components Private Limited, Delhi. Plot No.1, Subplot 4, 5, 8 & 9 Msil, Supplier Park, Phase 3A, Imt Manesar, Gurgaon – 1222 050 (Haryana). (Pan :Aabcf1682P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By :Shri S.K. Agarwal, Ca Revenue By :Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2025 Date Of Order : 22.09.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Revenue Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 30.05.2024 For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld Nfac Has Erred In Allowing The Appeal Of The Assessee By Deleting The Addition Made By The Ao Amounting To Rs.5,90,59,019/- On Account Of Disallowance Of Foreign Exchange Loss On Account Of Plant & Machinery.

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 41

…see and decide whether or not a transaction should have been entered or the quantum of expenditure to be incurred to run the business. It is for the assessee to take commercial decisions and decide how to conduct and carryon its business. [S.A Builders [2007] 288 ITR 1, SC]. It is also settled law that ad-hoc disallowance of expenditure is not maintainable unless the Assessing Officer is able to provide specific defects in the claim of expenditure made by the assessee. There is no dispute that the accounts have been tax audited and the auditors have not given any adverse comments. It is also clear that the assess…

Sharad Kumar Singh, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 37(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the is partly allowed

ITA 692/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Acit, Sharad Kumar Singh Circle-3(1), Income Tax Office 10A, Norode Behari Mullick Road, 3, Government Place, Vs. Kolkata-700006, West Bengal West Bengal-700001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Alqps3842K Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Kapil Mondal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mondal, DR

Section 195Section 40Section 40A(3)

…reasonable and how much is not reasonable and unless any comparable are brought on record to show the unreasonableness of the expenses to record. The case of the assessee is covered by the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of SA Builders reported in 288 ITR 1 (SC). Ground no.4 is allowed. 6. Ground no.5 is against the order of ld. CIT (A) confirming the disallowance as made by the ld. AO of 25% of the assembling charges on estimated basis. 6.1. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that during the course of assessment proceedings, the ld. AO found t…

DCIT, Cen Cir 2(2), Chennai vs. Jayapriya Company, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

ITA 1252/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Yamuna, CIT

Section 132Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 250

…st year. We are of the opinion that it is here the High Court has gone wrong and this approach resulted in wrong application of Matching Concept." 10.17 We also refer to the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of SA Builders Ltd. v. CIT (288 ITR 1) wherein the AO had disallowed portion of the interest paid on the premise that, the assessee had diverted to its borrowed capital to the subsidiary and associate concerns from which no income was realized, which was confirmed by the High Court. On appeal by way of Special Leave Petition, the Hon’ble Apex Court however held that, the authorities b…

DCIT, CC2(2), Chennai vs. Jayapriya Company, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

ITA 1251/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Yamuna, CIT

Section 132Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 250

Sri Sainath Associates, Lucknow vs. Dy.CIT-6, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 649/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143(3)Section 253(3)

…on Mills Ltd. vs. CIT [(1954) 26 ITR 775(SC)] + Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram vs. CIT [(1959) 37 ITR 288(SC)] CIT vs. National Rayon Commercial Co. Ltd. [(1992) 193 ITR 744 (Bom 1TO vs. Super Chemicals Distributors [(2005) 1 SOT 102 (Del)] S.A. Builders vs. CIT [288 ITR 1 (SC)] Further the Hon'ble ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of JCIT vs. Haryana Steel & Alloys Ltd. (in 1.T.A No. 3735/DEL/99) held that no addition can be made on surmises and conjectures. DCIT VS. SOPHISTICATED MARBLES & GRANITE INDUSTRIES [(2010) 3 ITR (TRIB) 220 (DEL)] 26TH FEBRUARY, 2010 “Business expenditure — Allowability — AO made ad hoc disallo…

Pradeep Sharma, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

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

ITA 1522/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…ness and all the required details were filed and not disputed and therefore, we held that the expenditure being for the purposes of business of the assessee the claim cannot be denied. We get support of our view from the decision of S. A. Builders Ltd. Vs CIT 288 ITR 1 (SC) wherein the Apex Court held that there was nexus between the expenditure and purchase of the business (which need not necessarily be the business of the appellant itself the Revenue cannot justifiably claim to put itself in the arm-chair of the businessman or in the position of the board of directors and assume the role to decide how much is r…