SA Builders, 288 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT v. Panipat Woollen and General Mills Company Ltd.

103 ITR 66Supreme Court of India1976#1030 most cited

What is SA Builders, 288 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT v. Panipat Woollen and General Mills Company Ltd. authority for?

The Income Tax Department cannot sit in the armchair of a businessman or question their commercial wisdom and business decisions. Expenses incurred for business expediency, determined from the businessman's point of view, are allowable business expenses.

105

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,359 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

SA Builders · Panipat Woollen Mills · commercial expediency · business expenditure · allowable expenses · revenue cannot question commercial wisdom · Income Tax Department armchair businessman · genuine business expenses · Section 37(1) income tax

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 1962Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 133(6)Section 68

Issues it is cited on

nav methoddcf methodstrategic investmentsection 56(2)(viib)valuation of sharescommercial rightscommercial expediencysection 251(1)section 56(2)(vii)date of transferintangible assetssection 56(2)

Judgments citing SA Builders, 288 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT v. Panipat Woollen and General Mills Company Ltd.

Speedy Courier Services Pvt Ltd, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward - 2(4), Faridabad

In the result, the appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 80/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R.R. Kumar & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Punyah Building Vs Ito Materials Pvt. Ltd. Ward-2 (1) House No.1002, Near Talab Faridabad Shiv Colony, Old Faridabad Haryana Ballahgarh Haryana 122002 Pan No.Aagcp8742B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sparsh Beauty Care Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito Plot No.1066, Near Janta Barat Ward-2 (4) Ghar Baba Nagar, Faridabad Faridabad Haryana 121002 Haryana Pan No.Aascs2575D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Speedy Courier Services Pvt. Vs Ito Ltd. Ward- 2 (4) Plot No.1022, Near Talab Shiv Faridabad Colony, Faridabad Haryana Pan No.Aascs2579R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 131oSection 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…h manner risk has to be undertaken. Such an approach of the revenue has been judicially frowned by the Hon'ble Apex Court on several occasions, for instance in the case of SA Builders, 288 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT vs. Panipat Woollen and General Mills Company Ltd., 103 ITR 66 (SC). The Courts have held that Income Tax Department cannot sit in the armchair of businessman to decide what is profitable and how the business should be carried out. Commercial expediency has to be seen from the point of view of businessman. Here in this case if the investment has made keeping assessee's own business objective of projection of…

Shri Rampriya Developers Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Incometax, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1946/HYD/2017[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Aug 2024AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1946/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 1999-2000) Shri Rampriya Developers Vs. Dy. C. I. T. (P) Ltd Circle 3(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aajcs6629P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/08/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…hat we must look at is the contract or the statute or the decree, in relation to its terms, the obligation imposed and the purpose for which the transaction was entered into. This decision was followed in CIT v. Panipat Woollen & General Mills Co. Ltd. |1976) 103 ITR 66 (SC). In this case, the court was considering whether a particular payment under an agreement styled as selling agency agreement was deductible expense under the aforesaid provision. At page 74, the court held : “It is well settled that the court in order to construe all agreement has to look to the substance or the essence of it rather than to it…

Enn Vee Holdings Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle 31, New Delhi

In the result, the addition made u/s 68 and u/s 56(2)(viib) in the case of M/s Realtime Marketing Pvt

ITA 1195/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Neeraj Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…h manner risk has to be undertaken. Such an approach of the revenue has been judicially frowned by the Hon'ble Apex Court on several occasions, for instance in the case of SA Builders, 288 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT vs. Panipat Woollen and General Mills Company Ltd., 103 ITR 66 (SC). The Courts have held that Income Tax Department cannot sit in the Realtime Marketing & ENN VEE Holdings Pvt. Ltd. armchair of businessman to decide what is profitable and how the business should be carried out. Commercial expediency has to be seen from the point of view of businessman. Here in this case if the investment has made keeping ass…

DCIT, CC-31, New Delhi vs. Realtime Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the addition made u/s 68 and u/s 56(2)(viib) in the case of M/s Realtime Marketing Pvt

ITA 1839/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Neeraj Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…h manner risk has to be undertaken. Such an approach of the revenue has been judicially frowned by the Hon'ble Apex Court on several occasions, for instance in the case of SA Builders, 288 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT vs. Panipat Woollen and General Mills Company Ltd., 103 ITR 66 (SC). The Courts have held that Income Tax Department cannot sit in the Realtime Marketing & ENN VEE Holdings Pvt. Ltd. armchair of businessman to decide what is profitable and how the business should be carried out. Commercial expediency has to be seen from the point of view of businessman. Here in this case if the investment has made keeping ass…

Pingash Marketing Private Limited, Ballabhgarh vs. ITO Ward-2(1), Faridabad

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

ITA 99/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

Section 143(1)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 52(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…h manner risk has to be undertaken. Such an approach of the revenue has been judicially frowned by the Hon'ble Apex Court on several occasions, for instance in the case of SA Builders, 288 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT vs. Panipat Woollen and General Mills Company Ltd., 103 ITR 66 (SC). The Courts have held that Income Tax Department cannot sit in the armchair of businessman to decide what is profitable and how the business should be carried out. Commercial expediency has to be seen from the point of view of businessman. Here in this case if the investment has made keeping assessee's own business objective of projection of…

Gopesh Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Ballabhgarh vs. ITO Ward-1(3), Faridabad

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

ITA 98/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

Section 143(1)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 52(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…h manner risk has to be undertaken. Such an approach of the revenue has been judicially frowned by the Hon'ble Apex Court on several occasions, for instance in the case of SA Builders, 288 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT vs. Panipat Woollen and General Mills Company Ltd., 103 ITR 66 (SC). The Courts have held that Income Tax Department cannot sit in the armchair of businessman to decide what is profitable and how the business should be carried out. Commercial expediency has to be seen from the point of view of businessman. Here in this case if the investment has made keeping assessee's own business objective of projection of…

Vidhi Cinemas Pvt.Ltd., Haryana vs. ITO Ward-2(5), Faridabad

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

ITA 88/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

Section 143(1)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 52(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…h manner risk has to be undertaken. Such an approach of the revenue has been judicially frowned by the Hon'ble Apex Court on several occasions, for instance in the case of SA Builders, 288 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT vs. Panipat Woollen and General Mills Company Ltd., 103 ITR 66 (SC). The Courts have held that Income Tax Department cannot sit in the armchair of businessman to decide what is profitable and how the business should be carried out. Commercial expediency has to be seen from the point of view of businessman. Here in this case if the investment has made keeping assessee's own business objective of projection of…

Zhilmil Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Haryana vs. ITO Ward-2(5), Faridabad

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

ITA 87/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

Section 143(1)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 52(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…h manner risk has to be undertaken. Such an approach of the revenue has been judicially frowned by the Hon'ble Apex Court on several occasions, for instance in the case of SA Builders, 288 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT vs. Panipat Woollen and General Mills Company Ltd., 103 ITR 66 (SC). The Courts have held that Income Tax Department cannot sit in the armchair of businessman to decide what is profitable and how the business should be carried out. Commercial expediency has to be seen from the point of view of businessman. Here in this case if the investment has made keeping assessee's own business objective of projection of…

Shanta Blankets Pvt. Ltd., Haryana vs. ITO Ward-2(3), Faridabad

In the result, Appeals in ITA No

ITA 84/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No.84/Del/2021, A.Y.2016-17)

Section 143(1)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 52(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…h manner risk has to be undertaken. Such an approach of the revenue has been judicially frowned by the Hon'ble Apex Court on several occasions, for instance in the case of SA Builders, 288 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT vs. Panipat Woollen and General Mills Company Ltd., 103 ITR 66 (SC). The Courts have held that Income Tax Department cannot sit in the armchair of businessman to decide what is profitable and how the business should be carried out. Commercial expediency has to be seen from the point of view of businessman. Here in this case if the investment has made keeping assessee's own business objective of projection of…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -1 vs. Abhirvey Projects Private Limited

ITA/618/2023HC Delhi05 Apr 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 56(2)(viiib)

…ner risk has to be undertaken. Such an approach of the revenue has been judicially frowned by the Hon'ble Apex Court on several occasions, for instance in the case of SA Builders, 288 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT vs. Panipat Woollen and General Mills Company Ltd., 103 ITR 66 (SC). The Courts have held that Income Tax Department cannot it in the armchair of businessman to decide what is profitable and how the business should be carried out. Commercial expediency has to be seen from the point of view of businessman. Here in this case if the investment has made keeping assessee's own business objective of projectio…

Udayan Grover, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2880/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleudayan Grover V. National Faceless Appeal Centre Panch Mahal Delhi Panch Sristhi Complex {Acit – 26(3), Bkc, Mumbai} Powai, Mumbai - 400072 Pan: Aclpg0572G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vimal Punmiya Department Represented By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 57Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Udayan Grover v. National Faceless Appeal Centre Panch Mahal Delhi Panch Sristhi Complex {ACIT – 26(3), BKC, Mumbai} Powai, Mumbai - 400072 PAN: ACLPG0572G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri Vimal Punmiya Department Represented by : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik Date of conclusion of Hearing : 23.01.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 07.02.2024 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against order of Learned…

Thinkstations Learning Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-8(1), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 9824/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Advocate
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viib)

…ich manner risk has to be undertaken. Such an approach of the revenue has been judicially frowned by the Hon'ble Apex Court on several occasions, for instance in the case of SA Builders, 288 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT v. Panipat Woolen and General Mills Company Ltd., 103 ITR 66 (SC). The Courts have held that Income Tax Department cannot sit in the armchair of businessman to decide what is profitable and how the business should be carried out Commercial expediency has to be seen from the point of view of businessman. Here in this case if the investment has made keeping assessee's own business objective of projection of f…

Thinkstations Learning Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-25(1), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 7345/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Advocate
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viib)

…ich manner risk has to be undertaken. Such an approach of the revenue has been judicially frowned by the Hon'ble Apex Court on several occasions, for instance in the case of SA Builders, 288 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT v. Panipat Woolen and General Mills Company Ltd., 103 ITR 66 (SC). The Courts have held that Income Tax Department cannot sit in the armchair of businessman to decide what is profitable and how the business should be carried out Commercial expediency has to be seen from the point of view of businessman. Here in this case if the investment has made keeping assessee's own business objective of projection of f…

Manhar Yarns Private Limited, Ballabgarh vs. ITO Ward-1(5), Faridabad

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 97/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Sumangla Saxena, Adv &For Respondent: . Arvind Kumar Bansal
Section 143(3)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…1 Manhar Yarns Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI ] BEFORE DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 97/DEL/2021 (A.Y. 2016-17) Manhar Yarns Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO 103/B Near Shyamji Mandir, Ward-1(5) Malerna Road, Adarsh Nagar, C. R. Building, Faridabad Ballabhgarh, Haryana Haryana PAN No. AAICM8265G ( RESPONDENT ) ( APPELLANT ) Sh. Rajiv Saxena, Adv, Ms. Assessee by : Sumangla Saxena, Adv & Sh. Dishant Sethi, Adv Department by: . Arvind Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 05.06.2023 Date of Pronouncement 20…

Movefast Tour & Travels Pvt. Ltd, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward-1(5), Faridabad

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 96/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 96/Del/2021 (A.Y. 2016-17) Movefast Tour & Travels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito Plot No. 1066, Baba Nagar, Near Ward-1(5) Janta Barat Ghar, Faridabad, C. R. Building, Faridabad Haryana Haryana Pan No. Aaicm2608P ( Respondent ) ( Appellant )

For Appellant: Sumangla Saxena, Adv &For Respondent: . Arvind Kumar Bansal
Section 143(3)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 56Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…1 Movefast Tour & Travels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI] BEFORE DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 96/DEL/2021 (A.Y. 2016-17) Movefast Tour & Travels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO Plot No. 1066, Baba Nagar, Near Ward-1(5) Janta Barat Ghar, Faridabad, C. R. Building, Faridabad Haryana Haryana PAN No. AAICM2608P ( RESPONDENT ) ( APPELLANT ) Sh. Rajiv Saxena, Adv, Ms. Assessee by : Sumangla Saxena, Adv & Sh. Dishant Sethi, Adv Department by: . Arvind Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 05.06.2023 Date of Prono…

Nelumbo Paints Pvt. Ltd., Haryana vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Haryana

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 85/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Sumangla Saxena, Adv &For Respondent: . Arvind Kumar Bansal
Section 143(3)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 56Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…1 Nelumbo Paints Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI ] BEFORE DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 85/DEL/2021 (A.Y. 2016-17) Nelumbo Paints Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO 103/B, Near Shamji Mandir Ward-2(1) Malerna Road, Adarsh Nagar, C. R. Building, Faridabad Ballabhgarh, Faridabad, Haryana Haryana PAN No. AAECP0080A ( RESPONDENT ) ( APPELLANT ) Sh. Rajiv Saxena, Adv, Ms. Assessee by : Sumangla Saxena, Adv & Sh. Dishant Sethi, Adv Department by: . Arvind Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 05.06.2023 Date of Pr…

Abhi Soaps Private Limited, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward - 1(1), Faridabad

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 79/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Sumangla Saxena, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 56Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…1 Abhi Soaps Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 79/DEL/2021 (A.Y. 2016-17) Abhi Soaps Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO Plot No. 1002, Near Talab, Shiv Ward-1(1) Colony, Faridabad, Haryana, Faridabad PAN No. AALCA0776B Haryana ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) Sh. Rajiv Saxena, Adv, Ms. Assessee by : Sumangla Saxena, Adv Department by: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 30.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement 20.06.2023 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM This appeal is filed b…

Movefast Automobiles Private Limited, Haryana vs. ITO Ward-1(5), Faridabad

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 101/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Sumangla Saxena, Adv &For Respondent: . Arvind Kumar Bansal
Section 143(3)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…1 Movefast Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI ] BEFORE DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 101/DEL/2021 (A.Y. 2016-17) Movefast Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO FF-9, Vishnu Place Near Neelam Ward-1(5) flyover, Sector-20B, Haryana 20- C. R. Building, Faridabad B, Haryana Haryana PAN No. AAICM2607C ( RESPONDENT ) ( APPELLANT ) Sh. Rajiv Saxena, Adv, Ms. Assessee by : Sumangla Saxena, Adv & Sh. Dishant Sethi, Adv Department by: . Arvind Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 05.06.2023 Date of Pronounc…

Madhava Home Decor Pvt Ltd, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward - 1(5), Faridabad

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 82/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Sumangla Saxena, Adv &For Respondent: . Arvind Kumar Bansal
Section 143(3)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 56Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…1 Madhava Home Décor Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI ] BEFORE DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 82/DEL/2021 (A.Y. 2016-17) Madhva Home Décor Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO Plot No. 1002, Near Talab Shiv Ward-1 (5) Colony, Faridabad, Haryana C.R. Building, Faridabad, PAN No. AAICM2611G Haryana ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) Sh. Rajiv Saxena, Adv, Ms. Assessee by : Sumangla Saxena, Adv & Sh. Dishant Seth, Adv Department by: . Arvind Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 05.06.2023 Date of Pronouncement 16.06.2023…

Planet Gogo Private Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward-3(2), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1526/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viib)

…h manner risk has to be undertaken. Such an approach of the revenue has been judicially frowned by the Hon'ble Apex Court on several occasions, for instance in the case of SA Builders, 288 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT vs. Panipat Woollen and General Mills Company Ltd., 103 ITR 66 (SC). The Courts have held that Income Tax Department cannot sit in the armchair of businessman to decide what is profitable and how the business should be carried out. Commercial expediency has to be seen from the point of view of businessman. Here in this case if the investment has made keeping assessee’s own business objective of projection of…