Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

118 ITR 261Supreme Court of India1979#238 most cited

What is Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

An expense incurred by an assessee for its own business, such as advertising, marketing, and promotional (AMP) expenses, cannot be disallowed merely because it incidentally or indirectly benefits the assessee's sister concerns or associated enterprises.

323

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 372,250 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT · 118 ITR 261 · Section 37(1) disallowance · business expenditure · commercial expediency · indirect benefit sister concerns · associated enterprises · AMP expenses · related party transactions · Section 40A(2)

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 1961Section 195Section 147Section 148Section 37Section 40(a)(i)

Issues it is cited on

section 10(2)(xv)section 5(2)section 40a(2)(b)commercial expediencysection 40a(2)section 195arm's length pricesection 40(a)(i)section 37(1)section 9(1)section 37associated enterprises

Judgments citing Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

Vvf Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 39, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee for Assessment Year 2002-03

ITA 9030/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh R. Prasad (CIT-DR) &
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

…on even though assessee may not be in a position to show compelling necessity of incurring such expenditure. In support of the aforesaid proposition, reliance can be placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sasoon J. David & Co. P. Ltd., 118 ITR 261 (SC). 12. Before parting, we may also refer to an additional Ground raised by the assessee on this aspect to contend that the action of Assessing Officer in disallowing the salary expenditure was not within the scope and ambit of Sec. 153A of the Act. Such plea has been raised with respect to Assessment Years 2002-03 to 2005-06 on the ground tha…

Vvf Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 39, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee for Assessment Year 2002-03

ITA 9029/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh R. Prasad (CIT-DR) &
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

…on even though assessee may not be in a position to show compelling necessity of incurring such expenditure. In support of the aforesaid proposition, reliance can be placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sasoon J. David & Co. P. Ltd., 118 ITR 261 (SC). 12. Before parting, we may also refer to an additional Ground raised by the assessee on this aspect to contend that the action of Assessing Officer in disallowing the salary expenditure was not within the scope and ambit of Sec. 153A of the Act. Such plea has been raised with respect to Assessment Years 2002-03 to 2005-06 on the ground tha…

Vvf Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 39, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee for Assessment Year 2002-03

ITA 9028/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh R. Prasad (CIT-DR) &
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

…on even though assessee may not be in a position to show compelling necessity of incurring such expenditure. In support of the aforesaid proposition, reliance can be placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sasoon J. David & Co. P. Ltd., 118 ITR 261 (SC). 12. Before parting, we may also refer to an additional Ground raised by the assessee on this aspect to contend that the action of Assessing Officer in disallowing the salary expenditure was not within the scope and ambit of Sec. 153A of the Act. Such plea has been raised with respect to Assessment Years 2002-03 to 2005-06 on the ground tha…

Vvf Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 39, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee for Assessment Year 2002-03

ITA 9027/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh R. Prasad (CIT-DR) &
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

…on even though assessee may not be in a position to show compelling necessity of incurring such expenditure. In support of the aforesaid proposition, reliance can be placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sasoon J. David & Co. P. Ltd., 118 ITR 261 (SC). 12. Before parting, we may also refer to an additional Ground raised by the assessee on this aspect to contend that the action of Assessing Officer in disallowing the salary expenditure was not within the scope and ambit of Sec. 153A of the Act. Such plea has been raised with respect to Assessment Years 2002-03 to 2005-06 on the ground tha…

Vvf Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 39, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee for Assessment Year 2002-03

ITA 9026/MUM/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh R. Prasad (CIT-DR) &
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

…on even though assessee may not be in a position to show compelling necessity of incurring such expenditure. In support of the aforesaid proposition, reliance can be placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sasoon J. David & Co. P. Ltd., 118 ITR 261 (SC). 12. Before parting, we may also refer to an additional Ground raised by the assessee on this aspect to contend that the action of Assessing Officer in disallowing the salary expenditure was not within the scope and ambit of Sec. 153A of the Act. Such plea has been raised with respect to Assessment Years 2002-03 to 2005-06 on the ground tha…

Vvf Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 39, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee for Assessment Year 2002-03

ITA 9025/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh R. Prasad (CIT-DR) &
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

…on even though assessee may not be in a position to show compelling necessity of incurring such expenditure. In support of the aforesaid proposition, reliance can be placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sasoon J. David & Co. P. Ltd., 118 ITR 261 (SC). 12. Before parting, we may also refer to an additional Ground raised by the assessee on this aspect to contend that the action of Assessing Officer in disallowing the salary expenditure was not within the scope and ambit of Sec. 153A of the Act. Such plea has been raised with respect to Assessment Years 2002-03 to 2005-06 on the ground tha…

Vvf Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 39, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee for Assessment Year 2002-03

ITA 9024/MUM/2010[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh R. Prasad (CIT-DR) &
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

…on even though assessee may not be in a position to show compelling necessity of incurring such expenditure. In support of the aforesaid proposition, reliance can be placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sasoon J. David & Co. P. Ltd., 118 ITR 261 (SC). 12. Before parting, we may also refer to an additional Ground raised by the assessee on this aspect to contend that the action of Assessing Officer in disallowing the salary expenditure was not within the scope and ambit of Sec. 153A of the Act. Such plea has been raised with respect to Assessment Years 2002-03 to 2005-06 on the ground tha…

Ramesh Builders, Mumbai vs. ITO 12(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee-Ramesh Builders(India) in ITA N0

ITA 1798/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1797/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Ramesh Builders (India), Income Tax बनाम/ 9, Dhiraj Chambers, Officer,12(1)(2),Aayakar V. 9, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Bhavan,M.K. Road, Fort,Mumbai – 400001. Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaafr4655E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Dr. Mukesh Jain,DR
Section 143(3)Section 45(4)

…decisions:- (i) Jugal Kishore Baldev Sahai v. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 228. (ii) Sri Venkata Satyanarayana Rice Mill Contractors Co. v. CIT (1977) 223 ITR 101. (iii) CIT v. Walchand & Co. (P) Ltd. (1967) 65 ITR 381 (iv) Sasson J. David & Co. (P) Ltd. v. CIT (1979) 118 ITR 261 (v) CIT v. Birla Cotton Spg. & Wvg.Mills (1972) 82 ITR 166 (vi)S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT (2007) 288 ITR 1 ITA 1797/Mum/2012 & 40 ITA 1798/Mum/2012 The A.O. went through the submission of the assessee and distinguished the case laws relied upon by the assessee by observing as under:- “i) In the case of Jugal Kishore Baldev Sahai v. CIT (1967)…

Ramesh Builders (India), Mumbai vs. ITO 12(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee-Ramesh Builders(India) in ITA N0

ITA 1797/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1797/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Ramesh Builders (India), Income Tax बनाम/ 9, Dhiraj Chambers, Officer,12(1)(2),Aayakar V. 9, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Bhavan,M.K. Road, Fort,Mumbai – 400001. Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaafr4655E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Dr. Mukesh Jain,DR
Section 143(3)Section 45(4)

…decisions:- (i) Jugal Kishore Baldev Sahai v. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 228. (ii) Sri Venkata Satyanarayana Rice Mill Contractors Co. v. CIT (1977) 223 ITR 101. (iii) CIT v. Walchand & Co. (P) Ltd. (1967) 65 ITR 381 (iv) Sasson J. David & Co. (P) Ltd. v. CIT (1979) 118 ITR 261 (v) CIT v. Birla Cotton Spg. & Wvg.Mills (1972) 82 ITR 166 (vi)S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT (2007) 288 ITR 1 ITA 1797/Mum/2012 & 40 ITA 1798/Mum/2012 The A.O. went through the submission of the assessee and distinguished the case laws relied upon by the assessee by observing as under:- “i) In the case of Jugal Kishore Baldev Sahai v. CIT (1967)…

Liugong India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 1482/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Manoj Pardasani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Amrendra Kumar, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…n acknowledges that an expenditure cannot be disallowed wholly or partly because its incidentally benefits the third party. This was in context on section 57(1) of the Act. Reference was made to the decision in Sassoon J. David and Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 118 ITR 261 (SC). The Supreme Court in the said decision emphasised that the expression "wholly and exclusively" used in section 10(2)(xv) of the Act did not mean "necessarily". It said : "The fact that somebody other than the assessee is also benefited by the expenditure should not come in the way of an expenditure being allowed by way of a deduction under…

Fabindia Overseas Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 2245/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaasstt. Year: 2009-10 Asstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: S/Shri Aseem Chawla, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.M.Govil, CIT DR
Section 80

…he Act. This fact is recognised in the judgment itself. The fact that the language employed in Section 37(1) of the Act is broader than Section 57(iii) of the Act makes the position stronger. 20. In the case of Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, (1979) 118 ITR 261 (SC), the Supreme Court referred to the legislative history and noted that when the Income Tax Bill of 1961 was introduced, Section 37(1) required that the expenditure should have been incurred “wholly, necessarily and exclusively” for the purposes of business in order to merit deduction. Pursuant to public protest, the word “necessarily” was omi…

Fabindia Overseas Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 2244/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaasstt. Year: 2009-10 Asstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: S/Shri Aseem Chawla, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.M.Govil, CIT DR
Section 80

…he Act. This fact is recognised in the judgment itself. The fact that the language employed in Section 37(1) of the Act is broader than Section 57(iii) of the Act makes the position stronger. 20. In the case of Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, (1979) 118 ITR 261 (SC), the Supreme Court referred to the legislative history and noted that when the Income Tax Bill of 1961 was introduced, Section 37(1) required that the expenditure should have been incurred “wholly, necessarily and exclusively” for the purposes of business in order to merit deduction. Pursuant to public protest, the word “necessarily” was omi…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Fabindia Overseas (P) Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 1898/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaasstt. Year: 2009-10 Asstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: S/Shri Aseem Chawla, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.M.Govil, CIT DR
Section 80

…he Act. This fact is recognised in the judgment itself. The fact that the language employed in Section 37(1) of the Act is broader than Section 57(iii) of the Act makes the position stronger. 20. In the case of Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, (1979) 118 ITR 261 (SC), the Supreme Court referred to the legislative history and noted that when the Income Tax Bill of 1961 was introduced, Section 37(1) required that the expenditure should have been incurred “wholly, necessarily and exclusively” for the purposes of business in order to merit deduction. Pursuant to public protest, the word “necessarily” was omi…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Fabindia Overseas (P) Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 1894/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaasstt. Year: 2009-10 Asstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: S/Shri Aseem Chawla, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.M.Govil, CIT DR
Section 80

…he Act. This fact is recognised in the judgment itself. The fact that the language employed in Section 37(1) of the Act is broader than Section 57(iii) of the Act makes the position stronger. 20. In the case of Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, (1979) 118 ITR 261 (SC), the Supreme Court referred to the legislative history and noted that when the Income Tax Bill of 1961 was introduced, Section 37(1) required that the expenditure should have been incurred “wholly, necessarily and exclusively” for the purposes of business in order to merit deduction. Pursuant to public protest, the word “necessarily” was omi…

Nandkishor & Co., Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee-firm in ITA N0

ITA 8644/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jun 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 8644/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06) Nandkishore & Co., Acit 4(2), बनाम/ Unit No. 208/209, 6 Th Floor, V. Wadala Udyog Bhavan, Aayakar Bhavan, Next To Wadala Telephone M.K. Road, Exchange, Mumbai- 400020. Dadar (E), Mumbai – 400 031. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaafn5385K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh(D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)Section 94(7)

…) Ltd, (2010) 322 ITR 158 (SC), decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of D&H Sechron Electrodes Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, (1983) 142 ITR 528 (MP) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sasoon J. David & Co. P. Ltd. v. CIT, (1979) 118 ITR 261 (SC). The learned Counsel for the assessee- firm submitted that the reliance placed by the Revenue in the case of Union of India v. Dharmendra Textile Processors [2008] 306 ITR 277(SC) and decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Zoom Communication Private Limited(2010) 191 Taxman 179(Del. HC) is misconceived, but wherein the is…

Toshbro Medicals P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee company in ITA N0

ITA 7064/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 7064/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) M/S Toshbro Medicals Dcit – 1(3), बनाम/ Private Limited, Aayakar Bhavan, V. 8 Mohatta Bhavan, M.K. Road, Off Dr. E. Moses Road, Mumbai – 400 020. Worli, Mumbai – 400 018. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aabct4483C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri A. Ramachandran,DR
Section 143(3)Section 37Section 80G

…necessarily to be actually used . The assessee company submitted that relief may be allowed u/s 80G of the Act. The assessee company relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sassoon J. David & Company Private Limited v. CIT, (1979)118 ITR 261(SC), in the case of CIT v. Dhanrajgirji, (!973)91 ITR 544(SC), ITAT decision in the case of Brightest ITA 7064/Mum/2012 6 Circle Jewellery v. ACIT in ITA No. 4511/Mum/2011 . The assessee company also relied upon the decision in the case of CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers in ITXA No. 3908/2010 decided by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court on 21.6.2912. The l…

ACIT, Bangalore vs. 3M India Limited, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee- company as well as the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 727/BANG/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 May 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Bhutani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 92C

…urring expenditure. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. (345 ITR 241), after considering the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Walchand & Co. P.Ltd. (65 ITR 381)(SC), Sassoon J.David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (118 ITR 261)(SC) held that the TPO cannot determine ALP at nil by holding that there was no need to incur such expenditure. While coming to this conclusion, the Hon’ble High Court has referred to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Eastern Investments Ltd. vs. CIT (20 ITR 1)(SC) and CIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody (115 ITR 519)(SC). It has been held…

3M India Limited, Bangalore vs. Addl.C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee- company as well as the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 725/BANG/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 May 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Bhutani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 92C

…urring expenditure. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. EKL Appliances Ltd. (345 ITR 241), after considering the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Walchand & Co. P.Ltd. (65 ITR 381)(SC), Sassoon J.David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (118 ITR 261)(SC) held that the TPO cannot determine ALP at nil by holding that there was no need to incur such expenditure. While coming to this conclusion, the Hon’ble High Court has referred to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Eastern Investments Ltd. vs. CIT (20 ITR 1)(SC) and CIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody (115 ITR 519)(SC). It has been held…

Ge Money Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result ground, no

ITA 6282/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Sachit Jolly, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amendra Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 32Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 92C

…he business requirement of the assessee as well as regarding the selection of suppliers from services should have been procured from whom. For this he relied on the decisions of i. CIT V Walchand & CO Limited 65 ITR 381 (SC) ii. Sasoon J David& co P Ltd V CIT 118 ITR 261 (SC) iii. Hive Communications P Ltd V CIT 201 Taxman 99 ( Del ) iv. CIT V EKL Appliances 345 ITR 241 ( Del) It was further submitted that several tribunals have held that TPO cannot question the commercial wisdom of the assessee. i. Dresser-Rand India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT [2012] 13 ITR (Trib.) 422 (Mum) Page 29 of 79 G E Money Financial Services Pv…

Ge Money Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result ground, no

ITA 5882/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Sachit Jolly, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amendra Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 32Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 92C

…he business requirement of the assessee as well as regarding the selection of suppliers from services should have been procured from whom. For this he relied on the decisions of i. CIT V Walchand & CO Limited 65 ITR 381 (SC) ii. Sasoon J David& co P Ltd V CIT 118 ITR 261 (SC) iii. Hive Communications P Ltd V CIT 201 Taxman 99 ( Del ) iv. CIT V EKL Appliances 345 ITR 241 ( Del) It was further submitted that several tribunals have held that TPO cannot question the commercial wisdom of the assessee. i. Dresser-Rand India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT [2012] 13 ITR (Trib.) 422 (Mum) Page 29 of 79 G E Money Financial Services Pv…