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

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2276/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT
Section 143(3)

…sum of money was expended on the ground of commercial expediency and in order indirectly to facilitate the carrying on of the business of the assessee 69 I.T.A. Nos.2275-2281/Chny/2019 & In a subsequent decision in T Sassoon J David and Co P Ltd vs CIT 1979 118 ITR 261 the Apex Court held that the three tests mentioned in the above Supreme Court case have to be read disjunctively Consequently if a payment satisfiesany of the three tests the same would be admissible 24. Brief facts are that the AO during the course of assessment proceedings noted that the assessee company has claimed foreign tour expenses incur…

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2275/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT
Section 143(3)

…sum of money was expended on the ground of commercial expediency and in order indirectly to facilitate the carrying on of the business of the assessee 69 I.T.A. Nos.2275-2281/Chny/2019 & In a subsequent decision in T Sassoon J David and Co P Ltd vs CIT 1979 118 ITR 261 the Apex Court held that the three tests mentioned in the above Supreme Court case have to be read disjunctively Consequently if a payment satisfiesany of the three tests the same would be admissible 24. Brief facts are that the AO during the course of assessment proceedings noted that the assessee company has claimed foreign tour expenses incur…

M/S. V.V.Vanniaperumal & Sons, Virudhunagar vs. PCIT-2, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1765/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT
Section 143(3)

…sum of money was expended on the ground of commercial expediency and in order indirectly to facilitate the carrying on of the business of the assessee 69 I.T.A. Nos.2275-2281/Chny/2019 & In a subsequent decision in T Sassoon J David and Co P Ltd vs CIT 1979 118 ITR 261 the Apex Court held that the three tests mentioned in the above Supreme Court case have to be read disjunctively Consequently if a payment satisfiesany of the three tests the same would be admissible 24. Brief facts are that the AO during the course of assessment proceedings noted that the assessee company has claimed foreign tour expenses incur…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1)(2), Bangalore vs. M/S. Boving Fouress Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee and the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 646/BANG/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.S.Parthasarthi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Muzaffar Hussain, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 37

…a) without analyzing the merits and demerits of the issue before him. However, while arriving at such a conclusion, the IT authorities have failed to keep in view the rulings of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sasson J David & Co; Pvt. Ltd v. CIT (1979) 118 ITR 261 (SC), Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Mysore Kirloskar Ltd v. CIT (1987) 166 ITR 836 (Kar). 6.5 For the assessment year 2005-06, the assessment order has been completed under section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 27/12/2007 wherein we find there is no disallowance of commission payments. The principle of res judicata does no…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Fouress Pvt. Ltd., Hosakote

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee and the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 848/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.S.Parthasarthi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Muzaffar Hussain, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 37

…a) without analyzing the merits and demerits of the issue before him. However, while arriving at such a conclusion, the IT authorities have failed to keep in view the rulings of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sasson J David & Co; Pvt. Ltd v. CIT (1979) 118 ITR 261 (SC), Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Mysore Kirloskar Ltd v. CIT (1987) 166 ITR 836 (Kar). 6.5 For the assessment year 2005-06, the assessment order has been completed under section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 27/12/2007 wherein we find there is no disallowance of commission payments. The principle of res judicata does no…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Fouress Pvt. Ltd., Hosakote

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee and the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 847/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.S.Parthasarthi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Muzaffar Hussain, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 37

…a) without analyzing the merits and demerits of the issue before him. However, while arriving at such a conclusion, the IT authorities have failed to keep in view the rulings of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sasson J David & Co; Pvt. Ltd v. CIT (1979) 118 ITR 261 (SC), Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Mysore Kirloskar Ltd v. CIT (1987) 166 ITR 836 (Kar). 6.5 For the assessment year 2005-06, the assessment order has been completed under section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 27/12/2007 wherein we find there is no disallowance of commission payments. The principle of res judicata does no…

M/S B. Fouress Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee and the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 846/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.S.Parthasarthi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Muzaffar Hussain, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 37

…a) without analyzing the merits and demerits of the issue before him. However, while arriving at such a conclusion, the IT authorities have failed to keep in view the rulings of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sasson J David & Co; Pvt. Ltd v. CIT (1979) 118 ITR 261 (SC), Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Mysore Kirloskar Ltd v. CIT (1987) 166 ITR 836 (Kar). 6.5 For the assessment year 2005-06, the assessment order has been completed under section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 27/12/2007 wherein we find there is no disallowance of commission payments. The principle of res judicata does no…

M/S. Himalaya Wellness Company (Formerly Known As the Himalaya Drug Company), Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 6(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 259/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.259/Bang/2022 : Asst.Year 2017-2018 M/S.Himalaya Wellness Company The Deputy Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As The Himalaya Income-Tax, Circle 6(1)(1) V. Bengaluru. Drug Company), Makali, Tumkur Road Bengaluru – 562 162. Pan : Aadft3025B. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri.Padamchand Kincha, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sumer Singh Meena, CIT -DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 2(11)Section 92C

…holly 59 IT(TP)A No.259/Bang/2022 M/s.Himalaya Wellness Company. 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 & Co (P.) 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 benefitted by the expenditure should not come in the way of an expenditure being allowed by way of a deduction under…

Messung Systems Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 14, Pune

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 2585/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2585/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri S. P. Walimbe
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JM AND SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं. / ITA No.2585/PUN/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Messung Systems Pvt.Ltd. 501, Lunkad Skyvista, Sr. No. 230/A/3/2, Viman Nagar, Pune – 411 014. .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant PAN : AABCM1832B बनधम / V/s. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent DCIT, Circle 14, Pune Assessee by : Shri Nikhil Pathak Revenue by : Shri S. P. Walimbe सपनवधई की तधरऩख / Date of Hearing : 05.05.2022 घोषणध की तधरऩख / Date of Pronouncement : 08.06.2022 आदेश / ORDER PER S…

Coca-Cola India Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1(1), Pune

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the assessment

ITA 182/PUN/2004[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Apr 2022AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1258/Pun/2003 & Ita No.182/Pun/2004 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 1998-99 & 1999-2000 Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of 1107-1110, Pirangut Income Tax, Tal Mulshi,Pune Circle 1(1), Pune Pan : Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1258/PUN/2003 & ITA No.182/PUN/2004 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 1998-99 & 1999-2000 Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of 1107-1110, Pirangut Income Tax, Tal Mulshi,Pune Circle 1(1), Pune PAN : AAACB8573G Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.237/PUN/2004 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 1999-2000 The Dy. Commissioner of Vs. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, 1107-1110, Pirangut Circle 1(1), Pune Tal Mulshi,Pune PA…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Pune vs. Coca-Cola India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the assessment

ITA 237/PUN/2004[199-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Apr 2022

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1258/Pun/2003 & Ita No.182/Pun/2004 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 1998-99 & 1999-2000 Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of 1107-1110, Pirangut Income Tax, Tal Mulshi,Pune Circle 1(1), Pune Pan : Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1258/PUN/2003 & ITA No.182/PUN/2004 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 1998-99 & 1999-2000 Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of 1107-1110, Pirangut Income Tax, Tal Mulshi,Pune Circle 1(1), Pune PAN : AAACB8573G Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.237/PUN/2004 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 1999-2000 The Dy. Commissioner of Vs. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, 1107-1110, Pirangut Circle 1(1), Pune Tal Mulshi,Pune PA…

Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the assessment

ITA 1258/PUN/2003[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Apr 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1258/Pun/2003 & Ita No.182/Pun/2004 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 1998-99 & 1999-2000 Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of 1107-1110, Pirangut Income Tax, Tal Mulshi,Pune Circle 1(1), Pune Pan : Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1258/PUN/2003 & ITA No.182/PUN/2004 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 1998-99 & 1999-2000 Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of 1107-1110, Pirangut Income Tax, Tal Mulshi,Pune Circle 1(1), Pune PAN : AAACB8573G Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.237/PUN/2004 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 1999-2000 The Dy. Commissioner of Vs. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, 1107-1110, Pirangut Circle 1(1), Pune Tal Mulshi,Pune PA…

Highgrace Investments P. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, Hyd, Hyderabad

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 635/HYD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri L. P. Sahu

For Respondent: Shri T. Sunil Goutam. (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)(a)

…red voluntarily and without any necessity and if it is incurred for promoting the business and to earn profits assessee can claim deduction even though there was no compelling necessity to incur such expenditure. (Sasson J. David & Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (1979) 118 ITR 261 (SC)). Though the main objects of business is to earn profits, business purposes are wider than profit-making purposes. Business expediency does not require that expenses should be incurred only for earning immediate profits. Expenses incurred though not directly related to earning to income, may be allowable deductions if they are related to the…

Highgrace Investments P. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, Hyd, Hyderabad

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 634/HYD/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Apr 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri L. P. Sahu

For Respondent: Shri T. Sunil Goutam. (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)(a)

…red voluntarily and without any necessity and if it is incurred for promoting the business and to earn profits assessee can claim deduction even though there was no compelling necessity to incur such expenditure. (Sasson J. David & Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (1979) 118 ITR 261 (SC)). Though the main objects of business is to earn profits, business purposes are wider than profit-making purposes. Business expediency does not require that expenses should be incurred only for earning immediate profits. Expenses incurred though not directly related to earning to income, may be allowable deductions if they are related to the…

Elem Investments P. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, Hyd, Hyderabad

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 624/HYD/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Apr 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri L. P. Sahu

For Respondent: Shri T. Sunil Goutam. (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)(a)

…red voluntarily and without any necessity and if it is incurred for promoting the business and to earn profits assessee can claim deduction even though there was no compelling necessity to incur such expenditure. (Sasson J. David & Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (1979) 118 ITR 261 (SC)). Though the main objects of business is to earn profits, business purposes are wider than profit-making purposes. Business expediency does not require that expenses should be incurred only for earning immediate profits. Expenses incurred though not directly related to earning to income, may be allowable deductions if they are related to the…

M/S. United Spirits Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 2701/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.2701/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 M/S.United Spirits Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of Ub Towers, Income-Tax, Circle 7(1)(1) V. No.24 Vittal Mallya Road Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 001. Pan : Aaccm8043J. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Senior Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Pradeep Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2022 Date Of Hearing : 24.03.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against Final Assessment Order Dated 12.10.2017 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The I.T.Act. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2013-2014. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Follows: The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Manufacture & Sale Of Alcoholic Beverage. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2013-2014 On 28.11.2013 Which Was Selected For Scrutiny Assessment. During The Course Of Assessment, The Assessee’S Case Was Also Referred To The Transfer Pricing Officer (Tpo). The Tpo Vide Order Dated 26.10.2016, Recommended Transfer Pricing Adjustments. The A.O., Thereafter, Passed A Draft Assessment Order Dated 30.12.2016. 2 It(Tp)A No.2701/Bang/2017 M/S.United Spirits Limited.

For Appellant: Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 234CSection 36(1)(iii)

…iture under section 37 of the Act, as per the settled position of law. Reference in this regard was made to the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in CIT vs. Chandulal Keshavlal & Co. [1960] 38 ITR 601 (SC), Sasson J. David and Co. P. Ltd vs. CIT 118 ITR 261(SC) and SA Builders Ltd. vs. CIT 288 ITR 1(SC). He further submitted that the Revenue cannot step into the shoes of an assessee to determine the commercial expediency of an expenditure incurred by it. 90. On the other hand, the learned DR relied upon the order of the AO and the DRP in support of his contentions. 91. After considering the rival su…

Reliance Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Large Taxpayer Unit-2, Mumbai

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 2876/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2022AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 28

…s not apply." It will, therefore, be clear that even if an expense is incurred voluntarily, it may still be construed as 'wholly and exclusively'. Explaining this principle, Hon'ble Supreme Court has, in the case of Sassoon J David & Co. (P) Ltd.v. CIT [1979] 118 ITR 261/1 Taxman 485inter alia observed that : "It has to be observed here that the expression "wholly and exclusively" used in s. 10(2)(xv) of the Act does not mean "necessarily". Ordinarily, it is for the assessee to decide whether any expenditure should be incurred in the course of his or its business. Such expenditure may be incurred voluntarily and…

DCIT (Ltu)-2, Mumbai vs. M/S Reliance Industries Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 2344/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2022AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 28

…s not apply." It will, therefore, be clear that even if an expense is incurred voluntarily, it may still be construed as 'wholly and exclusively'. Explaining this principle, Hon'ble Supreme Court has, in the case of Sassoon J David & Co. (P) Ltd.v. CIT [1979] 118 ITR 261/1 Taxman 485inter alia observed that : "It has to be observed here that the expression "wholly and exclusively" used in s. 10(2)(xv) of the Act does not mean "necessarily". Ordinarily, it is for the assessee to decide whether any expenditure should be incurred in the course of his or its business. Such expenditure may be incurred voluntarily and…

Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Mumbai

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 1645/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2022AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 28

…s not apply." It will, therefore, be clear that even if an expense is incurred voluntarily, it may still be construed as 'wholly and exclusively'. Explaining this principle, Hon'ble Supreme Court has, in the case of Sassoon J David & Co. (P) Ltd.v. CIT [1979] 118 ITR 261/1 Taxman 485inter alia observed that : "It has to be observed here that the expression "wholly and exclusively" used in s. 10(2)(xv) of the Act does not mean "necessarily". Ordinarily, it is for the assessee to decide whether any expenditure should be incurred in the course of his or its business. Such expenditure may be incurred voluntarily and…

Red Hat India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/Asstt/CIT/ITO, NFAC, Delhi

ITA 1379/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain, A.R. &For Respondent: Ms. Vatsala Jha, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 144B

…ce Co. Ltd. (ITA No.3636/MUM/2017), Kotak Mahindra Asset Management Co. vs DCIT (ITA No.1416/Mum/2008), Aricent Technologies Holdings Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT (ITA No.5708/Del/2019) and Hon'ble Supreme Court’s (SC) judgment in Sassoon J David & Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (118 ITR 261). Consequently the grounds No.6.1, 6.2, 6.3 & 6.4 are decided for statistical purposes in favour of the assessee. Ground No.7.1 85. Ground No.7.1 is dismissed having not been pressed by the Ld. A.R. during the course of arguments. Ground No.8.1 86. The assessee challenged the action of the AO in not granting deduction under section 80G of…