Sayaji Iron & Engg. Co. v. CIT

253 ITR 749High Court2002#525 most cited

What is Sayaji Iron & Engg. Co. v. CIT authority for?

For a limited company, expenses cannot be disallowed merely on the grounds of presumed personal use of assets by directors or by treating the expenditure as a non-business purpose. Percentage disallowances of expenses in such cases are not sustainable.

181

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sayaji Iron & Engg. Co. v. CIT · 253 ITR 749 · disallowance of expenses · personal use directors · non-business purpose · limited company expenses · business expediency · Section 40A

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40(a)(ia)Section 119Section 127Section 133ASection 142(2A)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 198section 2(31)business expediencysection 40a(2)(b)material facts necessary for assessmentsection 40a(2)mere change of opinionsection 40ablock of assetsenduring benefitsection 40a(3)section 30

Judgments citing Sayaji Iron & Engg. Co. v. CIT

M/S. Sharang Plast Enggineering Private Limited, Lucknow vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-6, Lucknow

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

ITA 431/LKW/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava**

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor,<br>C.AFor Respondent: Shri<br>Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi,<br>Addl
Section 143(3)Section 40ASection 40A(3)Section 48A(3)

…/-.* - *4. BECAUSE the assessee being a corporate entity, no dis-allowance on account of personal expenses could have been made/sustained in* - *view of decision of Hon&#x27;ble Gujarat Hi. Court in the case of Sayaji Iron &amp; Engineering Co. Vs. CIT, reported in 253 ITR 749 (Guj.)* - *5. BECAUSE CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in up-holding the addition of Ys: 6,73,200/- on account of dis-allowance made by the assessing officer under section 40A(3) of the Act read with rule 6DD of the Income-tax Rules, 1962.* - *6. BECAUSE as per material and information placed on record, the assessee has not made payments exce…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2)(1), Bengaluru, Bangalore vs. M/S. Bangalore Credit Co-Operative Society Limited, Bangalore

ITA 2348/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 250

…Customs 197 ELT 471 (SC) b) Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community v. State of Maharashtra 254 ELT 196 (SC) c) Gammon India Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs 269 ELT 489 (SC) d) DLF Universal Limited v. CIT 306 ITR 271 (Del) e) Sayaji Iron and Engg. Co. v. CIT 253 ITR 749 (Guj) 13.14 The assessee relied on the decision Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Bihar v. Kalika Kuer @ Kalika Singh &amp; Others 5 SCC 448 for the proposition that even if the earlier decision of the Co-ordinate Bench seems to be incorrect to a Bench of the same jurisdiction on the ground that a possible aspect of the matter was not considered or n…

Income-Tax Officer, Ward-7(2)(1), Bengaluru vs. M/S. Bangalore Credit Co-Operative Society Limited, Bengaluru

ITA 2347/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Respondent: Sri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.R
Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…Customs 197 ELT 471 (SC) b) Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community v. State of Maharashtra 254 ELT 196 (SC) c) Gammon India Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs 269 ELT 489 (SC) d) DLF Universal Limited v. CIT 306 ITR 271 (Del) e) Sayaji Iron and Engg. Co. v. CIT 253 ITR 749 (Guj) 13.14 The assessee relied on the decision Hon&#x27;ble Supreme Court in State of Bihar v. Kalika Kuer @ Kalika Singh &amp; Others 5 SCC 448 for the proposition that even if the earlier decision of the Co-ordinate Bench seems to be incorrect to a Bench of the same jurisdiction on the ground that a possible aspect of the matter was not considered or…

Anita Lahu Ghadge, Mumbai vs. Circle41(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the grounds of appeal preferred by the assessee fail and the appeal is dismissed

ITA 2623/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankaranita Lahu Ghadge, V/S. Assistant Commissioner Of Swapnapurti, 33-D, Kamgar Income Tax, Circle – 26(1), बनाम Chs Ltd., S.G. Barve Marg, Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Near Nandkeshwar Mandir, Kurla Complex, Bandra Kamgar Nagar, Kurla East, (East), Mumbai – 400051, Mumbai–400024, Maharashtra Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Afqpg3328A Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Nikam, ARFor Respondent: Shri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)

…iness purposes. The L.d. A.O. with due respect, did not fully appreciate the necessity of such expenses and made a disallowance without considering the factual matrix of the case. The appellant relies on the decision of Sayaji Iron &amp; Engg. Co. v. CIT [2002] 253 ITR 749 (Guj HC), where it was held that if an expense is incurred for business purposes, a mere presumption of personal use cannot be a valid basis for disallowance. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court emphasized that such disallowances must be supported by tangible evidence and not just an arbitrary estimate., which includes petrol and diesel expenses and d…

Jindal Saw Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-13(2), New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 504/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Dcit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) New Delhi-110015. (Earlier Addl.Cit Range-4), Pan-Aabcs7280C C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002. Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Dcit, Vs Jindal Saw Ltd. Circle-13(2), (Formerly Known As M/S. Saw Pipes Room No.316A, Ltd.), 28, Najafgarh Road, C.R.Building, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Jindal Saw Ltd., Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Shivaji Marg, Circle-13(2), New Delhi-110015. New Delhi. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) P.O.Ramesh Nagar, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi-110002. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 43B

…. He has argued before me that it is a settled principle of law that in case of companies no expenditure can be disallowed by holding the same to be of personal in nature. The decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron &amp; Eng. Co. Ltd. V CIT 253 ITR 749 has been followed in the following jurisdictional ITAT decisions:- (i) MITSUI &amp; co. India p. Ltd. V ADDL. CIT ITAT Delhi E Bench in ITA No. 1362/De/2011 as decided on 3/6/2011 (ii) DCIT v Haryana Oxygen Ltd. 76 ITD 32 (DEL) (iii) Midland International LTd. V DCIT 109 ITD 198 (Del). 5.3. I have perused the decisions in hand. These decisions pertai…

DCIT Circle-13(2), New Delhi vs. Jindal Saw Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 4760/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Dcit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) New Delhi-110015. (Earlier Addl.Cit Range-4), Pan-Aabcs7280C C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002. Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Dcit, Vs Jindal Saw Ltd. Circle-13(2), (Formerly Known As M/S. Saw Pipes Room No.316A, Ltd.), 28, Najafgarh Road, C.R.Building, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Jindal Saw Ltd., Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Shivaji Marg, Circle-13(2), New Delhi-110015. New Delhi. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) P.O.Ramesh Nagar, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi-110002. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 43B

…. He has argued before me that it is a settled principle of law that in case of companies no expenditure can be disallowed by holding the same to be of personal in nature. The decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron &amp; Eng. Co. Ltd. V CIT 253 ITR 749 has been followed in the following jurisdictional ITAT decisions:- (i) MITSUI &amp; co. India p. Ltd. V ADDL. CIT ITAT Delhi E Bench in ITA No. 1362/De/2011 as decided on 3/6/2011 (ii) DCIT v Haryana Oxygen Ltd. 76 ITD 32 (DEL) (iii) Midland International LTd. V DCIT 109 ITD 198 (Del). 5.3. I have perused the decisions in hand. These decisions pertai…

Jindal Saw Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-13(2), New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 4693/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Dcit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) New Delhi-110015. (Earlier Addl.Cit Range-4), Pan-Aabcs7280C C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002. Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Dcit, Vs Jindal Saw Ltd. Circle-13(2), (Formerly Known As M/S. Saw Pipes Room No.316A, Ltd.), 28, Najafgarh Road, C.R.Building, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Jindal Saw Ltd., Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Shivaji Marg, Circle-13(2), New Delhi-110015. New Delhi. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) P.O.Ramesh Nagar, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi-110002. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 43B

…. He has argued before me that it is a settled principle of law that in case of companies no expenditure can be disallowed by holding the same to be of personal in nature. The decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron &amp; Eng. Co. Ltd. V CIT 253 ITR 749 has been followed in the following jurisdictional ITAT decisions:- (i) MITSUI &amp; co. India p. Ltd. V ADDL. CIT ITAT Delhi E Bench in ITA No. 1362/De/2011 as decided on 3/6/2011 (ii) DCIT v Haryana Oxygen Ltd. 76 ITD 32 (DEL) (iii) Midland International LTd. V DCIT 109 ITD 198 (Del). 5.3. I have perused the decisions in hand. These decisions pertai…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Bbc World India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 3489/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2025AY 2008-09

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

…n the case of J.J. Enterprises vs. CIT 254 ITR 216 (SC), the disallowances made by the AO cannot be sustained. Furthermore, no disallowance on account of various heads can be made in the case of limited company as held in the case of Sayaji Engineering Works, 253 ITR 749, Guj. This has become a settled law. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the judicial pronouncements, percentage disallowances of expenses made by the AO are hereby deleted. As a result, grounds 6 and 7 are allowed.” 20. At the time of hearing ld. DR submitted with regard to ground no.4 that the Assessing offic…

Ahluwalia Erectors and Febrications Pvt. Ltd., Kota vs. ACIT Cir-1 Kota, Kota

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 953/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234A

…ea as has been held in several cases. Kindly refer: ACIT v/s M/s Anil Special Steel Industries Ltd. (2014) 52 TW 189 (JP) held that no disallowance can be made in case of a Limited/Private Limited Company decision in the case of Sayaji Iron &amp; Eng. Co. v/s CIT 253 ITR 749 (Guj.) referred. 18 Ahluwalia Erectors &amp; Febricators Pvt. Ltd., vs. ACIT The above factual averments are also supported by the Board of Director passed resolution time to time, as and when vehicles were purchased, reproduced here under: &quot;It is hereby resolved that Vehicle Car Ciaz no RJ-20-CD-7188 Dated 17-06- 2015 purchased &amp; registered in the…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Aurangabad vs. Jhaveri Flexo India Pvt Ltd, Aurangabad

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

ITA 1172/PUN/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Shri Deepak ShahFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69C

…ses, the AO noted that the same is for benefit of the directors. Even when the vehicle expense is for benefit of director, the same is allowable so far as the company is concerned as held by Gujarat High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron &amp; Engineering Co Ltd. (253 ITR 749). In absence of specific finding that particular expense is not for the purpose of business, no disallowance is called for. The scheme of the act does not recognize lumpsum / ad-hoc disallowance. Therefore in our 9 C.O. No.14/PUN/2024 considered opinion LD CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition of Rs.4,00,000/- &amp; hence the ground of appeal no.1…

DCIT, CC -1(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Hindalco Industries Ltd., Mumbai

Accordingly, there is no substance raised by the department and the same is dismissed

ITA 619/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2024AY 2003-04
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

…of business. 50. Now this issue stands covered by the decision of the Hon&#x27;ble Bombay High Court in the case of OTIS Elevators Company India limited VS comm. of Income tax IT ref. no. 497 of 1977, Sayaji Iron &amp; Engg. Co. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (2002) 253 ITR 749 (Guj). Further, full Bench decision of the Punjab &amp; Haryana High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Groz Beckert Asia Limited (2013) 351 ITR 196 (P&amp;H) (FB) before the Hon&#x27;ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, a similar claim of membership fees of a club paid by the assessee-company was declined by the AO on the ground that they we…

M/S. Hindalco Industries Ltd.(Earlier Known As Indian Aluminium Company Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC -1(4) (Earlier Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-8, Kolkatta), Mumbai

ITA 612/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2024AY 2003-04
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER &amp; MS PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.612/KOL/2007 (Assessment Year:2003-04) M/s. Hindalco Industries Ltd. Vs. DCIT (Earlier known as Indian Aluminium Company Ltd.) Ahura Centre, 1st Floor, B Wing, Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri (E) Mumbai-400 093 CC-1(4), Mumbai (Earlier Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-8, Kolkata PAN/GIR No.AAACH1201R (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.619/KOL/2007 (Assessment Year:2003-04) DCIT Mumbai CC-1(4), Vs. M/s. Hindalco Industries Ltd. (As a successor to M/s. Indian Aluminium Co…

Bajaj Capital Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 4(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2598/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar[Assessment Year : 2017-18] Bajaj Capital Ltd., Vs Acit, 97, Bajaj House, Nehru Place, Circle-4(2), South Delhi, New Delhi-110019. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacb1006E Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri R.K.Sharma, Adv. Respondent By Shri Kanv Bali, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 16.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 31.05.2024

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…expenses and would not incur personal expenses unlike living being. The body corporate operates through living beings. The authorities below failed to advert to this fundamental question. Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron &amp; Engg.Co. vs CIT 253 ITR 749 [Guj.High Court] under the similar facts held as under:- “There is one more aspect of the matter which requires to be considered. The assessee which is a private limited company is a distinct assessable entity as per the definition of “person” under section 2(31) of the Act. Therefore, it cannot be stated that when the vehicles are used by the d…

Oberoi Hotels Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-8, Kolkata.

ITA 1811/KOL/2006[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 May 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri. Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee ()

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…1 ITA 489/Kol /2005 ITA 1808/Kol /2006 ITA 1811/Kol /2006 Oberoi Hotels (P) Ltd IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “B”, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI. RAJESH KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A. No.489/Kol/2005 - A.Y. 2001-02 I.T.A. No.1811/Kol/2006 - A.Y. 2003-04 Oberoi Hotels Private Limited vs DCIT, Circle-8, Kolkata P-7, Chowringhee Square 4, Mangoe Lane, Kolkata-700 001 PAN : AAACO3408K Kolkata-700 069 APPELLANT RESPONDENT DCIT, Circle-8, Kolkata vs Oberoi Hotels Private Limited 4, Mangoe Lane, Kolkata-700 001 PAN : AAACO3408K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee re…

DCIT, Cir-8, Kolkata vs. Oberoi Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1808/KOL/2006[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 May 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri. Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee ()

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…1 ITA 489/Kol /2005 ITA 1808/Kol /2006 ITA 1811/Kol /2006 Oberoi Hotels (P) Ltd IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “B”, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI. RAJESH KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A. No.489/Kol/2005 - A.Y. 2001-02 I.T.A. No.1811/Kol/2006 - A.Y. 2003-04 Oberoi Hotels Private Limited vs DCIT, Circle-8, Kolkata P-7, Chowringhee Square 4, Mangoe Lane, Kolkata-700 001 PAN : AAACO3408K Kolkata-700 069 APPELLANT RESPONDENT DCIT, Circle-8, Kolkata vs Oberoi Hotels Private Limited 4, Mangoe Lane, Kolkata-700 001 PAN : AAACO3408K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee re…

Oberoi Hotels Private Limited., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-8, Kolkata

ITA 489/KOL/2005[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 May 2024AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri. Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee ()

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…1 ITA 489/Kol /2005 ITA 1808/Kol /2006 ITA 1811/Kol /2006 Oberoi Hotels (P) Ltd IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “B”, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI. RAJESH KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A. No.489/Kol/2005 - A.Y. 2001-02 I.T.A. No.1811/Kol/2006 - A.Y. 2003-04 Oberoi Hotels Private Limited vs DCIT, Circle-8, Kolkata P-7, Chowringhee Square 4, Mangoe Lane, Kolkata-700 001 PAN : AAACO3408K Kolkata-700 069 APPELLANT RESPONDENT DCIT, Circle-8, Kolkata vs Oberoi Hotels Private Limited 4, Mangoe Lane, Kolkata-700 001 PAN : AAACO3408K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee re…

Samsung C and T Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT Circle 22(2) Delhi, New Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 2184/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

…Auditor has not stated the expenditure to be a disallowance item, it could not have been disallowed by way of an adjustment under section 143(1)(a) of the Act. In support of such contention, he relied upon the following decisions: 1. Sayaji Iron &amp; Engg. Co. 253 ITR 749 (Guj.) 2. United Glass Manufacturing Co. Ltd., 28 Taxmann.com 429 (SC) 3. Ansal Housing Limited 153 Taxmann.com 102 (Del-ITAT) 4. SCV &amp; LLP Vs. DCIT, ITA No.1756/Del/2020, dated 17.08.2022 5. Samtel Colour Ltd., (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Delhi) 6. S.R.F. Charitable Trust Vs. Union of India [1992] 183 ITR 95 4 | P a g e AY: 2018-19 7. Strongly relying u…

M/S Essargee Construction Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal vs. The ACIT- 1(1), Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assesse for A

ITA 9/IND/2023[22013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jul 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 40A(3)

…nce made by the AO is highly arbitrary and unjustified without any material to show that these expenses are incorrect for person use of the directors. He has relied upon the judgment of Gujarat High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron and Engineering Co. vs. CIT 253 ITR 749, DCIT vs. Brilliant Esates Private Limited order dated 13.12.2018 in ITANo.349/Ind/2017 Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal. The order of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in case of DCIT vs. Globus Mega Project Pvt. Ltd. in ITANo.446 &amp; 447/Ind/2018 dated 08.09.2022. 36. On the other hand, Ld. DR has submitted that the AO has made disallowance…

M/S Essargee Construction Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal vs. The DCIT- 1(1), Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assesse for A

ITA 8/IND/2023[22012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jul 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 40A(3)

…nce made by the AO is highly arbitrary and unjustified without any material to show that these expenses are incorrect for person use of the directors. He has relied upon the judgment of Gujarat High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron and Engineering Co. vs. CIT 253 ITR 749, DCIT vs. Brilliant Esates Private Limited order dated 13.12.2018 in ITANo.349/Ind/2017 Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal. The order of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in case of DCIT vs. Globus Mega Project Pvt. Ltd. in ITANo.446 &amp; 447/Ind/2018 dated 08.09.2022. 36. On the other hand, Ld. DR has submitted that the AO has made disallowance…

M/S Essargee Construction Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal vs. The ACIT- 1(1), Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assesse for A

ITA 7/IND/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jul 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 40A(3)

…nce made by the AO is highly arbitrary and unjustified without any material to show that these expenses are incorrect for person use of the directors. He has relied upon the judgment of Gujarat High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron and Engineering Co. vs. CIT 253 ITR 749, DCIT vs. Brilliant Esates Private Limited order dated 13.12.2018 in ITANo.349/Ind/2017 Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal. The order of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in case of DCIT vs. Globus Mega Project Pvt. Ltd. in ITANo.446 &amp; 447/Ind/2018 dated 08.09.2022. 36. On the other hand, Ld. DR has submitted that the AO has made disallowance…