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

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai vs. Raymond Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4073/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal &For Respondent: Shri T. Shankar
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 23Section 40A(2)(b)

…el for the assessee contended that it is a case of company wherein no disallowance can be made on the basis of personal use for which reliance was placed upon the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Sayaji Iron &Engg. Co. vs .Commissioner of Income-tax (253 ITR 749) and Dinesh Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2002] 122 Taxman 384 (Gujarat). However, the Ld. CIT- DR defended the disallowance made by the Ld. Assessing Officer by contending that personal use cannot be ruled out. 5.2 We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In view of the above, we are repr…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai vs. Raymond Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4072/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal &For Respondent: Shri T. Shankar
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 23Section 40A(2)(b)

…el for the assessee contended that it is a case of company wherein no disallowance can be made on the basis of personal use for which reliance was placed upon the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Sayaji Iron &Engg. Co. vs .Commissioner of Income-tax (253 ITR 749) and Dinesh Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2002] 122 Taxman 384 (Gujarat). However, the Ld. CIT- DR defended the disallowance made by the Ld. Assessing Officer by contending that personal use cannot be ruled out. 5.2 We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In view of the above, we are repr…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai vs. Raymond Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 202/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal &For Respondent: Shri T. Shankar
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 23Section 40A(2)(b)

…el for the assessee contended that it is a case of company wherein no disallowance can be made on the basis of personal use for which reliance was placed upon the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Sayaji Iron &Engg. Co. vs .Commissioner of Income-tax (253 ITR 749) and Dinesh Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2002] 122 Taxman 384 (Gujarat). However, the Ld. CIT- DR defended the disallowance made by the Ld. Assessing Officer by contending that personal use cannot be ruled out. 5.2 We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In view of the above, we are repr…

Venkateshwar Ispat Limited, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 15/RPR/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.15/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Venkateshwar Ispat Limited 655-B, Urla Industrial Complex, Raipur-493 221 (C.G.) Pan : Aaacv7829H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ed in Sec. 2(31) of the Act, therefore, being an inanimate person there cannot be anything personal about such entity. The aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Sayaji Iron And Engg. Co. Vs. CIT (2002) 253 ITR 749 (Guj). On the basis of my aforesaid observation that an assessee company is a distinct assessable entity, i.e an inanimate person, therefore, no disallowance on account of personal expenditure could have been validly made, I vacate the aforesaid ad-hoc disallowance of Rs.11,000/- made by the A.O. Thus, the Ground of appeal No.4 raised by the asse…

Silver Spark Apparel Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT, CC-8(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 558/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Sh. Madhur Agrawal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Chetan M. Kacha, Sr. DR
Section 30Section 31Section 32Section 38(2)

…ision of the Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai in the case of NIBR Bullion P Ltd v/s DCIT in ITA Nos. 5522 to 5524/Mum/2011. The appellant has also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron & Engg. Co. v/s CIT reported in 253 ITR 749 and that in the case of Dinesh Mills Ltd vs. CIT reported in 122 Taxman 384. 10. Without prejudice to the above, the appellant has also placed reliance of the decision dated 10.10.2017 in their own case for case for AY 2012-13 of my Ld. Predecessor, wherein 50% of expenses and deprecation were allowed. It has also been submitted that as on date,…

M/S Well Wisher Construction P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT - 15(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1912/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2022AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)

…ss purposes and no personal purpose could be established thereon. Moreover, we hold that there cannot be any personal element of expenditure in a company as held by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron & Engineering Co. vs CIT reporte din 253 ITR 749 (Guj) . In any case, the purpose of foreign visits is to be decided by the assessee company and the ld. AO cannot step into the shoes of the businessman and decide whether the foreign trips were required or not. Reliance in this regard is placed on the celebrated decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Dhanrajgirji Raja Narasingar…

Adani Enterprises Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

Appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 2035/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedasstt. Sr.No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Vartik Choksi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, C.I.T.DR
Section 143(3)Section 28Section 35Section 92C

…on the ground that as Air Craft was used by directors and employees, personal use cannot be ruled out. The said contention of Assessing Officer cannot be accepted in view of decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High court in the case of Sayaji Iron &Engg. Co. V/s CIT 253 ITR 749 wherein it is held as under: "Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with sections 198 and 309 of the Companies Act, 1956 - Business expenditure - Allowability of - Assessment year 1979-80 - Whether when vehicles belonging to an assessee-company are used by its directors, for personal or other purposes, it would be wrong to hold that veh…

Vishwa Industrial Co. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir (1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 39/KOL/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 145ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

…es. Directors are also one of the key managerial persons cum employee of the company and getting the salary. Regarding personal use of company's facilities by the directors; we rely on the cases of - Sayaji Iron &Engg. Co. Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (2002) 253 ITR 749(Gujrat) D.S Construction (P) Ltd. Vs Income Tax officer ITAT Delhi (1987) 29TTJ(Del) 22 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Haryana Oxygen Ltd. (2001) 73 TTJ(Del) 575 Metallizing Equipment Co.(P) Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 70 TTJ (Jd) 358. In all these cases; additions made on account of personal use of company’s facilities by dir…

DCIT, Circle- 1(2), New Delhi vs. Advance India Projects Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 7138/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narendrakumar Billaiyashri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Zahid Parvez, Sr. DR
Section 46A

…private limited company and, therefore, in our considered opinion, there cannot be any question of any personal element in so far as legal person is concerned. For this proposition, we draw support from the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in 253 ITR 749. 33. As mentioned elsewhere, all that the Assessing Officer has to verify is as to whether the expenditure has been incurred for the business and since the expenditure has been incurred for the purpose of business, the same has to be allowed. 34. We, accordingly, direct the Assessing Officer to delete the adhoc disallowance of Rs. 9,02,822/-.…

Advance India Projects Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 12, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 7130/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narendrakumar Billaiyashri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Zahid Parvez, Sr. DR
Section 46A

…private limited company and, therefore, in our considered opinion, there cannot be any question of any personal element in so far as legal person is concerned. For this proposition, we draw support from the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in 253 ITR 749. 33. As mentioned elsewhere, all that the Assessing Officer has to verify is as to whether the expenditure has been incurred for the business and since the expenditure has been incurred for the purpose of business, the same has to be allowed. 34. We, accordingly, direct the Assessing Officer to delete the adhoc disallowance of Rs. 9,02,822/-.…

Pegasus Properties P. Ltd., Pune vs. Dy CIT, CC-2(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 943/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rajan VoraFor Respondent: Shri Dhramveer Singh
Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 22Section 23Section 23(4)

…ns, presumptions, surmises and conjectures cannot be sustained and have to be summarily deleted. Reliance in this regard is also placed on the following decisions: 33 ITA.NO. 943/MUM/2021 (A.Y: 2015-16) Pegasus Properties Pvt. Ltd., • Sayaji Iron & Engg Co. (253 ITR 749) (Guj HC) (Copy is enclosed at page 346 to 350 of the paperbook) • M/s Johnson & Johnson Ltd (ITA No. 9437/Mum/2004) dated 15 February 2013 (Copy is enclosed at page 351 to 367 of the paperbook) 54. Prayer In view of the above. the Appellant prays before your Honour that the learned AO be directed to delete the ad-hoc disallowance of advertisemen…

Lodha Developers Ltd(Formerly Known As Lodha Developers Private Limited), Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2349/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Blemacrotech Developers Limited V. Dcit – Central Circle – 7(3) {Erstwhile Lodha Developers Limited} Room No. 655, 6Th Floor 412, 4Th Floor, 17G Vardhaman Chamber Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle Mumbai – 400020 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aaacl1490J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit – Central Circle – 7(3) V. Macrotech Developers Limited Room No. 655, 6Th Floor {Erstwhile Lodha Developers Limited} 412, 4Th Floor, 17G Vardhaman Chamber Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle Mumbai – 400020 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aaacl1490J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora &For Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj
Section 37(1)

…counsel for the assessee submitted that no addition can be made on the basis of mere surmise and conjecture. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following judgements: a) Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram Vs CIT (1959) 37 ITR 288 (SC) b) Sayaji Iron & Engg Co. (253 ITR 749) (Guj HC) (Refer Page 342 to 345 of the paper book) 17. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that no ad hoc disallowance can be made for expenses incurred for purpose of business without giving any basis of estimation. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following judgements: - a) Palava Dwellers Pvt Ltd (group company) in ITA 2147/M/2018…

M/S M/S Sunita Finlease Limited, Raipur, Raipur (Cg) vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Raipur, Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 7/BIL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No. 07/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Sunita Finlease Limited 2/509, Choubey Colony, Opp. Rajkumar College, G.E Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aadcs2759J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Prafulla Pendse, Ar Revenue By : Shri G.N Singh, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Prafulla Pendse, ARFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ed in Sec. 2(31) of the Act, therefore, being an inanimate person there cannot be anything personal about such entity. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Sayaji Iron And Engg. Co. Vs. CIT (2002) 253 ITR 749 (Guj). We, thus, in terms of our aforesaid observations vacate the ad-hoc disallowance of Rs.1,50,000/- made by the A.O out of travelling & conveyance expenses. 8. As regards the disallowance of Rs.50,000/- out of the assessee’s claim for deduction of vehicle running and maintenance expenses of Rs.3,96,347/-, we find that the reasons leading to…

Real Gold Developers LLP, Mumbai vs. ACIT, RG. 20(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1899/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanita Nos. 1899 & 1900/Mum/2021 (A.Ys: 2014-15 & 2017-18)

For Appellant: Mr.Malav .P. Sheth.ARFor Respondent: Mr.T.Shankar .DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32

…ed for non business purpose more so when genuineness of the business expenditure and facts contained in the log book were accepted. The Ld. A.R. relied on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron and Engineering Co. vs. CIT (2002) 253 ITR 749 and submitted that the disallowance as sustained by Ld. CIT(A) may kindly be deleted. 9. In respect of disallowance of depreciation and expenses. The Honble Tribunal has dealt and deleted the disallowance at page 6 para 8 of the order read as under: 8. After hearing both the parties and perusing the material on record, we find that in this case…

Careernet Technologies (P) Ltd., Gorakhpur vs. ACIT, Range - 2, Gorakhpur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 110/VNS/2019[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi19 Apr 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year:2014-15 Careernet Technologies The Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited V. Income Tax, 200, Charanlalchowk Range-2 Durga Bari Road, Gorakhpur, U.P. Gorakhpur-273001, U.P. Pan: Aabcc7128H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: None ( Written submissions, datedFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)

…d/2011 e) ITO v. Dr. Mahendra Kumar Agarwal in ITA No. 460/Alld/2004 dated 13.07.2006 7 Assessment Year:2014-15 Careernet Technologies Private Limited f) Hon’ble Gujarat High Court judgment and order in the case of Sayaji Iron and Engg. Co. v. CIT reported in 253 ITR 749 5.2 The ld. Sr. DR drew attention of the Bench to the assessment order passed by the AO. The ld. Sr. DR also brought attention of the Bench to the appellate order passed by ld. CIT(A) . The ld. SR DR relied upon the judgment and order passed by Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Pr. CIT v. RimjhimIspat Limited reported in (2016) 382 ITR…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Indian Farmer Fertilizer Co-Operative Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2786/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaasstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Indian Farmer Fertilizer Tax Co-Operative Ltd. Circle -31(1), Iffco Sadan, C-1, New Delhi District Centre, Saket Place, New Delhi Pan- Aaaai0050M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 90

…assessee company. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Gujarat Nargian Ltd. vs. DCIT citation 67 SOT 325 (Delhi) and GAIL India Ltd. vs. DCIT ITA No. 4454/Del/2013 (Delhi Tribunal) also Sayaji Iron and Engineering Company vs. CIT 253 ITR 749 (Guj.). 7 ITA No. 2786/Del./2015 M/s. Indian Farmer Fertilizer Co-operative ltd. 9. Giving thoughtful consideration to the matter on record and going through the precedent cited it is quite evident that as far as ground no 1 and 2 arising our of the issue of dividend income from investment in the P.E. in Oman is concerned the same being includ…

First Overseas Capital Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5242/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2015-16 First Overseas Capital Limited, Dcit-1(1)(2), Ground Floor, Bhupen Room No. 533/579, 5Th Floor, Chambers, Dalal Street, Fort, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400001 Vs. Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacl4337A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K Gopal (Ar) Revenue By : Shri Pinishetty Satya Prasanth (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 27/12/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 29/12/2021

For Appellant: Shri K Gopal (AR)For Respondent: Shri Pinishetty Satya Prasanth (DR)
Section 143(3)

….” 12 Assessment Year: 2015-16 12. Before us, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee relied on the submission before the lower authorities. He also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron and Engg. Co Vs CIT reported in 253 ITR 749 (Guj). On the other hand, the Ld. DR relied on the order of the lower authorities. 13. We have heard rival submission of the parties and perused the relevant material on record. As far as claim of expenses under section 37 of the Act is concerned, the primary onus is on the assessee to substantiate with the documentary evidences whether the expen…

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

In the result, the appeal filed by revenue is dismissed

ITA 2212/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Nov 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh Wagle, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sankarganesh, JCIT (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)(b)

…144 of the income tax act,1961 the AO cannot resort to ad-hoc disallowance of expenditure (CIT v. Anil Kumar & Co. (2016) Karn-HC). The view that I am thus taking find support from the following decisions. In the case of Sayaji Iron and Engg. Co. Vs CIT(2002) 253 ITR 749 (Gug-HC) it was held that the assessee had submitted bills/vouchers as were maintained by it in regular course of business. If AO was not satisfied with any particular items of expenses, he could have pointed it out to assessee for inviting its response. There should not be a practice of making ad hoc disallowance on the ground of personal expend…

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 03, New Delhi vs. Dlf Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5941/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Surender Pal, CIT-DRFor Respondent: S/Shri R.S. Singhvi & Satyajeet Goel
Section 14A

…e of Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. 254 ITR 377 held that assessing officer cannot question the reasonableness of the expenditure incurred for the purpose of business. On the basis of decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron and Engg. Co 253 ITR 749I, it was further held that assessee is a public ltd. company and being a distinct assessee, there cannot be a case of disallowance of expenses on account of personal expense. If the expenses are incurred for the purpose of Director or employees of the company, the same are allowable. 15.3 We find that this issue came for up consideration before…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed and appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2083/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: S/Shri Pradeep Dinodia & R.KFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…on’ble ITAT has upheld the said Order of ld. CIT (A). The 9 ITA. .899, 1348, 1349-D-2013, 5776-D-2014, 2083-D-2015, 1704-D-2015 assessee also referred to and relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sayaji Iron & Engineering Ltd. 253 ITR 749 (Gujarat) to claim that there cannot be any personal element in the hands of the corporate entity and disallowance made by the AO was wholly unjustified. Reference was also made to the case of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Patiala vs. Road Master Industries of India (P) Ltd. 2009-TIOL-446- HC-P&H to submit that once an FB…