Sri Venkata Satyanarayana Rice Mill Contractors Co. v. CIT, A.P.II

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi - 10 vs. Indian Farm Forestry Development

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI

…ness. The expenditure would satisfy the said test if it is for the purposes of business. 11. Kuber Singh Bhagwandas (supra) was referred to with approval by the Supreme Court in Sri Venkata Satyanarayana Rice Mill Contractors Co. V. CIT, A.P.II (1996) 6 SCC 611 to hold that money expended even voluntarily on the grounds of commercial expediency in order to indirectly facilitate carrying on of the business should be regarded as expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of trade. In this case, following passage from Atherton v. British Insulated & Helsey Cables (1925) 10 TC 155 was quoted :-…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-10 vs. M/S Indian Farm Forestry Development

…ness. The expenditure would satisfy the said test if it is for the purposes of business. 11. Kuber Singh Bhagwandas (supra) was referred to with approval by the Supreme Court in Sri Venkata Satyanarayana Rice Mill Contractors Co. V. CIT, A.P.II (1996) 6 SCC 611 to hold that money expended even voluntarily on the grounds of commercial expediency in order to indirectly facilitate carrying on of the business should be regarded as expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of trade. In this case, following passage from Atherton v. British Insulated & Helsey Cables (1925) 10 TC 155 was quoted :- 201…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-1) vs. Late Shri Sudhir Sareen

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…ose which were enacted after the Constitution came into force. The appropriate provision that the court ought to have discussed is Article 13(1) of the Constitution. Even though, the court notices its judgment in John Vallamattom v. Union of India, (2003) 6 SCC 6115 which adverts to Article 13 of the Constitution, there is no discussion of that article in Navtej Singh Johar. (b) In Navtej Singh Johar, although the court referred to the judgments rendered in Chiranjit Lal Chowdhuri v. Union of India, 1950 SCR 869 and State of Bombay v. F.N. Balsara, 1951 SCR 682, both of which dealt with pre-constituti…

Income Tax vs. Of India Pvt. Ltd

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

…ty of the expense is not dependent on the fact that it is incurred to fulfill or discharge a legal obligation. See: (i) Jugal Kishore Baldev Sahai v. CIT : AIR 1967 SC 495; (ii) Sri Venkata Satyanarayana Rice Mill Contractors Co v. CIT, AP-II: (1996) 6 SCC 611; (iii) CIT v. Walchand & Co. Pvt. Ltd : AIR 1967 SC 1435 = 65 ITR 381; (iv) M/s Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt Ltd v. CIT Bombay : 1979 (3) SCC 524; (v) The CIT, West Bengal v. Birla Cotton Spinning & Weaving Mills & Another : (1971) 3 SCC 344 (vi) SA Builders Ltd v. CIT ; 2007 (1) SCC 781. 8.5 Keeping in mind the aforesaid test, let us e…