Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT

63 ITR 57Supreme Court of India1967#1716 most cited

What is Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

The question of whether an amount claimed as an expenditure was laid out wholly and exclusively for business purposes must be decided based on the facts and circumstances of each case. The Income-tax Officer retains the discretion to determine the deductibility of an expense, and the mere existence of an agreement or actual payment does not bind the officer to allow the deduction under Section 37.

67

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT · 63 ITR 57 · Section 37 · Section 37(1) · wholly and exclusively for business · business expenditure · Income-tax Officer discretion · deductibility of expenses · factual determination · business expediency · commission payment

Sections most often in play

Section 143(2)Section 37Section 37(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80ICSection 144

Issues it is cited on

section 14bsection 10(2)(xv)section 10(33)section 40a(7)wholly and exclusively for businesssection 28(iv)section 43b(b)section 10(2)section 36(2)going concernbusiness expediencysection 36(1)(vii)

Judgments citing Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT

RUPAL CHEMICALS,RATNAGIRI vs. ITO WARD 1, RATNAGIRI

In the result Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2588/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.2588/Pun/2025 नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2021-2022 Vs Ito, Ward 1, Rupal Chemicals, D/13, Midc, Lote Ratnagiri Parashuram, Taluka Khed, District Ratnagiri-415722 Maharashtra Pan-Aabfr7940R Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ramkrishna LingsurFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh B Budruk-
Section 133(6)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 144B

…ncies. It seems a bit out of place that the parties entered into an oral business relationship involving such huge amounts of money over a period of time." 9. We further find support from Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [1967] 63 ITR 57 (SC)[20-09-1966] wherein it was observed as under:- “It is an erroneous proposition to contend that as soon as an assessee has established two facts, viz., the existence of an agreement between the employer and the employee and the fact of actual payment, no discretion is left to the Income-tax Officer except to hold that the payment was made who…

NALANDA GROUP OF MANAGEMENT EDUCATION,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-1(1)EXEMPTION, , KOLKATA

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

ITA 140/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 250

…s and in the light of the circumstances in each case. The relevant extract from the order is as under: “In our opinion, the facts of this case come within the rule laid down by this court in Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1967] 63 ITR 57 (SC). The question whether an amount claimed as an expenditure was laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business has to be decided on the facts and in the light of the circumstances in each case. The mere existence of an agreement between the assessee and its selling agents or payment of certain amounts as commission,…

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)

…ld in the case of Schneider Electric India Ltd vs CIT(2008) 219 CTR 76(Del),no deduction could be allowed on the basis of few bills and the fact that the payments were made by account payee cheques. As held in the case of Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT 63 ITR 57(SC), the question whether an amount claimed as an expenditure was laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business has to be decided on the facts and in the light of the circumstances in each case. It is still open to the Income-tax Officer to consider the relevant factors and determine for himself whether the commission…

INDIAN COAL AGENCY,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-35, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

ITA 868/KOL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sonjoy Sarma & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'सी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री संजय शमाा, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री राकेश धमश्रा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 867/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Indian Coal Agency Pr. CIT, Circle-12, Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAAFI7134H I.T.A. No.: 868/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Indian Coal Agency DCIT, Circle-35, Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAAFI7134H I.T.A. No.: 1258/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2015-16 DCIT, Circle-35, Kolkata I…

INDIAN COAL AGENCY,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT, CIRCLE - 12, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

ITA 867/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sonjoy Sarma & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'सी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री संजय शमाा, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री राकेश धमश्रा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 867/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Indian Coal Agency Pr. CIT, Circle-12, Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAAFI7134H I.T.A. No.: 868/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Indian Coal Agency DCIT, Circle-35, Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAAFI7134H I.T.A. No.: 1258/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2015-16 DCIT, Circle-35, Kolkata I…

DCIT, CIRCLE-35, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. INDIAN COAL AGENCY, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed

ITA 1258/KOL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sonjoy Sarma & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'सी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री संजय शमाा, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री राकेश धमश्रा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 867/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Indian Coal Agency Pr. CIT, Circle-12, Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAAFI7134H I.T.A. No.: 868/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Indian Coal Agency DCIT, Circle-35, Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAAFI7134H I.T.A. No.: 1258/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2015-16 DCIT, Circle-35, Kolkata I…

JAJOO ENTERPRISES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CC 4(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal for A

ITA 6343/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosainvs. Acit, Cc – 4(3) Jajoo Enterprises Ltd Flat No. 42/B, Jaihind Estate, 3Rd Floor, Ld.Dr. A.M Road, Maharashtra – 400002. Pan/Gir No. Aaacj9939L (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 145(3)Section 250Section 37(1)

…s, shopping malls, gas cylinders, etc Considering the totality of facts, I am of the view that the AO was right in opining that the expenses are not wholly and exclusively incurred for the purpose of business. 8.13. In the case of Swadeshi Cotton Mills Ltd., 63 ITR 57, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under:- "On behalf of the appellant learned counsel put forward the argument that the amount of Rs 1,11,090 paid to the directors was spent wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the company and was therefore properly claimed as a deduction under section 10(2)(xv) of the Income-tax Act. It was pointed out tha…

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. AMBALAL SARABHI ENTERPRISES LIMITED,, VADODARA

ITA 2067/AHD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…e bench's decision in ITA No. 1771/AHD/2015 for A.Y. 2001- 02 and submitted that 40% of the damages under Section 14B had been allowed as compensatory in earlier assessment years, following judicial precedents, such as, Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [233 ITR 199 (SC)]. The AR argued that judicial consistency should be maintained, and the disallowance of the entire amount of damages was unwarranted. 15. The DR supported the orders of the AO and CIT(A), stating that the damages under Section 14B of the Act were clearly penal in nature and were levied for violation of statutory provisions. The DR, in case…

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. AMBALAL SARABHI ENTERPRISES LIMITED,, VADODARA

ITA 2066/AHD/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…e bench's decision in ITA No. 1771/AHD/2015 for A.Y. 2001- 02 and submitted that 40% of the damages under Section 14B had been allowed as compensatory in earlier assessment years, following judicial precedents, such as, Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [233 ITR 199 (SC)]. The AR argued that judicial consistency should be maintained, and the disallowance of the entire amount of damages was unwarranted. 15. The DR supported the orders of the AO and CIT(A), stating that the damages under Section 14B of the Act were clearly penal in nature and were levied for violation of statutory provisions. The DR, in case…

AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, BARODA

ITA 1783/AHD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…e bench's decision in ITA No. 1771/AHD/2015 for A.Y. 2001- 02 and submitted that 40% of the damages under Section 14B had been allowed as compensatory in earlier assessment years, following judicial precedents, such as, Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [233 ITR 199 (SC)]. The AR argued that judicial consistency should be maintained, and the disallowance of the entire amount of damages was unwarranted. 15. The DR supported the orders of the AO and CIT(A), stating that the damages under Section 14B of the Act were clearly penal in nature and were levied for violation of statutory provisions. The DR, in case…

AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, BARODA

ITA 1782/AHD/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…e bench's decision in ITA No. 1771/AHD/2015 for A.Y. 2001- 02 and submitted that 40% of the damages under Section 14B had been allowed as compensatory in earlier assessment years, following judicial precedents, such as, Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [233 ITR 199 (SC)]. The AR argued that judicial consistency should be maintained, and the disallowance of the entire amount of damages was unwarranted. 15. The DR supported the orders of the AO and CIT(A), stating that the damages under Section 14B of the Act were clearly penal in nature and were levied for violation of statutory provisions. The DR, in case…

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LIMITED,, VADODARA

ITA 1594/AHD/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…e bench's decision in ITA No. 1771/AHD/2015 for A.Y. 2001- 02 and submitted that 40% of the damages under Section 14B had been allowed as compensatory in earlier assessment years, following judicial precedents, such as, Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [233 ITR 199 (SC)]. The AR argued that judicial consistency should be maintained, and the disallowance of the entire amount of damages was unwarranted. 15. The DR supported the orders of the AO and CIT(A), stating that the damages under Section 14B of the Act were clearly penal in nature and were levied for violation of statutory provisions. The DR, in case…

AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1)(1),, BARODA

ITA 1291/AHD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…e bench's decision in ITA No. 1771/AHD/2015 for A.Y. 2001- 02 and submitted that 40% of the damages under Section 14B had been allowed as compensatory in earlier assessment years, following judicial precedents, such as, Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [233 ITR 199 (SC)]. The AR argued that judicial consistency should be maintained, and the disallowance of the entire amount of damages was unwarranted. 15. The DR supported the orders of the AO and CIT(A), stating that the damages under Section 14B of the Act were clearly penal in nature and were levied for violation of statutory provisions. The DR, in case…

AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1)(1),, BARODA

ITA 1290/AHD/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…e bench's decision in ITA No. 1771/AHD/2015 for A.Y. 2001- 02 and submitted that 40% of the damages under Section 14B had been allowed as compensatory in earlier assessment years, following judicial precedents, such as, Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [233 ITR 199 (SC)]. The AR argued that judicial consistency should be maintained, and the disallowance of the entire amount of damages was unwarranted. 15. The DR supported the orders of the AO and CIT(A), stating that the damages under Section 14B of the Act were clearly penal in nature and were levied for violation of statutory provisions. The DR, in case…

AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LIMITED,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

ITA 1773/AHD/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…e bench's decision in ITA No. 1771/AHD/2015 for A.Y. 2001- 02 and submitted that 40% of the damages under Section 14B had been allowed as compensatory in earlier assessment years, following judicial precedents, such as, Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [233 ITR 199 (SC)]. The AR argued that judicial consistency should be maintained, and the disallowance of the entire amount of damages was unwarranted. 15. The DR supported the orders of the AO and CIT(A), stating that the damages under Section 14B of the Act were clearly penal in nature and were levied for violation of statutory provisions. The DR, in case…

AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LIMITED,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

ITA 1772/AHD/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…e bench's decision in ITA No. 1771/AHD/2015 for A.Y. 2001- 02 and submitted that 40% of the damages under Section 14B had been allowed as compensatory in earlier assessment years, following judicial precedents, such as, Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [233 ITR 199 (SC)]. The AR argued that judicial consistency should be maintained, and the disallowance of the entire amount of damages was unwarranted. 15. The DR supported the orders of the AO and CIT(A), stating that the damages under Section 14B of the Act were clearly penal in nature and were levied for violation of statutory provisions. The DR, in case…

MANGALORE CHEMICALS & FERTILIZERS LTD., ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1209/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Sri H.V. Gowthama, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 37

…(Kar.) wherein held that penalty and fine in lieu of confiscation of goods levied under rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules for removal of goods without making entries in the register are not admissible deductions. 3. Swadeshi Cotton Mills Ltd. V. CIT(1998) 233 ITR 199 (SC), wherein held that where penalty was imposed not on account of any delayed payment of central sales tax but was for contravention of provisions of Central Sales Act, 1956, the penalty levied on assessee could not be allowed as deduction. Mangalore Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd., Bangalore Page 7 of 13 4.1 Aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(A)…

SHRI RAMPRIYA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1946/HYD/2017[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Aug 2024AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1946/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 1999-2000) Shri Rampriya Developers Vs. Dy. C. I. T. (P) Ltd Circle 3(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aajcs6629P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/08/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…findings of the Income Tax Officer contained in Paras (a), (b) and (c) above, the law did not permit him to proceed to scrutinize the expenditure further, is not tenable or acceptable” (emphasis supplied by us). In Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd v. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 57, the Supreme Court considered the case of an assessee company which had, by resolution of the shareholders, decided to give one per cent of the net profits as commission to the directors. Repelling and rejecting the arguments put forward by the counsel for the assessee that the payment having been made in accordance with law and by a resolution of…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. MALAR PUBLICATIONS LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2915/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2915/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Malar Publications Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of V. No. 86, Periyar Evr High Road, Income-Tax, Vepery, Chennai – 600 007. Corporate Circle -4(1), [Pan: Aaacm-2573-P] Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07.05.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Respondent: Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 143(3)

…ftware development expenditure spent by the assessee as revenue expenditure in the present assessment year. The ld. DR has relied on the following judicial decisions. (i) Hon’ble Apex Court’s decision in the case of Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd vs CIT [1967] 63 ITR 65 (ii) Hon’ble Madras High Court’s decision in the case of EID Parry (India) ltd 279 ITR 253 (iii) Hon’ble Chennai Tribunal’s decision in the case of Superfil Products Ltd vs ACIT in ITA No. 2053/Mds/2011 However, the ld.CIT(A) has not followed the verdict in the right spirit and hence the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) in allowing the deduction s…

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)

…n of supporting evidence, when a notice under section 142(1) was issued to furnish clarification and evidence concerning the return of income filed by the appellant. As laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 57, that the question whether an amount-claimed as expenditure was laid out or expended wholly or exclusively for the purpose of the assessee's business, profession or vocation has to be decided on the facts and in the light of the circumstances of the each case. The mere existence of an agreement between the assessee and the commission agent, assumin…

Showing 1–20 of 67 · Page 1 of 4