How many judgments cite Voltamp Transformers Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT?

27 judgments on BharatTax cite Voltamp Transformers Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (129 ITR 105), spanning 2010 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Voltamp Transformers Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 40A(2)(b), Section 142(1), Section 143(1)(a), Section 143(2), Section 143(3), Section 145(3).

Voltamp Transformers Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

129 ITR 105High Court1981#4346 most cited

What is Voltamp Transformers Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

The Gujarat High Court in Voltamp Transformers Pvt. Ltd. held that the perspective of the assessee, a businessman, should be considered when determining commercial expediency, not solely the department's viewpoint. A businessman must act prudently to advance their business interests.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Voltamp Transformers Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT · section 37 · commercial expediency · prudent businessman · business interest · departmental view · assessee's perspective · Gujarat High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 40A(2)(b)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 37 Section 92BA

Issues it is cited on

section 40a(2)(b)section 40a(2)commercial expediency section 37 section 37(1)person total income company business document interest section 14

Judgments citing Voltamp Transformers Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. BLEND FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the R

ITA 8088/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant (Account Member) & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh SanghviFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhari (SR. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 40A(2)(b)

…eld by Hon'ble Gujarat High court in the and not department point of view held by Hon'ble Gujarat High court in the and not department point of view held by Hon'ble Gujarat High court in the case of Voltamp Transfor case of Voltamp Transformers Pvt Ltd vs CIT 129 ITR 105 (Guj). We further mers Pvt Ltd vs CIT 129 ITR 105 (Guj). We further find that Hon'ble Rajasthan High court in the case of CIT vs. Consulting find that Hon'ble Rajasthan High court in the case of CIT vs. Consulting find that Hon'ble Rajasthan High court in the case of CIT vs. Consulting Engineering Group Ltd. Reported in 223 Taman 440 held that it…

ZETA BUILDTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-7, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3449/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: Sh. Suresh Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)

…(SC)  CIT Vs. Dhanrajgirji Raja Narasingirji 91 ITR 544 (SC)  J.K. Woollen Manufacturers v. CIT[1969] 72 ITR 612 (SC)  Aluminium Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT [1972] 86 ITR 11 (SC)  Dalmia Cement (254 ITR 377) (Del)  Voltamp Transformers Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 129 ITR 105 (Guj)  Shaw Wallace Distilleries Ltd. vs. ACIT: 85 TTJ 236 (Del.);  DCIT vs ICICI Web Trade Ltd.: ITA No. 6559/M/2006 (Mum.). 14. With regard to disallowance of Rs. 3 lakhs for MIS information to M/s Big Think Media P Ltd, it is submitted that, since in the present case also, the payment is to the unrelated party and relying on the decision in…

SHRI SURESH KUMAR GOYAL, 501 UNIQUE SANGHI APARTMENT DURGAPURA JAIPUR-302018,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

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

ITA 664/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)

…nd profit and loss accounts and that they had paid tax thereon, which was also accepted by revenue - Whether impugned order of Tribunal could not be treated as perverse - Held, yes [Para 9] [In favour of assessee] 10.3 Voltamp Transformers P. Ltd V CIT (1981) 129 ITR 105 (Guj) (DPB 15). Hence, this disallowance may kindly be deleted. On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 2.3 2.4 We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of wholesale trading of cement, fertilizer and…

DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR vs. GRIDCO LIMITED, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 36/CTK/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack20 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2013-14 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Dcit, Dcit, Corporate Circle Corporate Circle - Vs. Grid Corporation Of O Grid Corporation Of Orissa 1(1), Bhubaneswar. 1(1), Bhubaneswar. Ltd., Ltd., Janapath, Janapath, Bhubanesw Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aabcg 5398 P (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri Ved Jain/P. Venugopal Rao, Ars Venugopal Rao, Ars Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/0 02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/0 /02/2023 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: S/Shri Ved Jain/P. Venugopal Rao, ARsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam

…t free loan, proportionately, borrowing liability might have been reduced. The Company has not acted as a prudential businessman as per the ratio P a g e 5 | 12 Assessment Year : 2013-14 laid down in the cases of Voltamp Transformers (P) Ltd. vs. CIT [1981) 129 ITR 105/5 Taxman 253 (Guj.); and CIT vs. Walchand & Co. (P.) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 (SC) where it was observed that yardstick will have to be taken from the businessman point of view but the businessman must be a prudent businessman. 29. The Commercial expediency would include such purpose as is expected by the assessee to advance its business interest a…

DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. GRIDCO LIMITED, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 346/CTK/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack20 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

For Appellant: S/Shri Ved Jain/P. Venugopal Rao, ARsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-17(1), HYDERABAD vs. D.R.S.LOGISTICS PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1971/HYD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeeval Lal Lavidiya, DR

…g standard and policy. The expediency, legitimacy and the business needs will have to be examined from the assessee’s point of view and not from the department’s view, as held by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Voltamp Transformers Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 129 ITR 105 (Guj). We further find that Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Consulting Engineering Group Ltd. reported in 223 Taxman 440 has held that it is for the assessee as a business concern to conclude as to what remuneration of the salary has to be paid to the employees and the reasonableness of the expenses is to be judged from an ang…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-17(1), HYDERABAD vs. DRS LOGISTICS PRIVATE LIMITED , SECUNDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1719/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeeval Lal Lavidiya, DR

BALANI INFOTECH P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2767/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandrabalani Infotech P. Ltd. Vs. Acit 119, Vinobapuri Lajpat Circle – 4(1) Nagar-Ii, New Delhi-24 New Delhi

Section 143(3)Section 2(41)Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

…of Revenue authorities. The expediency, legitimacy and the business needs will have to be examined from the assessee’s point of view and not from the department’s view as held by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Voltamp Transformers Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 129 ITR 105 (Guj). We further find that Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Consulting Engineering Group Ltd. reported in 223 Taxman 440 has held that it is for an assessee as a businessman to come to a conclusion as to what remuneration of the salary is to be paid to the employees and the reasonableness of the expenses is to be judged from…

K L CONCAST PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 14(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, we hold that the disallowance made by the LD AO u/s 40A (2) is unjustified

ITA 5195/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)(b)

…been decided in favour of the assessee in assessee’s own case and submitted that the present appeal deserves to be allowed. 9. Per contra, Ld. SR. DR submitted that the assessing officer has relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in (1981) 129 ITR 105 (Guj) and contended that the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A) requires no interference. 10. We have heard the rival submission on the issue under consideration, we have also gone through the entire materials available on record and gave our thoughtful consideration. It is emerges from the record that, the Board Resolution has been pa…

DCIT CC 44, MUMBAI vs. SOPARIWALA EXPORTS, MUMBAI

ITA 3039/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Sept 2021AY 2007-08

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 92

…necessity of expenditure is totally unsustainable. In this regard he placed reliance on the following decisions :- • Sasson J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (118 ITR 261) • Shahzad-a-Nand & Sons Vs. CIT (108 ITR 358) • Voltamp Transformers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (129 ITR 105) 15. He further submitted that the contract between the parties is to be understood as is understood by the parties and Assessing Officer cannot give his own interpretation to the contract. In this regard he placed reliance upon 15 M/s. Sopariwala Exports M/s. Sopariwala Exports Pvt. Ltd. the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case o…

DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 2 (1),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. GANGES INTERNATIONALE PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3370/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3370/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2016-17 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Ganges International Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(1), Vs. B-36, Lawrence Road, Room No. 511, 5Th Floor, Wanaparthy Industrial Area, Block, No. 121, M.G. Road, New Delhi 110 035. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aaacg4177F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ved Jain, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 16.03.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.04.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 6, Chennai Dated 25.09.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2016-17. The Effective Ground Raised By The Revenue Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition On Account Of Disallowance Of Commission Paid To M/S. Amikong Pte Ltd. For ₹.2,66,91,976/- & M/S. Poushali Sales Pvt. Ltd. For ₹.69,74,865/-.

For Appellant: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Ved Jain, C.A

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 37

…ccount of commercial expediency. If there was evidence that sales increased due to effort of the commission agent and that the commission paid was reasonable and the commission was held to be deductible as held in Voltamp Transformers Pvt Ltd. Vs. CIT (1981) .129 ITR 105 (Gujarat). The Appellant has fully discharged the onus under the law by establishing commission expenses exclusively for the purpose of the business. The turnover /income has not been disputed then it was unjustified on the part of the Assessing Officer to disbelieve the corresponding expenses incurred to derive such income or doubt the genuinene…

ASIAN MILLS PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT, RANGE-1,,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1397/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1397/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Asian Mills Pvt. Ltd., A.C.I.T., 104, Sakar Iii, Vs. Range-1, Opp. Old High Court, Ahmedabad. Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380014. Pan: Aabca8236G & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1531/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 D.C.I.T., Asian Mills Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. 104, Sakar Iii, Ahmedabad. Opp. Old High Court, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380014. Pan: Aabca8236G

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr.D.R

Section 194Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40Section 6Section 7

…was to conduct deeper enquiry on the payment of such commission expenses but he has not done so. 33.8 In holding so we draw support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Voltamp Transformers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 129 ITR 105 wherein it was held as under: “8. It is well-settled law that so far as the questions of commercial expediency and business need of an organisation are concerned, it is not the viewpoint of a revenue officer which should count but it should be the viewpoint of an ordinary business men dealing with a situation like the one faced by the particular…

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(3),, SURAT vs. M/S. JIVRAJ TEA COMPANY,, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2343/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat01 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.2343/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner Vs. Jivraj Tea Company, Of Income Tax, 5/258-259, Jivraj Chambers, Circle – 2(3), Surat. Ruwala Tekra, Bhagal, Surat. [Pan: Aacfj 2236 R] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah – Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Prasoon Kabra – Cit-Dr

Section 40A(2)(b)Section 80I

…e his commercial expediency. The ld. CIT(A) has relied on the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Ramanand Sagar vs. DCIT 255 ITR 134 (Bom.) and decision of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. Voltam Transformers Pvt. Ltd. 129 ITR 105 (Guj.), wherein the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court held that so far as legitimate business needs of assessee or the benefit derived by /accrued to the assessee from goods/services/facilities are concerned these are not be judged from the view point of Revenue Officer but from a view point of a businessman. 19. While granting relief to the asse…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. RIDDHI STEEL & TUBE PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 909/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Ridhi Steels & Tubes Pvt.Ltd. Acit, Cir.5 Ahmedabad. 83/84, Village Kamod Vs. Piplaj Pirana Road Aslali Piplaj, Ahmedabad Pan : Aaccr 0175 J "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Acit, Cir.5 Ridhi Steels & Tubes Pvt.Ltd. Ahmedabad. 83/84, Village Kamod Vs. Piplaj Pirana Road Aslali Piplaj, Ahmedabad

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, ARFor Respondent: Shri

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 69B

…y and business needs are to be appreciated while considering allowance or disallowance of the expenditure claimed by an assessee, we would like to make reference to the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Voltamp Transformer P.Ltd., Vs. CIT, 129 ITR 105 (Guj) wherein it has held that – “So far as the questions of commercial expediency and business need of an organization are concerned, it is not the view point of a revenue officer which should count, but it should be the view of an ordinary businessman dealing with a situation like the one faced by the assessee.” 15. In a similar circumstance,…

RIDDHI STEEL & TUBES PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 638/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, ARFor Respondent: Shri

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 69B

SHARMA CARS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-8, NOW CIRCLE-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1655/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1655/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sharma Cars P.Ltd. Dcit, Cir.8 “Kayakalp”, N.H. No.8 Vs Ahmedabad. Naroda, Ahmedabad 382330. Pan: Aadcs 0305 E अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri T.P. Hemani & Shri P.B. Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri T.P. Hemani, and Shri P.B. Parmar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

Section 143(2)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ - अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD – BENCH ‘D’ BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1655/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sharma Cars P.Ltd. DCIT, Cir.8 “Kayakalp”, N.H. No.8 Vs Ahmedabad. Naroda, Ahmedabad 382330. PAN: AADCS 0305 E अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri T.P. Hemani, and Shri P.B. Parmar, AR Revenue by : Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 11/01/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement : 01 / 02/2019 O R…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. SH. MEDIA SATELLITE & TELECOM LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 415/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiito, Vs. Media Satellite & Telecom Ward-16(3), Ltd, New Delhi 1201, B-89, Hemkunt Chamber, Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan: Aaacm0721D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: None

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40A(2)(b)

…assessee from goods, services or facilities etc, are concerned these are not to be judged from the point of view of a revenue officer but from ITO Vs. Media Satellite & Telecom Ltd the view point of businessman. [Voltamp Transformers Pvt. Ltd. \/s. CIT (1981) 129 ITR 105 (Guj)] Provisions of Sec. 40A(2)(b) of the Act have not been complied with to the extent of quantifying the element of unreasonable and excessive nature of expense if any claimed by the appellant in the opinion of the AO. The 100% disallowance of rebate and discount has been made on the sole consideration that it was allowed to an associated conc…

HINDUJA GROUP INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT RG 6(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals for A

ITA 4458/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma & Shri Amarjit Singh

Section 115Section 143(3)Section 40

…is revenue in nature and incurred wholly and exclusively in the interest of business, it should be allowed without being too meticulous, as to whether such visits results immediately in earning of profits. The Gujarat High Court in Voltamp Transformers P Ltd 129 ITR 105, has held, the benefit derived by or accruing to the assessee from goods services or facilities etc. are to be judged from the viewpoint of a businessman and not from the viewpoint of a revenue officer. This cardinal principle has not been accepted by the AO and while considering the allowability of the expenditure he has looked into the proposit…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE- 5(3),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI PRAVIN SHRIPAL JAIN ,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 162/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.162/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12)

For Respondent: Shri A.L. Thakkar, AR

Section 37Section 37(1)

…s to quantification of expenditure while expression “exclusively” refers to the motive, objective and purpose of the expenditure. The assessee has relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Voltamp Transformer Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, 129 ITR 105 (Guj). This decision was referred by the assessee in his written submissions filed before the ld.CIT(A) and following observations were brought to the notice of the ld.CIT(A). “So far as the questions of commercial expediency and business need of an organization are concerned, it is not the view point of a revenue officer which should count, but…

THE DCIT, 1(1), INDORE vs. M/S. MODERN LABORATORIES, INDORE

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

ITA 277/IND/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jul 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./ ./ ./ I.T.A. No.277 & Co.16/Ind/2014 ./ "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-09

…case of Nestor Pharmaceuticals (P.) Ltd. [2010] 33 DTR 293(Del), Bharat Medical DCIT v 1(1) v Modern Laboratories / I. T. A. No. 277/Ind/2014& CO.No.16/Ind/2014/AY:08-09 Page 6 of 29 Stores [2009] 308 ITR 373(P&H) and Voltamp Transformers Pvt. Ltd. [1981] 129 ITR 105 (Guj). This explain the role of commission agents in government contract and describes the details of service rendered by them in such contracts. On merits, the CIT (A) observed that there is mismatch in the case of M/s. Apex Pharmaceuticals, Bhopal regarding bills and TDS and variation of commission payments from 1% to 25%. The appellant expl…

Showing 1–20 of 27 · Page 1 of 2