Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal allows appeal, Rs. 21,00,000 payment to C-1 India deemed legitimate business expense</h1> The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, overturning the disallowance of Rs. 21,00,000 paid to C-1 India Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal found the ... Disallowance of expenses as not being for the purpose of the business of the appellant - as per revenue assessee has not filed any documentary evidence to substantiate its claim before the AO - Held that:- The correctness in the contention of the assessee that despite the fact that C-1 India incurred losses in the relevant previous year, the company had active business and the website of C-1 India also indicates the extensive business activities undertaken by them. We find that the company products and solutions in the Procurement space cover FRQ and Tender Management, vendor management, contract management, auction (reverse and forward), emarket place, sourcing services, consulting and supplier analytics etc. and the offer tailor made products and services based on the best practices specific to industry domain and the few screenshots from the company’s website showing the products and services offered, awards and achievements. We observe the correctness in the contention of the assessee’s counsel that these details are very much available on the internet which can be accessed by anybody. In view of the above, we find that assessee’s counsel has rightly submitted that facts indicate the extent of business activities of C-1 India which is beyond doubt. Decision of the AO as well Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in disallowing the payment of ₹ 21,00,000/- by holding that the expenditure made by the assessee was not for the business purpose. We also observe that Revenue Authorities have wrongly held that there were inconsistency in the stand of the assessee for the nature of payment to C-1 India Pvt. Ltd. as well as that assessee company is controlled by Sh. Suresh Nanda for the purpose of payment and the payment appeared to have been made of set off the losses in the public company. We find that expenditure incurred by the assessee qualify as deduction u/s. 37(1) of the I.T. Act and the assessee fully established that the expenditure in dispute has been made wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business. IN view of the above, we find that there is a force in the arguments advanced by the Ld. Counsel of the assessee, hence, we delete the disallowance of ₹ 21,00,000/-. - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues:Disallowance of payment made to C-1 India Pvt. Ltd. by the assessee for the financial year 2003-04 under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.Analysis:Issue 1: Disallowance of Payment to C-1 India Pvt. Ltd.The case involved an appeal by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, New Delhi related to the disallowance of Rs. 21,00,000 paid to C-1 India Pvt. Ltd. The Assessing Officer disallowed the payment as not being for the purpose of the business of the assessee, suspecting it was done to reduce tax liability. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld this disallowance in the impugned order. The appellant contended that the expenditure was incurred for setting up a system to aid management decisions and maximize manpower utilization. The Memorandum of Understanding with C-1 India Pvt. Ltd. outlined the scope of work for Dynatron Exports Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's arguments, noting that the payment was for legitimate business purposes. It was observed that C-1 India had active business operations despite incurring losses, offering various products and services in the procurement space. The Tribunal concluded that the expenditure qualified for deduction under section 37(1) as it was wholly and exclusively for business purposes, overturning the disallowance.The Tribunal highlighted that the Revenue Authorities incorrectly perceived inconsistencies in the nature of payment and control by Sh. Suresh Nanda. It was emphasized that the expenditure was legitimate and supported by documentary evidence. The Tribunal noted that the appellant had substantiated the business purpose of the payment adequately, emphasizing the extensive business activities of C-1 India. The Tribunal found that the AO and Ld. CIT(A) erred in disallowing the payment and concluded that the appellant had met the onus of establishing the expenditure's business nature. Therefore, the disallowance of Rs. 21,00,000 was deleted, and the appeal filed by the assessee was allowed.In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision revolved around the legitimacy of the expenditure made to C-1 India Pvt. Ltd. for business purposes, emphasizing the need for expenses to be wholly and exclusively for business to qualify for deduction under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found the appellant's explanations and documentary evidence convincing, leading to the deletion of the disallowance and allowing the appeal.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found