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.
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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



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 :

        2017 (8) TMI 1252 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        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

        Tribunal overturns Assessing Officer's disallowances, citing lack of evidence. The tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, finding that the disallowances made by the Assessing Officer were not justified as they were based on ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Tribunal overturns Assessing Officer's disallowances, citing lack of evidence.

                            The tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, finding that the disallowances made by the Assessing Officer were not justified as they were based on surmises and conjectures without proper consideration of relevant evidence. The tribunal emphasized that the AO failed to prove the payments were excessive or unreasonable. The order was pronounced in the Open Court on 18th August 2017.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Legality of the appellate order passed by CIT(A).
                            2. Legality of the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (A.O).
                            3. Disallowance of Rs. 32,65,000 on account of ground handling charges.
                            4. Disallowance of Rs. 2,20,800 on account of conveyance expenses paid to two directors.

                            Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Legality of the appellate order passed by CIT(A):
                            The appellant argued that the appellate order passed by the CIT(A) was illegal and against the principles of natural justice. The tribunal noted that the CIT(A) confirmed the additions/disallowances made by the Assessing Officer without considering the relevant evidence and submissions provided by the assessee.

                            2. Legality of the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (A.O):
                            The appellant contended that the assessment order was illegal and against the principles of natural justice as it was passed without providing a proper and effective opportunity of hearing. The tribunal observed that the query regarding ground handling charges was raised by the AO on 17/12/2012 with compliance required by 24/12/2012, and the assessment order was passed on 28/12/2012, within 11 days of raising the query. The AO ignored the written submissions filed by the assessee on 24/12/2012, indicating that proper opportunity of hearing was not provided.

                            3. Disallowance of Rs. 32,65,000 on account of ground handling charges:
                            The assessee argued that the disallowance was made because the payments were to the wives of the directors and certain details were not filed. The assessee explained that ground handling services were outsourced to Mrs. Rupam Malik and Mrs. Zinnia Singh due to the complexity and lack of internal infrastructure. The tribunal noted that the AO disallowed the charges on the basis of surmises and conjectures without considering the relevant evidence, such as confirmations from the recipients, their IT returns, and TDS certificates. The tribunal held that the disallowance was not justified as the AO did not provide any finding that the amount paid was excessive or unreasonable concerning the fair market value of the services rendered. The tribunal cited several case laws supporting that the reasonableness of the expenditure should be viewed from the perspective of a prudent businessman and not the revenue authorities.

                            4. Disallowance of Rs. 2,20,800 on account of conveyance expenses paid to two directors:
                            The assessee contended that the conveyance expenses were reimbursed to the directors as per the Board Resolution and were not treated as perquisites. The AO disallowed the expenses on the ground that the amounts were not shown as perquisites. The tribunal found that the payments were genuine, verifiable, and made by account payee cheques. The tribunal agreed with the assessee's explanation that the company did not own vehicles to avoid overhead expenses, and the fixed reimbursement of conveyance expenses could not be treated as perquisites. The tribunal held that whether the reimbursement was exempt or taxable should be examined in the case of the directors and not the company.

                            Conclusion:
                            The tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee on both issues, finding that the disallowances made by the AO were based on surmises and conjectures without considering the relevant evidence and submissions provided by the assessee. The tribunal emphasized that the AO failed to discharge the onus of proving that the payments were excessive or unreasonable under Section 40A(2) of the Act.

                            Order Pronounced:
                            The appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the order was pronounced in the Open Court on 18th August 2017.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found