Case LawHigh Court › Commissioner Of Income Tax-13 v. Shri Bh...

Commissioner Of Income Tax-13 v. Shri Bhavin V. Desai

High Court 16 Dec 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax-13 v. Shri Bhavin V. Desai
Date of order
16 Dec 2011
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Commissioner Of Income Tax-13 v. Shri Bhavin V. Desai, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: 1.Following two questions of law are raised by the Revenue in this Appeal. “(a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the CIT(A) and ITAT was justified in holding that the amount of Rs.1,87,52,740/- received by the from ABN Amro Bank is reimbursement of expenses instead of Servic...

Decision: Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.237 OF 2011 Commissioner of Income Tax-13. ..Appellant. Vs. Shri Bhavin V. Desai...Respondent. .... Mr. Suresh Kumar, for the Appellant.Mr. B. V. Jhaveri, for the Respondent. .... CORAM : J. P. DEVADHAR & A.R. JOSHI, JJ. th DECEMBER, 2011. DATED : 16 P.C. 1.Following two questions of law are raised by the Revenue in this Appeal. “(a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the CIT(A) and ITAT was justified in holding that the amount of Rs.1,87,52,740/- received by the from ABN Amro Bank is reimbursement of expenses instead of Service Charges received ? (b)Whether the CIT(A) and ITAT was justified in deleting the additions of Rs.48,12,647/- made by the A. O. on account of failure of the assessee to substantiate the expenses ?” 2.Perusal of the order passed by the Assessing Officer shows that out of sum of Rs.1,87,52,740/- claimed as reimbursement of expenses, the Assessing Officer had made disallowance of Rs.48,12,647/- on the ground that the said amount represented the fees for the services rendered by the assessee. The CIT(A) as also the ITAT have held on construction of the agreement that the assessee has been paid separately for the services rendered and the amount of Rs.1,87,52,740/- received by the assessee was towards the reimbursement of the expenses incurred by the assessee on behalf of the third parties. In our opinion, the decision of the ITAT is based on a finding of fact and no fault can be found with the same. Hence, we see no reason to entertain the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. (A. R. JOSHI, J.) (J. P. DEVADHAR,J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan