Case LawHigh Court › Income Tax-1 v. M/S. Chowdry Associates

Income Tax-1 v. M/S. Chowdry Associates

High Court 09 May 2024 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Income Tax-1 v. M/S. Chowdry Associates
Date of order
09 May 2024
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Income Tax-1 v. M/S. Chowdry Associates, the High Court (2024) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: The appeal is allowed and impugned addition is deleted.” 5.In view of the aforesaid, and bearing in mind the conclusions that stand recorded in para 8 of the judgment of the ITAT, we find that the appeal fails to raise any substantial question of law.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
$~58 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ITA 264/2024 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Prashant Meharchandani, SSC with Mr. Akshat Singh, Adv. versus % M/S. CHOWDRY ASSOCIATES ..... Respondent Through: None CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMAHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV O R D E R 09.05.2024 CM APPL. 27533/2024 (11 Days Delay in filing) -CM APPL. 27534/2024 (58 Days Delay in refiling) 1.Bearing in mind the disclosures made the delay of 11 days in filing and 58 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned. 2.Applications stand disposed of. ITA 264/2024 3.Having heard Mr. Meharchandani, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, and on going through the judgment dated 14 September 2023 rendered by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [“ITAT”] we find that the issue of administrative expenses came to be answered in favour of the assessee bearing in mind the undisputed position that the shares or interests were held in its subsidiary. 4.We note that the ITAT in para 8 has held as follows: “8. After thorough examination of the assessment order and order of ld. CIT(A), it can be observed that not a single word is discussed on the basis of the financials or the P & L Account of the assessee company to show how this suo moto disallowance, is not justified. No reason for disagreeing with the suo-motto disallowance is mentioned by the ld. AO. The exempt income is from investments in subsidiary and there is no justification to attribute any direct or indirect expenses by the assessee for maintaining the shares of subsidiary Dabur India Limitetd on a very general presumption. Grounds are sustained. The appeal is allowed and impugned addition is deleted.” 5.In view of the aforesaid, and bearing in mind the conclusions that stand recorded in para 8 of the judgment of the ITAT, we find that the appeal fails to raise any substantial question of law. It shall, consequently, stand dismissed. YASHWANT VARMA, J MAY 9, 2024/kk PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, 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