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
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.