ANAND AUTOMOTIVE P. LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS ANAND AUTOMOTIVE LTD),MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 2(1)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7570/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2019AY 2006-074 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the appeal regarding the Section 40A(3) disallowance, finding that payments were made by cheque, not cash. For the ad-hoc addition, the Tribunal restricted it to 5% of the aggregate expenditure, deleting the balance.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged disallowances made by the lower authorities on repairs and maintenance expenses. One disallowance was for cash payments exceeding Rs. 20,000, and the other was an ad-hoc addition for unverifiable cash expenditure.

What were the issues?

Whether cash payments exceeding Rs. 20,000 were made in violation of Section 40A(3), and if an ad-hoc disallowance on unverifiable cash expenditure was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40A(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Appellant: Shri Prasad Bapat-Ld. AR
For Respondent: Shri Abdul Hakeem M. - Ld. DR

Assessee by : Shri Prasad Bapat-Ld. AR Revenue by : Shri Abdul Hakeem M. - Ld. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ : 01/05/2019 Date of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 16/05/2019 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year [AY] 2006-07 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-4, Mumbai [CIT(A)], Appeal No. CIT(A)-4/IT-63/ACIT-2(1)(1)/2015-16 dated 22/09/2016 on following grounds of appeal: -

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming disallowance of INR 33,908/- u/s 40A(3) stating that the assessee has violated provision of section 40A(3).

2 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming disallowance of 20% of cash expenditure i.e. INR 8,17,310 stating the huge cash expenditure is unverifiable as the assessee does not have adequately supported bills.”

2.1 This is second round of appeal before us since the matter of disallowance of repairs & maintenance expenses, in the first round, was set aside to the file of Ld. AO for re-adjudication by this Tribunal vide para 10 of order dated 28/06/2013, a copy of which has been placed on record. Accordingly, assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 has been reframed on 18/03/2015 wherein the assessee has again been saddled with aggregate addition of Rs.8,51,218/- on account of repairs & maintenance expenses, which upon confirmation by Ld. first appellate authority vide impugned order dated 22/09/2016, is the subject matter of present appeal before us. 2.2 In the set aside proceedings, upon perusal of details of repairs & maintenance expenses as filed by the assessee, it transpired that the assessee made certain payments in cash exceeding Rs.20,000/- in violation of Section 40A(3) which called for disallowance to the extent of 20% of such expenditure. The details of these expenditure could be extracted in the following manner: - Sr. No. Name of the Party Amount (Rs.) 1 Vishal Electricals 64,395/- 2. Cash 20,138/- 3. S.M.Enterprises (Pune) 26,062/- 4. K.N.G.Wires & Cables 58,945/- Total 1,69,540/- Accordingly, an amount of Rs.33,908/- has been disallowed and added back to the income of the assessee.

More judgments on Section 40A(3)

All 3,278 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40A(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →