ANAND AUTOMOTIVE P. LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS ANAND AUTOMOTIVE LTD),MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 2(1)(1), MUMBAI
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?
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
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)
- Rekha Agarwal, Jaipur vs ITO WD 4(1), JaipurITA 844/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Infra Developers, Shivpuri vs Income Tax Officer, AshoknagarITA 454/AGR/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Saiyed Zaharul Alam, Murshidabad vs I.T.O., Ward - 42(1), MurshidabadITA 2233/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
- M/S Sadana Electric Store, Lucknow vs DCIT Range-6, LucknowITA 283/LKW/2024[2014-15]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
- Nagendra Prasad, Patna vs ITO Ward -5(3) Patna, Dak BanglowITA 362/PAT/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026