109 ITR 1 (AIl), PH. Textiles v. CIT

121 ITR 232High Court1980#8732 most cited
12

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194-IASection 194LASection 28Section 40(a)(ia)Section 40A(3)

Judgments citing 109 ITR 1 (AIl), PH. Textiles v. CIT

PRAHLAD DAS GOYAL,BHOPAL vs. DCIT - 1(1) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5/IND/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2016-17 Prahlad Das Goyal, Dcit/Acit 1(1) 18, Shyamla Hills, Bhopal बनाम/ Bhopal Vs. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Abbpg3494L Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 31.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04.08.2025

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194Section 40

…ajowanlal Jaiswal v. CIT, [1976] 103 ITR 706 Orissa; U.P. Hardware Store v. CIT, [1976] 104 ITR 664 Allahabad; Ratan Udyog v. ITO, [1977] 109 ITR 1 Allahabad; P.R. Textiles v. CIT, Kerala, [19801 121 ITR 237 Kerala; CIT, v. Kishan Chand Maheswari Dass, [1980] 121 ITR 232 P & H; Kanti Lal Purshottam and Co. v. CIT, [1985] 155 ITR 519 Raj; CIT, v. New Light Tin Mfg. Co., [1980] 121 ITR 229 P & H; Fakri Automobiles v. CIT, [1986] 160 ITR 504 Raj; Venkata Satayanarayana Timber Depot v. ITR, [1987] 165 ITR 253 AP.; and Akash Films v. CIT, [1991] ITR 32 Karnataka. The decisions of the High Courts of Andhra Pradesh, Ori…

MUDIT KUMAR BAJAJ,UJJAIN vs. ITO-1(2), UJJAIN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed”

ITA 550/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Indore18 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani(Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aezpb2621P Assessee By Ms. Nupur Ladha & Shri Vaibhav Siroliya, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.06.2024 O R D E R

Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 40A(3)

…eral High Courts. - Sajowanlal Jaiswal v. CIT [1976] 103 ITR 706 (Ori.), U.P. Hardware Store v. CIT [1976] 104 ITR 664 (All.), Raton Udyog v. 1TO [1977] 109 ITR 1 (AIl), PH. Textiles v. CIT [1980] 121 ITR 237 (Ker.), CIT v. Kishan Chand Maheshwari Dass [1980] 121 ITR 232 (Punj. & Har.), Kanti Lal Purshottam & Co. v. CIT [1985] 155 ITR 519 (Raj.), CIT v. New Light Tin Mfg. Co. [1980] 121 ITR 229 (Punj. & Har.), Fakri Automobiles v. CIT [1986] 160 ITR 504 (Raj.), Venkata Satyanarayana Timber Depot v. CIT [1987] 165 ITR 253 (AP), and Akash Films v. CIT [1991] 190 ITR 32 (Kar.). The decisions of the High Courts of An…

SAMPAT LAL DEWANGAN,DHAMTARI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 11/RPR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 10 & 11/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 Sampat Lal Dewangan Narenderajewellers, Dhamtari (C.G.)-493 773 Pan :Aetpd8959C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bangalore. ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Bikram Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Choudhury N.C Roy, SR. DR
Section 143(1)Section 40A(3)

…10 & 11/RPR/2022 with new jewellery, then it does get covered under the exception clause (d) of Rule 6DD. Also, the same view had been taken by the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kishan Chand Mahjeshwari Dass (1980) 121 ITR 232 (P & H). It was observed by the Hon’ble High Court that where the payment is made by way of adjustment against the amount of any liability incurred by the payee for any goods supplied or services rendered by the assessee to such payee then, such situation would fall within the exception contemplated in clause (e) of Rule 6DD of the Income Tax Rul…

SAMPAT LAL DEWANGAN,DHAMTARI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 10/RPR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 10 & 11/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 Sampat Lal Dewangan Narenderajewellers, Dhamtari (C.G.)-493 773 Pan :Aetpd8959C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bangalore. ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Bikram Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Choudhury N.C Roy, SR. DR
Section 143(1)Section 40A(3)

…10 & 11/RPR/2022 with new jewellery, then it does get covered under the exception clause (d) of Rule 6DD. Also, the same view had been taken by the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kishan Chand Mahjeshwari Dass (1980) 121 ITR 232 (P & H). It was observed by the Hon’ble High Court that where the payment is made by way of adjustment against the amount of any liability incurred by the payee for any goods supplied or services rendered by the assessee to such payee then, such situation would fall within the exception contemplated in clause (e) of Rule 6DD of the Income Tax Rul…

M/S VIJAYETA BUILDCON PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 980/JPR/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Oct 2020AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Sh. S. R. Sharma (CA) &For Respondent: Sh. B. K. Gupta (CIT)
Section 153ASection 253(5)Section 40A(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES ‘B’ JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 980/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2007-08 cuke M/s Vijayeta Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. The ACIT, Vs. B-68, Sterling Ground Floor Central Circle-01, Prithviraj Road, C-Scheme, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AACCV3035B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. S. R. Sharma (CA) & Sh. Rajn…

M/S. S.D. MINERALS PVT.LTD.,SURAT vs. THE JT.CIT.,(OSD)CIRCLE-4,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 554/SRT/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.554/Srt/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 M/S. S.D. Minerals Pvt. Ltd., Joint Commissioner Of 3009, World Trade Centre, Income-Tax Circle –4 Ring Road Surat 395002 (Osd)Surat Pan: Aakcs 3533 K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 40ASection 40A(3)

…eral High Courts. - Sajowanlal Jaiswal v. CIT [1976] 103 ITR 706 (Ori.), U.P. Hardware Store v. CIT [1976] 104 ITR 664 (All.), Raton Udyog v. 1TO [1977] 109 ITR 1 (AIl), PH. Textiles v. CIT [1980] 121 ITR 237 (Ker.), CIT v. Kishan Chand Maheshwari Dass [1980] 121 ITR 232 (Punj. & Har.), Kanti Lal Purshottam & Co. v. CIT [1985] 155 ITR 519 (Raj.), CIT v. New Light Tin Mfg. Co. [1980] 121 ITR 229 (Punj. & Har.), Fakri Automobiles v. CIT [1986] 160 ITR 504 (Raj.), Venkata Satyanarayana Timber Depot v. CIT [1987] 165 ITR 253 (AP), and Akash Films v. CIT [1991] 190 ITR 32 (Kar.). The decisions of the High Courts of An…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SANSKAR HOMES PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4430/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 40A(3)

…and the claim of it being investment is an afterthought. Learned DR placed reliance on the judgments in the case of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh vs CIT (1982) 136 ITR 589; (ii) CIT vs Kishan Chand Maheshwari Dass 1980) 121 ITR 232; (iii) CIT vs Avatar Singh & Sons (1981) 129 ITR 671; UP Hardware Store vs CIT (1976) 104 ITR 664(Delhi High Court); and Sajowan Lal Jaiswal vs CIT (1976) 103 ITR 706(Orissa High Court) for the proposition that Section 40A(3) is attracted to payments made for acquiring stock-in-trade and other material. 7. On the other hand, it was argued on beh…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SANSKAR HOMES PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4429/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 40A(3)

…and the claim of it being investment is an afterthought. Learned DR placed reliance on the judgments in the case of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh vs CIT (1982) 136 ITR 589; (ii) CIT vs Kishan Chand Maheshwari Dass 1980) 121 ITR 232; (iii) CIT vs Avatar Singh & Sons (1981) 129 ITR 671; UP Hardware Store vs CIT (1976) 104 ITR 664(Delhi High Court); and Sajowan Lal Jaiswal vs CIT (1976) 103 ITR 706(Orissa High Court) for the proposition that Section 40A(3) is attracted to payments made for acquiring stock-in-trade and other material. 7. On the other hand, it was argued on beh…

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, AMRITSAR. vs. SH. SHIV RAJ SINGH BAWA, AMRITSAR.

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed and the assessee’s CO, dismissed

ITA 407/ASR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 407/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)For Respondent: Sh. Tarun Bansal (Adv.)
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

….477; (2) U.P. Hardware Store vs. CIT (1976) 104 ITR 664 (All) : (3) Ratan Udyog vs. ITO 1977 CTR (All) 134 : (1977) 109 ITR 1 (All) : (4) P.R. Textiles vs. CIT (1980) 121 ITR 237 (Ker) : (5) CIT vs. Kishan Chand Maheswari Dass (1980) 14 CTR (P&H) 90 : (1980) 121 ITR 232 (P&H) : (6) Kanti Lal Purshottam & Co. vs. CIT (1986) 53 (AY 2012-13) ITO v. Shiv Raj Singh Bawa CTR (Raj) 19 : (1985) 155 ITR 519 (Raj) : (7) CIT vs. New Light Tin Manufacturing. Co. (1980) 14 CTR (P&H) 143 : (1980) 121 ITR 229 (P&H); (8) Fakri Automobiles vs. CIT (1986) 52 CTR (Raj) 59 : (1986) 160 ITR 504 (Raj); (9) Venkata Satyanarayana Tim…

M/S. SONEX TV APPLIANCES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 8(4), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee (in ITA No

ITA 390/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13 M/S Sonex Tv Appliances V/S. Income Tax Officer, Pvt. Ltd.3C, Chowringhee Ward-8(4), Aayakar Lane, Kolkata-16 Bhawan,P-7, [Pan No.Aafcs 7583 Q] Chowringhee Square,Kolkata-69 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 01-03-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 27-04-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Kolkata Dated 02.02.2017. Assessment Was Framed By Ito Ward-8(4), Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 25.02.2015 For Assessment Year 2012-13. Assessee Has Raised Following Ground:- “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Fact, The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Upholding The Addition Of Rs.54,32,333/- U/S 40A(3) Of The Act Made By The Ao Is Erroneous & Bad In Law. 2. That On The Fats & In Respect To The Circumstances Of The Case The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Upholding The Action Of The Ao To Hold The Payments Of Rs.54,32,333/- Made By The Appellant To M/S Neosa Electronic Pvt. Ltd. By Way Of Adjustment Against Liability Attracts The Provision Of Section 40A(3) Of The Act Is Arbitrary, Excessive & Bad In Law.

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…case of appellant does not fall within the above exception and hence there is no need to discuss the exception any further. Further the question involved in respect in the case of the appellant has been dealt with in CIT vs. Kishan Chand Maheshwwri Dass (1980 121 ITR 232 P&H) the following are relevant excerpts of the judgment:- ‘At the instance of the revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, ha referred the following two questions of law for the opinion of this court: 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the word “expend…

THE ACIT, CICLE -4(1), INDORE vs. M/S. NAROTTAMDAS ENTERPRISES PODDAR PLAZA, INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 843/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Jan 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 16

…of Income Tax Act,1961 cannot be made. These entries were not in the nature of "book adjustment" and various judgments referred to by the AO in the assessment order viz. the decision by Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Kishan Chand Maheshwari Das (121 ITR 232 (P & H), confirmed by Hon'ble Supreme Court as reported in 191 ITR 667 (SC) have not been found applicable to the facts of the case under consideration. The copies of the account of M/s.. Narottamdas Jethabhai & Family and relevant bank statements reflecting such payments through RTGS are placed on record which evidently prove that there were no…

VILAS TRANSPORT COMPANY,MUMBAI vs. ITO 13(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 6717/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainm/S. Vilas Transport Company Income Tax Officer-13(2)(1) 103/104, Vyapar Bhavan Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. 49, P. D’Mello Road, Carnac Mumbai 400020 Bunder, Mumbai 400009 Pan - Aaafv0760G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40ASection 40A(3)

…u/s. 40A(3) of I.T. Act, 1961. In this connection, reliance is also placed on the following decisions:- i) CIT V/S. Padmavathi Raje Cotton Mills—Cal-239 1TR 355 ii) CIT V/S. Grewal Group Of Industries—P&H-110 ITR 278 iii) CIT V/S. Kishan Chand Mahesh Dass—P&H-121 ITR 232 4.4.5 In the result, the ground of appeal is not only dismissed but disallowance is enhanced.” 5.3.2 On a perusal of the finding/decision of the learned CIT(A) it is seen that he has rendered a finding to the effect that the decision of the AO in disallowing under section 40A(3) of the Act an amount of `30,40,357/- @20% of payments of stevedoring…

109 ITR 1 (AIl), PH. Textiles v. CIT (121 ITR 232) — Cited in 12 Judgments | BharatTax