(3) ITO v. Nam Estates (P) Ltd.

141 ITD 659Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2013#22520 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 362,162 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2022.

Judgments citing (3) ITO v. Nam Estates (P) Ltd.

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - 3(1), Indore vs. Shri Rajeev Ajmera, Indore

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 51/IND/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms.Suchitra Kamble & Shrib.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-3(1) Shri Rajeev Ajmera, Indore बनाम/ Indore Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Abgpa4930L Co No.23/Ind/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.51/Ind/2018) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Rajeev Ajmera, Dcit-3(1) Indore Indore बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Abgpa4930L Assessee By Shri Mahendra Mittal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 31.08.2022 आदेश/ O R D E R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 44A

…7 Hyd Assessee had incurred expenditure wholly or exclusively for purpose of business must be allowed. Payments made was subjected to TDS and subsequent has filed their return of income. Amounts could not be disallowed. (3) ITO vs. Nam Estates (P) Ltd. (2013) 141 ITD 659 Bang, 21 ITR (Trib) 109 Bang Expenses on commission and brokerage charges on which tax deducted at source and remitted to the treasury were genuine and allowed the same. (4) CIT vs. Gopaldas Estate Housing (P) Ltd-267 ITR 149 Delhi Brokerage paid to brokers were not related to the assessee and expenditure is neither of personal nor capital. Disal…

M/S Samrudhi Developers, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-6(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 2272/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013 – 14

For Appellant: Shri V Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayanan, JCIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 40

…n the orders passed by the Ld.CIT(A). He also placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of Nam Estates Pvt Ltd vs ITU reported in (2020) 428 ITR 186 that upheld the decision of coordinate bench of this Tribunal reported in (2013) 141 ITD 659. He submitted that assessee has not established that the vendors to whom cash payments were not made, do not have any bank accounts. 5. We have perused submissions advanced by both sides in light of records placed before us. 5.1 The only issue raised by assessee is in respect of the disallowance of cash payment made by assessee to various vendors…

Madhav Govind Dhulshete, Latur vs. Income-Tax Officer

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 2148/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.2146/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Bharat RaichandaniFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal, CIT-DR

Section 271DSection 40A(3)

…here is operating bank accounts involving the parties. Therefore, AO came to the conclusion that it is a fit case for invoking the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act. AO relies on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Nam Estates Pvt. Ltd. 141 ITD 659 and the judgment of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Ramesh Chand (HUF) Vs. CIT 217 Taxman 75 (P&H-HC). Eventually, AO made addition of Rs.36,15,500/- as per the discussion in Para 4 of the assessment order. 6. During the First Appellate proceedings, this issue was addressed by the CIT(A) in Para Nos.7 to 9 of his order. In response…