40A(3). 2. Pr. CIT v. GEE Square Exports

100 Taxmann.com 462Reported decision2018#16391 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 2(33)Section 250Section 263

Judgments citing 40A(3). 2. Pr. CIT v. GEE Square Exports

DCIT, Mumbai vs. Chandmiya Miyajan Qureshi, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue bearing ITA No

ITA 5172/MUM/2024[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2025

Bench: SHRI. OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil R. PadvekarFor Respondent: Shri Virqabhadra Mahajan, (SR. DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORESHRI. OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A No.5172/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year 2012-13) DCIT, Mumbai vs Chandmiya Miyajan Qureshi Room No.828, 8th Floor D-301, Third Floor, Said Co-op. KautilyaBhavan, BandraKurla Housing Society, Umar Wadi, Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai- East, Mumbai-400 070 400 051 PAN : AAAPQ0210E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Tanzil R. Padvekar Respondent by : Shri Virqabhadra Mahajan, (SR. DR) Date of hearing : 17/10/2025 Date of pronouncement : 24/11/2025 O R D…

Gyasuddin Qureshi, Bulandshahr Up vs. ITO Ward 3(2), Ghaziabad

In the result, the Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3132/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: AO during the case proceedings but AO not considered it is to relevant to mention here that all the cash purchase is fully covered under rule 6DD(e)(ii) of the income tax rule assessee had purchases in cash of rupees 74,67,186/ out of total purchase 2,69,92,101/ due to this some purchase have to be done in cash, then many vendors do not have the bank account and purchase is done away from a remote area. Also the assessee rely on the order of the Hon,ble Chandigarh Bench of Income Tax Appell

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER GYASUDDIN QURESHI ITO, S/o. Sh. Riazuddin Qureshi Ward 3(2), 317A, Peer Khan Gulaothi Vs. Bulandshahar, Distt. Bulandshahr, (U.P.) (U.P.) PAN : AADPQ9156G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. K.Sampath, Adv. & Sh. V.Rajkumar, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 14/02/2024 Date of Pronouncement 27/02/2024 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM: This appeal by Assessee is filed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income…

M/S. Ace Developers, Mangaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangaluru

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 76/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheethal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri A. Ramesh Kumar, D.R
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 34Section 40A(3)

…grotech Private Limited Vs. AC1T (109 Taxmann.com 337) (Kar) Merely because purchases were made through uncrossed cheque/demand draft the same could not be considered as bogus so as to make disallowance under section 40A(3). 2. Pr. CIT Vs. GEE Square Exports (100 Taxmann.com 462) (SC) ITA Nos.74 to 76/Bang/2022 M/s. ACE Developers, Mangaluru Page 7 of 13 3.7 The ld. A.R. referring to the provisions of Section 40A(3) of the Act submitted that the intent of bringing the said provisions was to curb the black money but genuineness of transaction, business expediency and genuine hardship has also been kept as releva…

M/S. Ace Developers, Mangaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangaluru

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 75/BANG/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheethal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri A. Ramesh Kumar, D.R
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 34Section 40A(3)

…grotech Private Limited Vs. AC1T (109 Taxmann.com 337) (Kar) Merely because purchases were made through uncrossed cheque/demand draft the same could not be considered as bogus so as to make disallowance under section 40A(3). 2. Pr. CIT Vs. GEE Square Exports (100 Taxmann.com 462) (SC) ITA Nos.74 to 76/Bang/2022 M/s. ACE Developers, Mangaluru Page 7 of 13 3.7 The ld. A.R. referring to the provisions of Section 40A(3) of the Act submitted that the intent of bringing the said provisions was to curb the black money but genuineness of transaction, business expediency and genuine hardship has also been kept as releva…

M/S. Ace Developers, Mangaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangaluru

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 74/BANG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheethal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri A. Ramesh Kumar, D.R
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 34Section 40A(3)

…grotech Private Limited Vs. AC1T (109 Taxmann.com 337) (Kar) Merely because purchases were made through uncrossed cheque/demand draft the same could not be considered as bogus so as to make disallowance under section 40A(3). 2. Pr. CIT Vs. GEE Square Exports (100 Taxmann.com 462) (SC) ITA Nos.74 to 76/Bang/2022 M/s. ACE Developers, Mangaluru Page 7 of 13 3.7 The ld. A.R. referring to the provisions of Section 40A(3) of the Act submitted that the intent of bringing the said provisions was to curb the black money but genuineness of transaction, business expediency and genuine hardship has also been kept as releva…

40A(3). 2. Pr. CIT v. GEE Square Exports (100 Taxmann.com 462) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax