Associated Engineering Enterprises v. CIT

216 ITR 366High Court1995#12447 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2023.

Judgments citing Associated Engineering Enterprises v. CIT

M/S. SHREE TIRUPATI ASSOCIATES,BHILWARA vs. ITO, BHILWARA

ITA 2/JODH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur09 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 30Section 40ASection 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM M/s Shree Tirupati Vs Income Tax Associates, Officer, 4/28, Mansingh Ka Building, Ward-2, Bhilwara Bhadada Bagh, Bhopal Gunj, Bhilwara (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN NO. ABMFS 4450 P Assessee By Sh. Ajay Moondra-ITP Revenue By Sh. S. M. Joshi, JCIT-DR Date of hearing 12/07/2023 Date of 09/08/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM This appeal is filed by assessee and is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), Ajmer dated 05.11.2…

B SARAVANAN,TRICHY vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 12(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 721/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40Section 40A(3)Section 69D

…closed sources, 4. The terms of Section 40A(3) are not absolute according to Allahabad High Court (217 ITR 431), which followed 191 ITR 667 SC; other decisions holding so are: i. 167 ITR 139 Raj ii. 179 ITR 122 Cal iii. 191 ITR 667 SC iv. 200 ITR 490 Del v. 216 ITR 366 Gau vi. 225 ITR 57 Gau vii. 240 ITR 902 Gau viii. 265 ITR 121 Guj ix. 298 ITR 349 Raj x. 366 ITR 122 Gau 5. Even though identical Section 69D requires hundi transactions to be had only by A/c payee cheques, 219 ITR 225 AP and 216 ITR 696 Mds have accepted payments made through account payee drafts. For these and other reasons, which may be stat…

M/S H. K. INFRAVENTURE PVT. LTD ,VARANSI vs. JOINT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VARANSI

ITA 46/ALLD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad12 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar Viswakarma,CITD.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271D

…AO in assessment order, which was earlier brought to attention of the Bench during hearing. The reliance was placed by ld. CIT-DR on the Judgment and order passed by Hon’ble High Court of Gauhati in Associated Engineering Enterprise v. CIT, reported in (1995) 216 ITR 366(Gauhati),Appellate order passed by ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of Prabhavshali Chit Fund Company Private Limited v. CIT, reported in (1994) 49 ITD 566(Del-trib.)and Appellate order passed by ITAT, Pune Bench in the case of Balaji Traders v. DCIT, reported in (2001)78 ITD 368(Pune-trib.). 8.We have considered rival contentions and perused the m…

KEDAR NATH SAWHNEY ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-34(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 5191/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Suresh K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)

…he Assessee that the drivers had to pay cash for instant repair at unknown places is not covered under the cases and circumstances specified under Rule 6DD of IT Rules. The Ld. Pr.CIT relied on the decision of Associated Engineering Enterprise vs. CIT (1995), 216 ITR 366 (Gau.) in which it was held that the payments made in cash exceeding the specified limit as laid down under section 40A(3) are disallowable. Even proof of genuineness of payment will not suffice. Circumstances warranting the payment in cash have to be proved. Therefore, the onus is on the Assessee to prove that the so called unknown places are co…

NEW KALPANA ENT UDYOG,AURAIYA vs. I.T,O, AURAIYA

In the result. Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 49/AGR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra15 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 44A

…2017) 49 CCH 193 (Chenai Trib.) 5. The Ld. DR on the other hand, has in the hearing before us stated that the action of Ld. A.O. in disallowing Rs.27,07,320/- u/s 40A(3) was correct and he further submitted a few judgements namely Associated Engineers vs CIT 216 ITR 366, and Hotel Nagas Private Limited vs CIT T.C.A. No. 317 of 2008 of Hon’ble Madras High Court, however we find that in both these judgements, the fact that banking facilities were not available is not there, hence, the fact of these two cases is different from the facts in hand in this appeal. Thus, these case laws are of no help to the revenue. Th…

SHRI SIDDHI VINAYAK SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN,RAJNANDGAON vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

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

ITA 45/BIL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 45/Rpr/2016 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shri Siddhi Vinayak Shikshan Sansthan B.S. Complex, Manav Mandir Chowk, Rajnandgaon (C.G) Pin-491 441 Pan : Aacas1038H …....अपीलाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax 1(1), Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G) ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri S.R. Rao Revenue By : Shri R.P Namdeo

For Appellant: Shri S.R. RaoFor Respondent: Shri R.P Namdeo

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

…made in cash which does not show any exceptional circumstances forcing the appellant to make payment in cash in violation of the provisions of section 40A(3). The Hon’ble Guawati High Court in the case of Associated Engineering Enterprises Vs. CIT reported in 216 ITR 366 and the decision of the Hon’ble MP High Court in the case of Brijlal Rupchand Sanwara Vs. CIT reported in 135 Taxation 688 supports the above view. In view of the above discussion the disallowances of Rs.22,72,820/- on account of salary payments and Rs.78,000/- on account of advertisement expenses made in cash are hereby confirmed.” 5. The Ld. A…

M/S. PHARMA BIO SOLUTIONS,,CHINNAVUTAPALLI vs. THE, CIT(A),, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 114/VIZ/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.114/Viz/2016 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-2012) M/S Pharma Bio Solutions Vs. Income Tax Officer (Formerly Named As Ward-1(2) M/S Padmaja Laboratories Vijayawada Chinnavutapalli [Pan:Aakfp5523D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. B.V.S. Chalapathi Rao, Ar प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Smt. Suman Malik, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 13.11.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.11.2018

For Appellant: Shri. B.V.S. Chalapathi Rao, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR

Section 40Section 40A(3)

…CIT Vs Assam Tribune (Gauhati) 221 ITR 488, Hon’ble Gauhati High Court held that even if transaction is entered in the books of other party, unavoidable circumstances have to be proved by Appellant. In the case of Associated Engg. Enterprise Vs. CIT(Gauhati) 216 ITR 366, similar view was held that not merely genuineness of transaction, but existence of circumstances warranting cash payment must be proved. 6.3 In the case of Aggarwal Steel Traders Vs. CIT (P&H) 250 ITR 738, it was held that assessee must produce confirmatory letter from other party as proof for insisting on cash payment. 6.4 The relevant extrac…

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)

…that the assessee failed to prove that he falls in the exceptions provided in the statute, CIT(A) proceeded to confirm the addition made by the AO. CIT(A) relied on the judgment of Gujarat High Court in the case of Associated Engineering Enterprises Vs. CIT 216 ITR 366 (Guj.) CIT(A) dealt with the fact that the assessee is under obligation not only to demonstrate the genuineness of the transaction but also the existence of circumstances warranting cash payments to the seller. CIT(A) also gave a finding that the assessee does not fall in the exceptions provided in Rules 6DD(j) and 6DD. He accordingly confirmed…