Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh v. ITO

191 ITR 667Supreme Court of India1991#331 most cited

What is Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh v. ITO authority for?

Section 40A(3) is not absolute, and its application considers business expediency, practical difficulties, and other relevant factors, while keeping in mind its objective to curb the practice of ploughing unaccounted money into the system.

254

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,854 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh v. ITO · Section 40A(3) · Rule 6DD · cash payments disallowance · business expediency · practical difficulties · genuineness of transaction · objective of Section 40A(3) · unaccounted money · profits and gains of business or profession

Also reported as

59 Taxmann 114 SCC 38559 Taxmann.com 11

Sections most often in play

Section 40A(3)Section 143(3)Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6DDSection 132(4)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 40a(3)business expediencysection 40asection 40profits and gains of business or professionsection 40(a)genuineness of the transactionsection 132(4)section 131undisclosed incomeincriminating materialsection 132

Judgments citing Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh v. ITO

Subhashree Enterprises, Sambalpur vs. ACIT, Sambalpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 378/CTK/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 194CSection 40Section 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.378 /CTK/2013 Assessment Year : 2009-2010 M/s.Subhashree Enterprises, Vs. ACIT, Circle -1(1), C/O. Shri Ramesh Kumar Sambalpur Agarwal, At/PO: Rengali, Dist: Sambalpur. PAN/GIR No.ABIFS 1109 D (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.R.Mohanty, AR Revenue by : Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR Date of Hearing : 21/09/ 2017 Date of Pronouncement : 09/10/ 2017 O R D E R Per N.S.Saini, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)- Ber…

M/S Galaxy Dwellers (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5293/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Sept 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri O. P. Kanti.T. Appeal No. 5293/Del/2013 & I.T. Appeal No.3029/Del/2014 Assessment Years : 2006–2007 & 2007-08. M/S. Galaxy Dwellers (P) Ltd., Dy. Commissioner C/O. M/S. Rra Taxindia, Vs. Of Income Tax, D–28, South Extension, Part–I, Central Circle : 4, N E W D E L H I – 110 049. New Delhi. Pan : Aaccg 3782 C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, Adv.; &For Respondent: Shri A. K. Saroha, CIT [DR]
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40A(3)

…4.4. In this regard, it is pertinent to get into the following decisions on the impugned subject :- 10 I.T. Appeal No. 5293/Del/2013 AND I.T. Appeal No.3029/Del/2014 Assessment Years : 2006–2007 & 2007-08. Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh vs ITO reported in (1991) 191 ITR 667 (SC) "Section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which provides that expenditure in excess of Rs.2,500 (Rs.10,000 after the 1987 amendment) would be allowed to be deducted only if made by a crossed cheque or crossed bank draft (except in specified cases) is not arbitrary and does not amount to a restriction on the fundamental right to carry on b…

DCIT, Circle - 2, Minapore, Paschim Medinipur vs. Shri Jugal Kishore Das, Paschim Medinipur

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1707/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Sept 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] Assessment Year : 2010-11 D.C.I.T., Circle-2, -Versus- Shri Jugal Kishore Das Midnapore Paschim Medinipur (Pan: Adxpd 2305 B) (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant: Shri David Z.Chawngthu, Addl. Cit(Sr.Dr) For The Respondent: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 10.08.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2017. Order Per J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-(A)-Xxxvi, Kolkata Relating To A.Y. 2010-11 On The Following Grounds : “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Xxxvi, Kolkata Was Not Justified In Deleting Addition Aggregating To Rs 86,55,000/-, Made U/S 40A(3) On Account Of Cash Payments Of Rs 45,80,000/- To M/S United Spirits & Rs 40,75,000/- To M/S Vtr Marketing, ; 2. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) - Xxxvi, Kolkata Was Not Justified In Deleting Addition Of Rs 86,55,000/- U/S 40A(3), Ignoring Assessee'S Own Statement Recorded On Oath U/S 131 On 15/03/2013, That Payments Exceeding Rs 20,000/- Were Made In Violation Of The Provisions Of Section 40A(3) Read With Rule-6Dd ; 3. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) -Xxxvi, Kolkata Was Not Justified In Deleting Addition Of Rs 86,55,000/- U/S 40A(3), Ignoring The Fact That The Assessee Failed To Substantiate His Claim That Payments Were Made In Violation Of The Provisions Of Section 40A(3) Read With Rule-6Dd Due To Commercial Expediency ;”

For Appellant: Shri David Z.Chawngthu, Addl. CIT(Sr.DR)For Respondent: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate
Section 131Section 40ASection 40A(3)

…uch below Rs 20,000/- for which expenditure was incurred. All the purchase bills were also produced by the ld AR in his paper book filed. 4.6.1. We find that the Hon‟ble Supreme Court had held in the case of Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh vs ITO reported in (1991) 191 ITR 667 (SC) had held as below:- It will be clear from the provisions of section 40A(3) and Rule 6DD that they are intended to regulate the business transactions and to prevent the use of unaccounted money or reduce the chances to use black money for business transactions. In interpreting a taxing statute the court cannot be oblivious of the proliferatio…

ITO, Ward - 2(2), Asansol vs. Naba Kumar Mandal, Burdwan

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 1273/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 40A(3)Section 85Section 86

…g proper investigation by the department as to the identity of the payee and reasonableness of the payment.” 17. In this regard, it is pertinent to get into the following decisions on the impugned subject:- Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh vs ITO reported in (1991) 191 ITR 667 (SC) " 3.3.4. Section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which provides that expenditure in excess of Rs. 2,500 (Rs. 10,000 after the 1987 amendment) would be allowed to be deducted only if made by a crossed cheque or crossed bank draft (except in specified cases) is not arbitrary and does not amount to a restriction on the fundamental right to…

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. K. V. Srinivasa Rao

ITTA/480/2017HC Telangana01 Aug 2017
For Respondent: Mr. J.S. Guleria, Deputy
Section 120BSection 25Section 27Section 302

…r means of proving the statement may not be availed of, e.g., evidence that the statement is in the handwriting of that particular officer.” 49. It was laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Muthu Naicker and Others etc Versus State of T.N. (1978) 4 SCC 385, that if the witness affirms the previous statement, no proof is necessary, but if the witness denies or says that he did not remember the previous statement, the investigating officer should be asked about the same. It was observed: - 59 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:2282-DB ) “52. This is the most objectionable manner of using t…

Khalid Nadeem Allarakha, Nagpur vs. I.T.O. Ward 3(4), Nagpur

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 9/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Manoj MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 43A(3)

…63 (Bang.), wherein, the Tribunal has held as under:– “6. We have carefully considered rival submissions and relevant facts of the case. Hon'ble Supreme Court while, interpreting the provision of Section 40A(3) in the case of Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh v. ITO 191 ITR 667 at page 672 and 673 held thus "Section 40A(3) must not be read in isolation or to the exclusion of Rule 6DD. The section must be read along with the rule. If read together it will be dear that the provisions are not intended to restrict the business activities. There is no restriction on the assessee in his trading activities. Section 40A(3) only…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Green House Promoters Private Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 1828/CHNY/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1785, 1796 & 1828/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11, 2011-12 & 2009-2010. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. Green House Promoters Tax Vs. Pvt. Ltd, Company Circle Ii(1) No.4,Rama Rao Street, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan Aaccg 2333B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Supriyo Pal, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. Y. Sridhar, C.A
Section 194CSection 40Section 4U

…o check transaction which are not genuine and may be put as camouflage to evade tax by showing fictitious or false transactions" 8. The Appellate Tribunal in the case reported in 93 TT] 912 has held after considering the decision of the Apex Court reported in 191 ITR 667 as follows:- "The Hon'ble Supreme Court noted that the intention to make payment by crossed cheque or crossed DD is to enable the assessing authority to ascertain that the payment is genuine and not out of the undisclosed source. It is also noted that Section 40A(3) of the Act is intended to regulate business transactions and to prevent the use o…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Green House Promoters Private Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 1796/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1785, 1796 & 1828/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11, 2011-12 & 2009-2010. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. Green House Promoters Tax Vs. Pvt. Ltd, Company Circle Ii(1) No.4,Rama Rao Street, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan Aaccg 2333B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Supriyo Pal, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. Y. Sridhar, C.A
Section 194CSection 40Section 4U

…o check transaction which are not genuine and may be put as camouflage to evade tax by showing fictitious or false transactions" 8. The Appellate Tribunal in the case reported in 93 TT] 912 has held after considering the decision of the Apex Court reported in 191 ITR 667 as follows:- "The Hon'ble Supreme Court noted that the intention to make payment by crossed cheque or crossed DD is to enable the assessing authority to ascertain that the payment is genuine and not out of the undisclosed source. It is also noted that Section 40A(3) of the Act is intended to regulate business transactions and to prevent the use o…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Green House Promoters P. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 1785/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1785, 1796 & 1828/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11, 2011-12 & 2009-2010. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. Green House Promoters Tax Vs. Pvt. Ltd, Company Circle Ii(1) No.4,Rama Rao Street, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan Aaccg 2333B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Supriyo Pal, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. Y. Sridhar, C.A
Section 194CSection 40Section 4U

…o check transaction which are not genuine and may be put as camouflage to evade tax by showing fictitious or false transactions" 8. The Appellate Tribunal in the case reported in 93 TT] 912 has held after considering the decision of the Apex Court reported in 191 ITR 667 as follows:- "The Hon'ble Supreme Court noted that the intention to make payment by crossed cheque or crossed DD is to enable the assessing authority to ascertain that the payment is genuine and not out of the undisclosed source. It is also noted that Section 40A(3) of the Act is intended to regulate business transactions and to prevent the use o…

Morani Fourwheels Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

In the result, ground taken by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 175/JPR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 May 2017AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar (Ad.)For Respondent: Shri O.P. Bhateja (Addl.CIT)
Section 194CSection 40Section 40A(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jherh fnok flag] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: Smt. Diva Singh, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.175/JP/16 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2011-12 cuke M/s Morani Fourwheels Pvt. Ltd, The ACIT, Circle-6, Jaipur Vs. Plot No. 1, Murti Kala Colony, Gopalpura Byepass, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. AAFCM0805P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrhdh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri S. L. Poddar (Ad.) jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by : Shri O.P.…

P.Senthil Kumar, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 3398/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3397 & 3398/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2012-13. Shri. P. Senthil Kumar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, P-2, Hig Adyar Apartments, Non Corporate Ward 3(3) Kottur Gardens, Chennai. Circular Road, Kotturpuram, Chennai 600 086. [Pan Abbps 1019H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Durai Pandian, Sr. A.R
Section 271BSection 40A(3)

…not be disallowed u/s.40A(3) of the Act. As per assessee situations covered by of Rule 6DD of Income Tax Rules was only illustrative and not exhaustive. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh vs. ITO, 191 ITR 667 and that of Hon’ble Delhi ITA Nos.3397 & 3398/Mds/16 :- 4 -: High Court in the case of Basu Distributor vs. ITO 292 ITR 29. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) disposed of the appeal considering the submissions of the assessee and took a view that assessee’s case did not fit in any of the clauses of Rule 6DD of the Income Tax Rules. Aac…

P.Senthil Kumar, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 3397/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3397 & 3398/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2012-13. Shri. P. Senthil Kumar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, P-2, Hig Adyar Apartments, Non Corporate Ward 3(3) Kottur Gardens, Chennai. Circular Road, Kotturpuram, Chennai 600 086. [Pan Abbps 1019H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Durai Pandian, Sr. A.R
Section 271BSection 40A(3)

…not be disallowed u/s.40A(3) of the Act. As per assessee situations covered by of Rule 6DD of Income Tax Rules was only illustrative and not exhaustive. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh vs. ITO, 191 ITR 667 and that of Hon’ble Delhi ITA Nos.3397 & 3398/Mds/16 :- 4 -: High Court in the case of Basu Distributor vs. ITO 292 ITR 29. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) disposed of the appeal considering the submissions of the assessee and took a view that assessee’s case did not fit in any of the clauses of Rule 6DD of the Income Tax Rules. Aac…

Tara Art Printer Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, assessee's appeal stands allowed

ITA 2688/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddyay: 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjiv Rai Mehra, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr.D.R
Section 40A(3)

…proper investigation by the department as to the identity of the payee and reasonableness of the payment." 11.2 In this regard, it is pertinent to get into the following decisions on the impugned subject:- Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh vs ITO reported in (1991) 191 ITR 667 (SC) "Section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which provides that expenditure in excess of Rs.2,500 (Rs.10,000 after the 1987 amendment) would be allowed to be deducted only if made by a crossed cheque or crossed bank draft (except in specified cases) is not arbitrary and does not amount to a restriction on the fundamental right to carry on b…

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

…ture 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 "Hawala entry" or "book adjustment" of any nature with regard to paymen…

C.Elango, Tiruppur vs. ACIT, Tiruppur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 118/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri R. Durai Pandian, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A(3)Section 54F

…the payment to Agriculturalist and the assessee has explained various circumstances of payments and relied on decision of Hon'ble High Court in the case of Anupam Tele Services Vs ITO (2014), 143 Taxman.com 199, (Gujarat) and Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh, ITO 191 ITR 667 (SC). We on perusal of the submissions/evidence in the paper book are of the opinion that the assessee has :-10-: I.T.A. No. 118/Mds/2015 filed details on cash payment of more than 20,000/- before the Assessing Officer and has not furnished any inaccurate particulars and we support our view relying on judicial decisions that disallowance u/s.…

M/S Excel Engineers, Kolkata vs. J.C.I.T (OSD) Cir - 51, Kolkata.

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

ITA 1588/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Nov 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Subhas Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Debnath Lahiri, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

…ibunal in the case of Raja & Co vs DCIT in ITA No. 534/Coch/2011 dated 22.3.2013. He also placed reliance on the following high court decisions in support of various propositions made out in his arguments :- Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh vs ITO reported in (1991) 191 ITR 667 (SC) CIT vs CPL Tannery reported in (2009) 318 ITR 179 (Cal) CIT vs Crescent Export Syndicate in ITA No. 202 of 2008 dated 30.7.2008 – Calcutta High Court Anupam Teleservices vs ITO reported in (2014) 43 taxmann.com 199 (Guj) Sri Laxmi Satyanarayana Oil Mill vs CIT reported in (2014) 49 taxmann.com 363 (AP) 4.5. In response to this, the ld DR ar…

International Ships Stores Supplieres, Mumbai vs. JCIT RG 13(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2502/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu() & Shri Ravish Sood () Assessment Year: 2009-10 International Ships Stores Suppliers Vs. Jcit, Range 13(2) 101, Navratan, 69 P.D. Mello Road Mumbai 1St Floor, Carnac Bunder, Mumbai Pan No. Aaafi0135Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Mr. Deepak Traslhawala Assessee By : Mr. Javed Akhtar Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/10/2016

For Appellant: Mr. Javed AkhtarFor Respondent: Mr. Deepak Traslhawala
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…no disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the „Act‟ was called for. The Ld. A.R in order to drive home his aforesaid contention relied on the following judgments and a Circular issued by the CBDT :- (i). Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ludhiana. (1991) 191 ITR 667 (SC) (ii). CIT Vs. Chaudhary And Co. (1996) 217 ITR 431 (All) (iii). Ramaditya Investments Vs. CIT (2003) 262 ITR 491 (Del) (iv). Circular No. 1 of 2009, dt. 27th March, 2009 The Ld. A.R still further in his attempt to support his contention on the basis of an analogy that once the genuineness of a transaction is established, then the onus…

Smt Ira Panja, Burdwan vs. ITO, WD-2(3), Asansol

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 270/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2016AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm] I.T.A No. 270/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Smt. Ira Panja (Pan:Akipp2629Q) Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Wd-2(3), Asansol (Appellant) (Respondent) Date Of Hearing: 20.10.2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.10.2016

For Appellant: Shri T. P. Roy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. K. Chakraborty, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 6D

…t of M/s. Asansol Bottling and Packaging Pvt. Limited, . 9. Commercial expediency in relation to the application of section 40A(3) is well recognized by the various Courts vide in the cases as under:- (i) Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh –vs.- ITO reported in (1991) 191 ITR 667 (SC) (ii) CIT –vs.- CPL Tannery reported in (2009) 318 ITR 179 (Cal.); (iii) CIT –vs.- Crescent Export Syndicate in ITA No. 202 of 2008 dated 30.07.2008 (Calcutta High Court); (iv) Anupam Tele Services –vs.- ITO reported in (2014) 43 taxman.com 199 (Guj.); (v) Ashok Mondal –vs.- ITO in ITA No. 873/KOL/2012 (Kolkata Tribunal’s order dated 06.02.20…

M/S Shibpur Pachai Shop, Burdwan vs. ITO, WD-1(4), Asansol

In the result the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 340/KOL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm] I.T.A No. 340/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Respondent: Shri.Divakar Chakraborthy JCIT
Section 22Section 40A(3)Section 85Section 86

…g proper investigation by the department as to the identity of the payee and reasonableness of the payment.” 17. In this regard, it is pertinent to get into the following decisions on the impugned subject:- Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh vs ITO reported in (1991) 191 ITR 667 (SC) " 3.3.4. Section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which provides that expenditure in excess of Rs. 2,500 (Rs. 10,000 after the 1987 amendment) would be allowed to be deducted only if made by a crossed cheque or crossed bank draft (except in specified cases) is not arbitrary and does not amount to a restriction on the fundamental right to…

Srikanta Mondal, Burdwan vs. ITO, WD-2(2), Asansol, Burdwan

In the result the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 333/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm] I.T.A No. 333/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Srikanta Mondal -Vs.- I.T.O., Ward-2(2) Burdwan Asansol [Pan : Agxpm 6698 K] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri U.Dasgupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri.Divakar Chakraborthy JCIT
Section 22Section 40A(3)Section 85Section 86

…g proper investigation by the department as to the identity of the payee and reasonableness of the payment.” 17. In this regard, it is pertinent to get into the following decisions on the impugned subject:- Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh vs ITO reported in (1991) 191 ITR 667 (SC) " 3.3.4. Section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which provides that expenditure in excess of Rs. 2,500 (Rs. 10,000 after the 1987 amendment) would be allowed to be deducted only if made by a crossed cheque or crossed bank draft (except in specified cases) is not arbitrary and does not amount to a restriction on the fundamental right to…