CIT v. Banwari Lal Banshidhar

229 ITR 229High Court1998#607 most cited

What is CIT v. Banwari Lal Banshidhar authority for?

When the Assessing Officer rejects the books of account and computes income by applying a net profit rate, a separate disallowance under section 40A(3) for cash payments cannot be made.

162

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Banwari Lal Banshidhar · 229 ITR 229 · section 40A(3) · section 145(3) · rejection of books of account · net profit rate · cash payments · disallowance

Sections most often in play

Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 68Section 132(4)Section 40A(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 108trade creditorsonus of proofsection 145(3)rejection of books of accountsection 10bsection 40a(3)section 145section 30section 132(4a)on-moneysection 269

Judgments citing CIT v. Banwari Lal Banshidhar

Dipika Kishorkumar Patel, Bhavnagar vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2), Bhjavnagar

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

ITA 2153/AHD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2010-11 Dipika Kishorkumar Patel, The Income Tax Officer, A-76, Marketing Yard, Vs Ward-1 (2), Chitra, Bhavnagar-364 004 Bhavnagar Pan: Awkpp 2049 L अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B.R. Popat, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22/08/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/09/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice-:

For Appellant: Shri B.R. Popat, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40A(3)

…disallowance under Section 40A(3) of the Act separately in respect of purchases. To the similar effect is the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dipika Kishorkumar Patel Vs. ITO AY : 2010-11 7 Banwari Lal Banshidhar, [1998] 229 ITR 229], wherein it was held that where income of the assessee was computed applying gross profit rate and when no deduction was claimed by the assessee in respect of purchases, no disallowance under Section 40A(3) of the Act could be made by the Assessing Officer. We accordingly delete the disallowance of Rs.40,89,100/- made by the Assessing Officer an…

Shri Vimal Chandubhai Patel, Karamsad vs. The ITO, Ward-2, Anand

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

ITA 1857/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jun 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year:2008-09 Vimal Chandubhai Patel, The Ito, Ward-2, Limdi Pole, Laljinikhadki, New Vs Ahmedabad. Houses, Karamsad-388325. Pan :Aktpp 9776 F (Appellant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Sakar Sharma, Ar Revenue By : Shri R. R. Makwana, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 18/04/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement: 17/06/2022 आदेश/O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, ARFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 145(3)Section 40

…reditors and also for the purpose of arriving at a closing stock. This is the view taken by atleast four High Courts in the following reported judgments: 1. Indwell Constructions v. CIT [1998] 232 ITR 776 (AP) @ 778, 779 2. CIT v. Banwari Lal Banshidhar[1998] 229 ITR 229 (All.) @ 232 3. CIT v. Aggarwal Engg. Co. [2008] 302 ITR 246/2006] 156 Taxman 40 (Punj. & Har.) @ 249 4. CIT v. Amman Steel & Allied Industries [2015] 377 ITR 568 (Mad.)” Vimal C. Patel 5 10. Therefore, respectfully following the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, in the case of Bahubali Neminath Muttin(supra), we delete the additio…

ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar vs. Shri Babu Lal Data, 2015-16

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1232/JPR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 May 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: S. Naiyer Ali Najmi, CIT
Section 127Section 132Section 139Section 153A

…ment order. In any case once all these transactions are considered by the AO as purchase transaction and the income is estimated by application of g.p. rate, disallowance u/s 40A (3) cannot be made as held in the following cases: CIT Vs. Banwarilal Bansidhar 229 ITR 229 (All.) (HC) When income of the assessee was computed applying the gross profit rate and that when no deduction was allowed in regard to the purchases of the assessee, there was no need to look into the provisions of sec. 40A(3) and Rule 6DD(j). When gross profit rate is applied, that would take care of everything and there was no need for the AO…

ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar vs. Shri Babu Lal Data, 2015-16

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1231/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 May 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: S. Naiyer Ali Najmi, CIT
Section 127Section 132Section 139Section 153A

…ment order. In any case once all these transactions are considered by the AO as purchase transaction and the income is estimated by application of g.p. rate, disallowance u/s 40A (3) cannot be made as held in the following cases: CIT Vs. Banwarilal Bansidhar 229 ITR 229 (All.) (HC) When income of the assessee was computed applying the gross profit rate and that when no deduction was allowed in regard to the purchases of the assessee, there was no need to look into the provisions of sec. 40A(3) and Rule 6DD(j). When gross profit rate is applied, that would take care of everything and there was no need for the AO…

Shri Babu Lal Data, Alwar vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Alwar

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1223/JPR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 May 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: S. Naiyer Ali Najmi, CIT
Section 127Section 132Section 139Section 153A

…ment order. In any case once all these transactions are considered by the AO as purchase transaction and the income is estimated by application of g.p. rate, disallowance u/s 40A (3) cannot be made as held in the following cases: CIT Vs. Banwarilal Bansidhar 229 ITR 229 (All.) (HC) When income of the assessee was computed applying the gross profit rate and that when no deduction was allowed in regard to the purchases of the assessee, there was no need to look into the provisions of sec. 40A(3) and Rule 6DD(j). When gross profit rate is applied, that would take care of everything and there was no need for the AO…

Shri Babu Lal Data, Alwar vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Alwar

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1222/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 May 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: S. Naiyer Ali Najmi, CIT
Section 127Section 132Section 139Section 153A

…ment order. In any case once all these transactions are considered by the AO as purchase transaction and the income is estimated by application of g.p. rate, disallowance u/s 40A (3) cannot be made as held in the following cases: CIT Vs. Banwarilal Bansidhar 229 ITR 229 (All.) (HC) When income of the assessee was computed applying the gross profit rate and that when no deduction was allowed in regard to the purchases of the assessee, there was no need to look into the provisions of sec. 40A(3) and Rule 6DD(j). When gross profit rate is applied, that would take care of everything and there was no need for the AO…

Income Tax Officer 8(3)(3), Mumbai vs. M/S.Vibgyor Texotech Private Limited, Mumbai

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

ITA 1484/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-8(3)(3), M/S Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 616, 6Th Floor, Aayakar 309, Navyug, T.J. Road, Sewree, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400015. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaccv 0752 D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner Of 309, Navyug, T.J. Road, Sewree, Income Tax-8(3)(2), Mumbai-400015. Vs. Mumbai. Pan No. Aaccv 0752 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Pavan Ved, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Achal Sharma, CIT-DR/
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 264ASection 40

…ot uniform on the above aspect as would be seen from the following cases. In CIT v. Aggarwal Engg. Co. (Jai.) (2006) 206 CTR (P&H) 648, the Punjab & Haryana High Court held, relying on decision in CIT vs. Banwarilal Banshidhar (1998) 148 CTR (All) 533; (1998) 229 ITR 229 (All), that no separate addition on account of cash credit and on account of unexplained payments for purchases made outside the books can be made ITA No. 1484/M/2018 & ITA No. 487/M/2019 59 M/s Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd. once the net profit rate is applied on contract receipts of an assessee for estimating his income from contract work. Even wh…

M/S.Vibgyor Texotech Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT-8(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 487/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-8(3)(3), M/S Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 616, 6Th Floor, Aayakar 309, Navyug, T.J. Road, Sewree, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400015. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaccv 0752 D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner Of 309, Navyug, T.J. Road, Sewree, Income Tax-8(3)(2), Mumbai-400015. Vs. Mumbai. Pan No. Aaccv 0752 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Pavan Ved, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Achal Sharma, CIT-DR/
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 264ASection 40

…ot uniform on the above aspect as would be seen from the following cases. In CIT v. Aggarwal Engg. Co. (Jai.) (2006) 206 CTR (P&H) 648, the Punjab & Haryana High Court held, relying on decision in CIT vs. Banwarilal Banshidhar (1998) 148 CTR (All) 533; (1998) 229 ITR 229 (All), that no separate addition on account of cash credit and on account of unexplained payments for purchases made outside the books can be made ITA No. 1484/M/2018 & ITA No. 487/M/2019 59 M/s Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd. once the net profit rate is applied on contract receipts of an assessee for estimating his income from contract work. Even wh…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Pilot Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 3263/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and ShriFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Charudahry, CIT
Section 132

…herefore there is no question of disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the said amount. Moreover, the assessee has declared profit on the estimated basis based on of net asset basis. 10.3 The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT v Banwarilal Bansidhar (1998) 229 ITR 229 (All) has held that when profit were estimated and no deduction was sought and allowed u/s 40A(3), these was no need to look into the provisions of section 40A(3) r.w.rule 6DD(5). The Hon’ble High Court held as under :- 3. All the three questions, referred to this Court, revolve round the same controversy. The question for consideration is that…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Pilot Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 3262/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and ShriFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Charudahry, CIT
Section 132

…herefore there is no question of disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the said amount. Moreover, the assessee has declared profit on the estimated basis based on of net asset basis. 10.3 The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT v Banwarilal Bansidhar (1998) 229 ITR 229 (All) has held that when profit were estimated and no deduction was sought and allowed u/s 40A(3), these was no need to look into the provisions of section 40A(3) r.w.rule 6DD(5). The Hon’ble High Court held as under :- 3. All the three questions, referred to this Court, revolve round the same controversy. The question for consideration is that…

Optart Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-3(1)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, Penalty appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 699/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh) [Through Virtual Court]

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Divatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 250Section 40A(3)

…eged bogus purchases was confirmed after relying the following judgment: (i) Indwell Construction v. CIT [232 ITR 776 (AP)] (ii) Teja Construction v. ACIT [39 SOT 13 (Hyd)] (iii) ITO v. Sahadev Pradhan [33 taxmann.com 563] (iv) CIT v. Banwarilal Banshidhar [229 ITR 229] ITA No. 699 & 2461/Ahd/2018 4 . A.Y. 2013-14 (v) CIT v. Smt. Santosh Jain [159 taxmann.com 392] (vi) ITO v. Nardev Kumar Gupta [32 taxmann.com 388] 7. Since above said order by the ITAT Mumbai have been passed after considering this different Tribunal/High Court and thereafter confirmed 12.5% of the alleged bogus purchases. Thus, in parity wi…

M/S Argent Construction, Mumbai vs. DCIT, C.Circle-4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 401/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Rajiv Harit
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133A

…antified. Moreover, once the undisclosed income is being determined in an estimation basis, the provisions of Section 40A(3) cannot be applied as held by the Hon’ble High Courts in the cases of Smt. Santosh Jain (296 ITR 324) (P&H) and Banwari Lal Banshidhar, 229 ITR 229 (All.) 6.12 On the issue of what should be the reasonable profit margin which should be applied, the assessee contends that the profit margin shown by it in its books of 19.97% is much higher than the margin shown in the construction industry where even margin of 8% is considered to be reasonable. It was further submitted that on the said on-mone…

Vinayak Mhatre, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT - 26, Mumbai

ITA 2561/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita Nos.2559 To 2562/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12) M/S Vinayak Mhatre Pr. Cit-26 Flat No. B/10, Navsahjivan Chs Vs. 4Th Floor,C-10, Ltd, Shiv Srushti, Kurla (East), Pratyaksha Kar Bhawan, Mumbai 400 024 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai – 400 051

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kipgen,, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 44A

…out disallowances in context of expenses which were debited in the profit and loss account. In support of his aforesaid contention the ld. A.R had relied on the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of CIT vs. Banwarilal Bansidhar (1998) 229 ITR 229 (All). Also, reliance was placed on the order of the ITAT, Pune in the case of Dharrit Yogen Shah Vs. CIT–II, Pune, ITA No. 1658/Pune/2014 and that of the ITAT, Jaipur in M/s Power Liners Vs. ACIT, Circle-3, Jaipur, ITA No. 194/JP/2017, dated 08.01.2018. Drawing support from the order of the ITAT, Pune, in the ITA Nos. 2559 to 2562/Mum/2019 A.Ys.…

Vinayak Mhatre, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT - 26, Mumbai

ITA 2560/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita Nos.2559 To 2562/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12) M/S Vinayak Mhatre Pr. Cit-26 Flat No. B/10, Navsahjivan Chs Vs. 4Th Floor,C-10, Ltd, Shiv Srushti, Kurla (East), Pratyaksha Kar Bhawan, Mumbai 400 024 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai – 400 051

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kipgen,, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 44A

…out disallowances in context of expenses which were debited in the profit and loss account. In support of his aforesaid contention the ld. A.R had relied on the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of CIT vs. Banwarilal Bansidhar (1998) 229 ITR 229 (All). Also, reliance was placed on the order of the ITAT, Pune in the case of Dharrit Yogen Shah Vs. CIT–II, Pune, ITA No. 1658/Pune/2014 and that of the ITAT, Jaipur in M/s Power Liners Vs. ACIT, Circle-3, Jaipur, ITA No. 194/JP/2017, dated 08.01.2018. Drawing support from the order of the ITAT, Pune, in the ITA Nos. 2559 to 2562/Mum/2019 A.Ys.…

Vinayak Mhatre, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT - 26, Mumbai

ITA 2559/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita Nos.2559 To 2562/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12) M/S Vinayak Mhatre Pr. Cit-26 Flat No. B/10, Navsahjivan Chs Vs. 4Th Floor,C-10, Ltd, Shiv Srushti, Kurla (East), Pratyaksha Kar Bhawan, Mumbai 400 024 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai – 400 051

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kipgen,, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 44A

…out disallowances in context of expenses which were debited in the profit and loss account. In support of his aforesaid contention the ld. A.R had relied on the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of CIT vs. Banwarilal Bansidhar (1998) 229 ITR 229 (All). Also, reliance was placed on the order of the ITAT, Pune in the case of Dharrit Yogen Shah Vs. CIT–II, Pune, ITA No. 1658/Pune/2014 and that of the ITAT, Jaipur in M/s Power Liners Vs. ACIT, Circle-3, Jaipur, ITA No. 194/JP/2017, dated 08.01.2018. Drawing support from the order of the ITAT, Pune, in the ITA Nos. 2559 to 2562/Mum/2019 A.Ys.…

The ITO, Ward-1, Na

In the result, this ground of appeal is rejected

ITA 1003/AHD/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Jun 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2078/Ahd/2010 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2006-07 आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.1003/Ahd/2011 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2007-08 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shri Anil Kumar Amrutlal Chahwala, Ward-(1), Navsari. 102, Trimurti Complex, Vijalpore, Navsari. [Pan: Abnpc 6308 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…addition is sustainable. To support his contention the Ld. AR for the assessee relied on the following decisions;  Teja Construction Vs ACIT (2010) 129 TTJ 57 Hyd (URO),  CIT Vs Santosh Jain (2008) 266 ITR 324 ( P& H),  CIT Vs Banwari Lal Banshidhar (1998) 229 ITR 229 (All),  CIT Vs Bahubali N Muttin (2016) 388 ITR 608 (Kar),  Malpani House of stone Vs CIT (2017) 395 ITR 385 (Raj) and  Bipinchandra Hiralal Thakkar Vs ITO (2021) 187 ITD 477 (Surat-Trib) Anil Kumar A.Chahwala (AY 2006-07 & 2007-08) 24. We have considered the rival submissions of the parties and gone through the orders of Lower Authorities. We…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6343/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. K. N. Charydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Bhagwani, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40A(3)

…g judicial pronouncements that as no expenditure is incurred, Section 40A(3) is not applicable. i) CIT Vs Motilal Khatri (2008) 218 ITR 602 (Raj) ii) CIT, Faridabad Vs Alpha Toyo Ltd. (2008) 174 Taxman 427 (Puri and Haryana) iii) CIT Vs Banwari Lai Bansidhar 229 ITR 229 (All) ITA Nos. 6343 & 6304/Del/2013 19 Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. 16. Further, ld. AR has relied upon the judicial pronouncement by Hon’ble Supreme Court that reimbursement under no circumstances can be regarded as revenue receipt. Case relied upon is cited as CIT Vs Tejaji Farasram Kharawalla Ltd. (1968) 67 ITR 95 (SC). This judgment has…

Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6304/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. K. N. Charydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Bhagwani, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40A(3)

…g judicial pronouncements that as no expenditure is incurred, Section 40A(3) is not applicable. i) CIT Vs Motilal Khatri (2008) 218 ITR 602 (Raj) ii) CIT, Faridabad Vs Alpha Toyo Ltd. (2008) 174 Taxman 427 (Puri and Haryana) iii) CIT Vs Banwari Lai Bansidhar 229 ITR 229 (All) ITA Nos. 6343 & 6304/Del/2013 19 Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. 16. Further, ld. AR has relied upon the judicial pronouncement by Hon’ble Supreme Court that reimbursement under no circumstances can be regarded as revenue receipt. Case relied upon is cited as CIT Vs Tejaji Farasram Kharawalla Ltd. (1968) 67 ITR 95 (SC). This judgment has…

Ugc Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2155/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing)

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

…u/s 40A(3) where no deduction is claimed the Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions:- CIT vs. Motilal Khatri (2008) 218 CTR 602 (Raj.) i) ii) CIT Faridabad vs. Alpha Toyo Ltd (2008) 174 Taxmann 427 (Punj. & Har.) iii) CIT vs. Banwari Lai Bansidhar [1998] 229 ITR 229 (All) iv) Embee Clearing & Shipping Service Pvt. Ltd [2007] 12 SOT 227 (Mum.) Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that the disallowance u/s 40A(3) should be deleted. The issue of disallowance u/s 40A(3) of cash payment made for purchase of land was first decided by the Tribunal, New Delhi in the case of another group company of M/s BPTP Group viz., M/s We…

Usg Buildwell Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1351/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing)

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

…u/s 40A(3) where no deduction is claimed the Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions:- CIT vs. Motilal Khatri (2008) 218 CTR 602 (Raj.) i) ii) CIT Faridabad vs. Alpha Toyo Ltd (2008) 174 Taxmann 427 (Punj. & Har.) iii) CIT vs. Banwari Lai Bansidhar [1998] 229 ITR 229 (All) iv) Embee Clearing & Shipping Service Pvt. Ltd [2007] 12 SOT 227 (Mum.) Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that the disallowance u/s 40A(3) should be deleted. The issue of disallowance u/s 40A(3) of cash payment made for purchase of land was first decided by the Tribunal, New Delhi in the case of another group company of M/s BPTP Group viz., M/s We…