CIT v. Hardware Exchange

190 ITR 61High Court1991#14005 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194-IASection 194LASection 28Section 40(a)(ia)Section 40A(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 40a(3)section 40asection 40personindiabusinessdocument

Judgments citing CIT v. Hardware Exchange

PRAHLAD DAS GOYAL,BHOPAL vs. DCIT - 1(1) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5/IND/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2016-17 Prahlad Das Goyal, Dcit/Acit 1(1) 18, Shyamla Hills, Bhopal बनाम/ Bhopal Vs. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Abbpg3494L Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 31.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04.08.2025

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194Section 40

…ect that the payments made for purchasing stock-in-trade or raw materials should also be regarded as expenditure for the purpose of Section 40A(3). The only discordant note struck on this aspect is by the Gauhati High Court in CIT v. Hardware Exchange, [1991] 190 ITR 61. The Gauhati High Court has observed that Section 40A(3) applies only to payments made on account of 'expenditure incurred' and the payment made purchase of stock-in-trade cannot be termed as 'expenditure incurred since money does not go irretrievably in such cases. We are unable to agree with the view taken by the Gauhati High Court.” Page 5 of…

MUDIT KUMAR BAJAJ,UJJAIN vs. ITO-1(2), UJJAIN

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

ITA 550/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Indore18 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani(Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aezpb2621P Assessee By Ms. Nupur Ladha & Shri Vaibhav Siroliya, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.06.2024 O R D E R

Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 40A(3)

…fect that the payments made for purchasing stock-in-trade or raw materials should also be regarded as expenditure for the purpose of section 40A(3). The only discordant note struck on this aspect is by the Gauhati High Court in CIT v. Hardware Exchange [1991] 190 ITR 61. The Gauhati High Court has observed that section 40A(3) applies only to payments made on account of 'expenditure incurred' and the payment made for purchase of stock-in-trade cannot be termed as 'expenditure incurred' since money does not go irretrievably in such cases. We are unable to agree with the view taken by the Gauhati High Court.” 11 Mud…

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…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-17(3), HYDERABAD vs. VALUE PHARMA RETAIL(HYD) PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 2056/HYD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri R.Dipak, DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 2056/HYD/2018 Assessment Year: 2015-16 The Income Tax Officer, M/s.Value Pharma Retail Ward-17(3), Vs (Hyd) Private Limited, HYDERABAD HYDERABAD [PAN: AADCV5415G] (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue : Shri R.Dipak, DR For Assessee : NONE Date of Hearing : 19-04-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 26-08-2021 O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. : This Revenue’s appeal for AY.2015-16 arises from the CIT(A)-5, Hyderabad’s order dated 1…

M/S VIJAYETA BUILDCON PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 980/JPR/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Oct 2020AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Sh. S. R. Sharma (CA) &For Respondent: Sh. B. K. Gupta (CIT)
Section 153ASection 253(5)Section 40A(3)

…fect that the payments made for purchasing stock-in-trade or raw materials should also be regarded as expenditure for the purpose of section 40A(3). The only discordant note struck on this aspect is by the Gauhati High Court in CIT v. Hardware Exchange [1991] 190 ITR 61. The Gauhati High Court has observed that section 40A(3) applies only to payments made on account of 'expenditure incurred' and the payment made for purchase of stock-in-trade cannot be termed as 'expenditure incurred' since money does not go irretrievably in such cases. We are unable to agree with the view taken by the Gauhati High Court.” 28. No…

M/S. S.D. MINERALS PVT.LTD.,SURAT vs. THE JT.CIT.,(OSD)CIRCLE-4,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 554/SRT/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.554/Srt/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 M/S. S.D. Minerals Pvt. Ltd., Joint Commissioner Of 3009, World Trade Centre, Income-Tax Circle –4 Ring Road Surat 395002 (Osd)Surat Pan: Aakcs 3533 K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 40ASection 40A(3)

…ect that the payments made for purchasing stock-in- trade or raw materials should also be regarded as expenditure for the purpose of section 40A(3). The only discordant note struck on this aspect is by the Gauhati High Court in CIT v. Hardware Exchange [1991] 190 ITR 61. The Gauhati High Court has observed that section 40A(3) applies only to payments made on account of 'expenditure incurred' and the payment made for purchase of stock-in-trade cannot be termed as 'expenditure incurred' since money does not go irretrievably in such cases. We are unable to agree with the view taken by the Gauhati High Court. 9. Thu…

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, AMRITSAR. vs. SH. SHIV RAJ SINGH BAWA, AMRITSAR.

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed and the assessee’s CO, dismissed

ITA 407/ASR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 407/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)For Respondent: Sh. Tarun Bansal (Adv.)
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…made for purchasing stock-in-trade or raw materials should also be regarded as expenditure for the purpose of s. 40A(3). The only discordant note struck on this aspect is by the Gauhati High Court in CIT vs. Hardware Exchange (1991) 95 CTR (Gau) 183 : (1991) 190 ITR 61 (Gau). The Gauhati High Court has observed that s. 40A(3) applies only to payments made on account of "expenditure incurred" and that the payment made for purchase of stock-in-trade cannot be termed as "expenditure incurred" since money does not go out irretrievably in such cases. We are unable to agree with the view taken by the Gauhati High Cour…