CIT v. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar

270 ITR 314High Court2004#4019 most cited

What is CIT v. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar authority for?

No separate disallowance under Section 40A(3) is required when income is estimated by adopting a Net Profit Rate.

29

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar · 270 ITR 314 · Section 40A(3) · Section 37(1) · estimation of income · net profit rate · separate disallowance · expenditure

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 115BBESection 132Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 40A(3)Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

prohibited by lawsection 40a(3)section 40asearch assessmentsection 145(3)section 153dsection 40section 37(1)double taxationsection 37unexplained moneysection 139(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar

ACIT CC 6(1), MUMBAI, BKC, MUMBAI vs. ROSHNI ENTERPRISES, MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4471/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2021-22 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 Assistant Commissioner Vs Roshni Enterprises Of Income Tax Central 519, The Great Eastern Circle 6(1), Mumbai Gallaria, Sector 04, Bkc, Mumbai Nerul 400706. Room No. 445, 4Th Floor, Kautilya Bhawan, Bkc, Mumbai 400051. Pan: Aasfr6639Q Appellant Respondent Present For: Appellant By : Shri Nishit Gandhi, Advocate Respondent By : Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.04.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Three Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Against The Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)-54, Mumbai Vide Order Nos. Itba/Apl/S/250/2024- 25/1065343505(1), Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1065343031(1) & Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1065342652(1), Dated 03.06.2024, Passed Against The Assessment Orders By Dcit, Central Circle 6(1), Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 27.02.2024 For Assessment Year 2021-22, Dated M/S. Roshni Enterprises Ays 2021-22, 2019-20 & 2018-19 28.02.2024 For Assessment Year 2019-20 & Dated 31.03.2023 For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Grounds Taken By The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 69

…d [2013] 30 taxmann.com 295 (MP). c) CIT (Central) vs. Gobind Ram [2014] 48 taxmann.com 14 (P&H). d) M. Shyamalanathan & Co. vs. ITO [2023] 153 taxmann.com 23 (Chennai) e) CIT vs. Santosh Jain [2008] 296 ITR 324 (P&H) f) CIT vs. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar [2004] 270 ITR 314 (MP) 12. Assessee also submitted that no addition u/s 69C can be made once the on-money/unaccounted receipts are considered as "revenue receipts" while making addition to income and any expenditure out of such money cannot be treated as unexplained expenditure as it would amount to double addition. Assessee referred to the decision Hon'ble M/s. R…

ACIT CC 6(1), MUMBAI, BKC, MUMBAI vs. ROSHNI ENTERPRISES, MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4470/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2021-22 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 Assistant Commissioner Vs Roshni Enterprises Of Income Tax Central 519, The Great Eastern Circle 6(1), Mumbai Gallaria, Sector 04, Bkc, Mumbai Nerul 400706. Room No. 445, 4Th Floor, Kautilya Bhawan, Bkc, Mumbai 400051. Pan: Aasfr6639Q Appellant Respondent Present For: Appellant By : Shri Nishit Gandhi, Advocate Respondent By : Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.04.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Three Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Against The Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)-54, Mumbai Vide Order Nos. Itba/Apl/S/250/2024- 25/1065343505(1), Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1065343031(1) & Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1065342652(1), Dated 03.06.2024, Passed Against The Assessment Orders By Dcit, Central Circle 6(1), Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 27.02.2024 For Assessment Year 2021-22, Dated M/S. Roshni Enterprises Ays 2021-22, 2019-20 & 2018-19 28.02.2024 For Assessment Year 2019-20 & Dated 31.03.2023 For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Grounds Taken By The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 69

…d [2013] 30 taxmann.com 295 (MP). c) CIT (Central) vs. Gobind Ram [2014] 48 taxmann.com 14 (P&H). d) M. Shyamalanathan & Co. vs. ITO [2023] 153 taxmann.com 23 (Chennai) e) CIT vs. Santosh Jain [2008] 296 ITR 324 (P&H) f) CIT vs. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar [2004] 270 ITR 314 (MP) 12. Assessee also submitted that no addition u/s 69C can be made once the on-money/unaccounted receipts are considered as "revenue receipts" while making addition to income and any expenditure out of such money cannot be treated as unexplained expenditure as it would amount to double addition. Assessee referred to the decision Hon'ble M/s. R…

SEBCO PROPERTY PRIVATE LIMITED,TRICHY vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, TRICHY

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1471/CHNY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1428/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1429/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1430/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2019-20) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1431/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1432/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Dcit M/S Sebco Property Private Limited बनाम/ Central Circle-2, 24D, Mahalakshmi Nagar, Vs. Trichy. K.K. Nagar, Trichy-620 021. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-0810-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1467/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1468/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) &

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…d 40A(3) as made by Ld. AO in all the years, Ld. CIT(A) held that once the income was estimated, no separate addition of expenses would be warranted. This was as per the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in CIT v. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar (270 ITR 314) holding that no separate disallowance u/s. 40A(3) is required when income is estimated by adopting Net Profit Rate. Similar ratio was laid down by Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT (Central) v. Gobind Ram (229 Taxman 491) as well as by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in PCIT v. Jadau Jewellers & Manufacturers (P.) Ltd. (409 ITR…

SEBCO PROPERTY PRIVATE LIMITED,TRICHY vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, TRICHY

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1470/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1428/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1429/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1430/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2019-20) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1431/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1432/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Dcit M/S Sebco Property Private Limited बनाम/ Central Circle-2, 24D, Mahalakshmi Nagar, Vs. Trichy. K.K. Nagar, Trichy-620 021. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-0810-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1467/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1468/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) &

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…d 40A(3) as made by Ld. AO in all the years, Ld. CIT(A) held that once the income was estimated, no separate addition of expenses would be warranted. This was as per the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in CIT v. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar (270 ITR 314) holding that no separate disallowance u/s. 40A(3) is required when income is estimated by adopting Net Profit Rate. Similar ratio was laid down by Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT (Central) v. Gobind Ram (229 Taxman 491) as well as by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in PCIT v. Jadau Jewellers & Manufacturers (P.) Ltd. (409 ITR…

SEBCO PROPERTY PRIVATE LIMITED,TRICHY vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, TRICHY

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1469/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1428/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1429/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1430/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2019-20) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1431/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1432/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Dcit M/S Sebco Property Private Limited बनाम/ Central Circle-2, 24D, Mahalakshmi Nagar, Vs. Trichy. K.K. Nagar, Trichy-620 021. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-0810-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1467/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1468/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) &

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…d 40A(3) as made by Ld. AO in all the years, Ld. CIT(A) held that once the income was estimated, no separate addition of expenses would be warranted. This was as per the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in CIT v. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar (270 ITR 314) holding that no separate disallowance u/s. 40A(3) is required when income is estimated by adopting Net Profit Rate. Similar ratio was laid down by Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT (Central) v. Gobind Ram (229 Taxman 491) as well as by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in PCIT v. Jadau Jewellers & Manufacturers (P.) Ltd. (409 ITR…

SEBCO PROPERTY PRIVATE LIMITED,TRICHY vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, TRICHY

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1468/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1428/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1429/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1430/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2019-20) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1431/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1432/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Dcit M/S Sebco Property Private Limited बनाम/ Central Circle-2, 24D, Mahalakshmi Nagar, Vs. Trichy. K.K. Nagar, Trichy-620 021. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-0810-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1467/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1468/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) &

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…d 40A(3) as made by Ld. AO in all the years, Ld. CIT(A) held that once the income was estimated, no separate addition of expenses would be warranted. This was as per the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in CIT v. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar (270 ITR 314) holding that no separate disallowance u/s. 40A(3) is required when income is estimated by adopting Net Profit Rate. Similar ratio was laid down by Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT (Central) v. Gobind Ram (229 Taxman 491) as well as by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in PCIT v. Jadau Jewellers & Manufacturers (P.) Ltd. (409 ITR…

SEBCO PROPERTY PRIVATE LIMITED,TRICHY vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, TRICHY

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1467/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1428/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1429/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1430/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2019-20) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1431/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1432/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Dcit M/S Sebco Property Private Limited बनाम/ Central Circle-2, 24D, Mahalakshmi Nagar, Vs. Trichy. K.K. Nagar, Trichy-620 021. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-0810-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1467/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1468/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) &

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…d 40A(3) as made by Ld. AO in all the years, Ld. CIT(A) held that once the income was estimated, no separate addition of expenses would be warranted. This was as per the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in CIT v. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar (270 ITR 314) holding that no separate disallowance u/s. 40A(3) is required when income is estimated by adopting Net Profit Rate. Similar ratio was laid down by Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT (Central) v. Gobind Ram (229 Taxman 491) as well as by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in PCIT v. Jadau Jewellers & Manufacturers (P.) Ltd. (409 ITR…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, TRICHY, TRICHY vs. SEBCO PROPERTY PRIVATE LIMITED, TRICHY

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1432/CHNY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1428/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1429/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1430/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2019-20) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1431/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1432/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Dcit M/S Sebco Property Private Limited बनाम/ Central Circle-2, 24D, Mahalakshmi Nagar, Vs. Trichy. K.K. Nagar, Trichy-620 021. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-0810-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1467/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1468/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) &

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…d 40A(3) as made by Ld. AO in all the years, Ld. CIT(A) held that once the income was estimated, no separate addition of expenses would be warranted. This was as per the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in CIT v. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar (270 ITR 314) holding that no separate disallowance u/s. 40A(3) is required when income is estimated by adopting Net Profit Rate. Similar ratio was laid down by Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT (Central) v. Gobind Ram (229 Taxman 491) as well as by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in PCIT v. Jadau Jewellers & Manufacturers (P.) Ltd. (409 ITR…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, TRICHY, TRICHY vs. SEBCO PROPERTY PRIVATE LIMITED, TRICHY

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1431/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1428/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1429/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1430/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2019-20) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1431/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1432/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Dcit M/S Sebco Property Private Limited बनाम/ Central Circle-2, 24D, Mahalakshmi Nagar, Vs. Trichy. K.K. Nagar, Trichy-620 021. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-0810-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1467/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1468/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) &

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…d 40A(3) as made by Ld. AO in all the years, Ld. CIT(A) held that once the income was estimated, no separate addition of expenses would be warranted. This was as per the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in CIT v. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar (270 ITR 314) holding that no separate disallowance u/s. 40A(3) is required when income is estimated by adopting Net Profit Rate. Similar ratio was laid down by Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT (Central) v. Gobind Ram (229 Taxman 491) as well as by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in PCIT v. Jadau Jewellers & Manufacturers (P.) Ltd. (409 ITR…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, TRICHY, TRICHY vs. SEBCO PROPERTY PRIVATE LIMITED, TRICHY

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1430/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1428/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1429/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1430/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2019-20) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1431/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1432/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Dcit M/S Sebco Property Private Limited बनाम/ Central Circle-2, 24D, Mahalakshmi Nagar, Vs. Trichy. K.K. Nagar, Trichy-620 021. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-0810-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1467/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1468/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) &

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…d 40A(3) as made by Ld. AO in all the years, Ld. CIT(A) held that once the income was estimated, no separate addition of expenses would be warranted. This was as per the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in CIT v. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar (270 ITR 314) holding that no separate disallowance u/s. 40A(3) is required when income is estimated by adopting Net Profit Rate. Similar ratio was laid down by Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT (Central) v. Gobind Ram (229 Taxman 491) as well as by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in PCIT v. Jadau Jewellers & Manufacturers (P.) Ltd. (409 ITR…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, TRICHY, TRICHY vs. SEBCO PROPERTY PRIVATE LIMITED, TRICHY

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1429/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1428/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1429/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1430/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2019-20) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1431/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1432/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Dcit M/S Sebco Property Private Limited बनाम/ Central Circle-2, 24D, Mahalakshmi Nagar, Vs. Trichy. K.K. Nagar, Trichy-620 021. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-0810-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1467/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1468/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) &

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…d 40A(3) as made by Ld. AO in all the years, Ld. CIT(A) held that once the income was estimated, no separate addition of expenses would be warranted. This was as per the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in CIT v. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar (270 ITR 314) holding that no separate disallowance u/s. 40A(3) is required when income is estimated by adopting Net Profit Rate. Similar ratio was laid down by Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT (Central) v. Gobind Ram (229 Taxman 491) as well as by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in PCIT v. Jadau Jewellers & Manufacturers (P.) Ltd. (409 ITR…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, TRICHY, TRICHY vs. SEBCO PROPERTY PRIVATE LIMITED, TRICHY

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1428/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1428/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1429/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1430/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2019-20) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1431/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1432/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Dcit M/S Sebco Property Private Limited बनाम/ Central Circle-2, 24D, Mahalakshmi Nagar, Vs. Trichy. K.K. Nagar, Trichy-620 021. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-0810-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1467/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1468/Chny/2024 (िनधा'रणवष' / Assessment Year: 2018-19) &

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…d 40A(3) as made by Ld. AO in all the years, Ld. CIT(A) held that once the income was estimated, no separate addition of expenses would be warranted. This was as per the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in CIT v. Purshottam Lal Tamrakar (270 ITR 314) holding that no separate disallowance u/s. 40A(3) is required when income is estimated by adopting Net Profit Rate. Similar ratio was laid down by Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT (Central) v. Gobind Ram (229 Taxman 491) as well as by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in PCIT v. Jadau Jewellers & Manufacturers (P.) Ltd. (409 ITR…

ASSTT. CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. SMT. JOTI SURESH BAJORIA , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 151/NAG/2018[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Aug 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.151/Nag/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Assistant Smt. Jyoti Suresh Bajoria, Commissioner Of Income V 402/403, Jagat Plaza, Law Tax, Circle-1(1), S College Square, Amravati Nagpur. Road, Nagpur – 440010. Pan: Abrpb2740G Appellant / Revenue Respondent /Assessee Assessee By Shri Kapil Sharma– Ar Revenue By Shri Kailash Kanojiya – Dr Date Of Hearing 28/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31/08/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue I.E.Acit, Circle-1(1), Nagpur Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Nagpur Dated 26.03.2018 Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 153A Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). The Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Smt. Jyoti Suresh Bajoria [R]

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…Vs. Gobind Ram (2015) 229 Taxman 491 (P&H HC) 4. PCIT Vs. Jadau Jewellers & Manufacturers (P) Ltd. (2018) 409 ITR 85 (Rajasthan HC : Jaipur Bench) 5. CIT Vs. S. Mohammad Dhurabudeen (2008) 4 DTR 218 (Madras HC) 6. CIT Vs. Purshottamlal Tamrakar Uchehra (2004) 270 ITR 314 (MP HC) 7. CIT Vs. Banwarilal Banshidhar (1998) 229 ITR 229 (Allahabad HC) 8. Satishkumar Vishnudas Bhutada Vs. ITO (ITAT Pune) 9. Kirtikumar Vishnudas Bhutada Vs. ACIT (ITAT Pune) 10. DCIT Vs. Shri. Narendra Mithailal Agrawal (ITAT Pune) 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. There is no denial of the fact that AO has estima…

THE DCIT1(1), INDORE vs. SHRI RAVI ARORA, INDORE

ITA 212/IND/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2011-12 Dcit-5(1), Shri Ravi Arora, Indore 1007, Khatiwala Tank, बनाम/ 236, Indraprasth Tower, 6, M.G. Road, Vs. Indore. (Revenue / Appellant) (Assessee / Respondent) Pan: Agdpa8921H Assessee By Shri Yash Kukreja, Ca & Shri Hitesh Chimnani, Adv & Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri P.K.Mishra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 04.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2023

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 68

…entions. However, it needs to be appreciated that the profits of the business have been estimated at 12% as discussed above. On such facts I am guided by the decision of Jurisdictional Madhya Pradesh High Court in case of CIT vs. Purshottamlal Tamrakar (2004) 270 ITR 314 (MP) wherein it is observed that when profit rate is applied and income of the Appellant is estimated form business, no separate disallowance is called for under Section 40A(3) of the Act. 10.3 Also in case of Singhal Builders Contractor v. Addl. CIT, (2011) 12 taxmann.com 199 (Jaipur) it is held that where the AO applies gross profit rate or net…

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

…d not be invoked. CIT Vs. Hindustan Equipment Pvt. Ltd. 84 CCH 285 (MP) (HC) When net profit rate was applied by AO, there was no scope for further disallowance of any expenditure u/s 40A(3) in respect of such purchase. CIT VS. Purshottamlal Tamrakar Uchehra 270 ITR 314 (MP) (HC) Sec. 40A (3) is not applicable when income is determined by applying net profit rate. In view of above, Ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the disallowance made by AO u/s 40A(3) and therefore, this ground of the department be dismissed. 47. On the contrary, the ld. DR has relied on the order of the authorities below and submitted that the…

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

…d not be invoked. CIT Vs. Hindustan Equipment Pvt. Ltd. 84 CCH 285 (MP) (HC) When net profit rate was applied by AO, there was no scope for further disallowance of any expenditure u/s 40A(3) in respect of such purchase. CIT VS. Purshottamlal Tamrakar Uchehra 270 ITR 314 (MP) (HC) Sec. 40A (3) is not applicable when income is determined by applying net profit rate. In view of above, Ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the disallowance made by AO u/s 40A(3) and therefore, this ground of the department be dismissed. 47. On the contrary, the ld. DR has relied on the order of the authorities below and submitted that the…

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

…d not be invoked. CIT Vs. Hindustan Equipment Pvt. Ltd. 84 CCH 285 (MP) (HC) When net profit rate was applied by AO, there was no scope for further disallowance of any expenditure u/s 40A(3) in respect of such purchase. CIT VS. Purshottamlal Tamrakar Uchehra 270 ITR 314 (MP) (HC) Sec. 40A (3) is not applicable when income is determined by applying net profit rate. In view of above, Ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the disallowance made by AO u/s 40A(3) and therefore, this ground of the department be dismissed. 47. On the contrary, the ld. DR has relied on the order of the authorities below and submitted that the…

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

…d not be invoked. CIT Vs. Hindustan Equipment Pvt. Ltd. 84 CCH 285 (MP) (HC) When net profit rate was applied by AO, there was no scope for further disallowance of any expenditure u/s 40A(3) in respect of such purchase. CIT VS. Purshottamlal Tamrakar Uchehra 270 ITR 314 (MP) (HC) Sec. 40A (3) is not applicable when income is determined by applying net profit rate. In view of above, Ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the disallowance made by AO u/s 40A(3) and therefore, this ground of the department be dismissed. 47. On the contrary, the ld. DR has relied on the order of the authorities below and submitted that the…

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

…(2005) 94 TTJ (Jodh) 1119, it was held that where net income is computed in respect of the unrecorded transactions, no further disallowance u/s 40A(3) can be made. 10.9 The Hon’ble Madhya Pardesh High Court in the case of CIT v Purshottam Lal Tamrakar (2004) 270 ITR 314 (MP) held that disallowance u/s 40A(3) could not be made where the income is computed on the basis of some estimated formula. 10.10 In Chhattisgarh Steel Casting (P) Ltd v ACIT (2008) 8 DTR (Bilaspur) (Trib) 14, it was held that disallowance u/s 40A(3) made by the A.O. out of unrecorded purchases form the seized record was uncalled for. 10.11 I…

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

…(2005) 94 TTJ (Jodh) 1119, it was held that where net income is computed in respect of the unrecorded transactions, no further disallowance u/s 40A(3) can be made. 10.9 The Hon’ble Madhya Pardesh High Court in the case of CIT v Purshottam Lal Tamrakar (2004) 270 ITR 314 (MP) held that disallowance u/s 40A(3) could not be made where the income is computed on the basis of some estimated formula. 10.10 In Chhattisgarh Steel Casting (P) Ltd v ACIT (2008) 8 DTR (Bilaspur) (Trib) 14, it was held that disallowance u/s 40A(3) made by the A.O. out of unrecorded purchases form the seized record was uncalled for. 10.11 I…

Showing 1–20 of 29 · Page 1 of 2