CIT v. Transport Corporation of India

256 ITR 701High Court2002#3887 most cited

What is CIT v. Transport Corporation of India authority for?

An assessee bears the burden of proving the genuineness of expenses claimed as deductions. Failure to substantiate claims leads to their disallowance.

30

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Transport Corporation of India · Section 37(1) · deduction of expenses · genuineness of expenses · onus on assessee · unsubstantiated claims · unverifiable expenses · expenditure disallowance

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 131(1A)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 251

Issues it is cited on

place of effective managementsection 6(3)section 127(1)legal expensesddtpreponderance of probabilityprincipal officershell companyroyalty incomesection 131(1a)colourable devicebusiness expediency

Judgments citing CIT v. Transport Corporation of India

Zulfi Ravdjee, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 270/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Sri Zulfi Ravdjee Vs. A.C.I.T. Hyderabad Circle 14(1) Pan:Aeapa2227H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao,Ca Revenue By: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 22/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 26/09/2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17.6.2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac, Relating To A.Y.2017-18. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Construction Under The Name & Style Of Az Developer. It Has Undertaken Two Contract Works, One At Moinabad & The Second One At Kompally & Also Maintaining The Building “Alcazar Plaza & Towers”. He Filed His Return Of Income On 31.10.2017 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.33,76,600/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & Statutory Notices U/S 143(2)/142(1) Were Served On The Assessee In Response To Which

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao,CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 143(2)Section 40a

…Officer, the assessee failed to discharge the onus cast on him by proving the genuineness of various expenses debited. The Assessing Officer, therefore, relying on the decision of the Hon'ble A.P. High Court in the case of Transport Corporation of India Ltd (256 ITR 701) where it has been held that it is the duty of the assessee to prove the genuineness of the payments, made addition of Rs.85,56,088/- being 10% of the total expenditure of Rs.8,55,60,883/-. 4. The Assessing Officer similarly made addition of Rs.1,00,764/- being 30% of the expenditure of Rs.3,34,880/- for Page 2 of 9 ITA No 270 of 2022 Zulfi Rav…

Chem Colour (India) Limited, Kota vs. ACIT Circle -2, Kota

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

ITA 166/JPR/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Manisha Choudhary, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)Section 92C

…l of the statement of account, the expenses are not properly vouched and are supported by self prepared vouchers. The said expenditures were mostly met through cash. As per judgement 3 (ITA NO. 166/JP/2021) Chem Colour (India ) Ltd. vs ACIT, Circle-2, Kota 256 ITR 701 (A.P.) in case of Transport Corporation of India, self made vouchers are only a claiman not a proof. 4.3 The assessee has not submitted any satisfactory explanation in this regard. Considering above fact, I make a disallowance @ 10% of aforesaid expenses which comes to Rs.8,286/- u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and added to the total taxabl…

Bhadanes Hitech Technology Computer Pvt.Ltd, Nashik vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1), Nashik

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1289/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Bhadanes Hitech Technology Vs. Ito, Ward Computer Pvt. Ltd. 1(1), Nashik Flat No.10, Padmavishwa Plaza, Nashik Pune Road, Tagore Nagar, Nashik – 422006 Pan : Aadcb9102E Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 68

…s imposed in the said provision on any commission paid by the assessee, if it is otherwise demonstrated that the same was expended wholly or exclusively for the purpose of business or profession. 5.4 In the case of CIT v. Transport Corporation of India (2002) 256 ITR 701/123 Taxman 806(AP) the Division Bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court observed that mere payment by the assessee itself would not entitle him to deduction of expenditure unless the same was proved to be paid for commercial considerations. It was observed that in such a situation, the burden of proof is on the assessee and not for the department to i…

ACIT 22 (1), Mumbai vs. Cyprian Anthony Mascarenhas, Mumbai

In the result this appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 6791/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2021AY 2009-10
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 37(1)

…been made by A/c. payee cheque does not automatically entail into the transaction being recognized as a genuine one. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Andhra Paradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. Transport Corporation of India Ltd., 256 ITR 701 and on the decision in the case of CIT vs. Imperial Chemical Industries (I) Pvt. Ltd., 74 ITR 17. The assessee has not produced copy of invoices, stock register, transport proof etc. the notice under section 133(6) of the Act sent to the above parties have returned with no reply. Further the assessee has not been able to produce the parties. In v…

ITO 6(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Aristo Realty Developers Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4669/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer-6(1)(2), M/S Aristo Reality R. No. 508, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs. Development Ltd. Bhavan, M.K. Road, 601, Symphony Mumbai-400020. Nehru Road, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-400057 Pan No. Aaacl0593J Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Ms. Aarju Garodia, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Dilip Lakhani, Ar Date Of Hearing : 13/03/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/04/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Dilip Lakhani, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Aarju Garodia, DR
Section 143

…isto Reality 3 As the assessee failed to file documentary evidence in support of its expenses for business purposes in the foreign trips performed, the AO relying on the decision in CIT v. Calcutta Agency 19 ITR 191, CIT v. Transport Corporation of India Ltd. 256 ITR 701 and CIT v. Imperial Chemical Industries (I) Pvt. Ltd. 74 ITR 17 disallowed the above sum of Rs.29,91,772/-. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A), following the order of the Tribunal in the case of the assessee for the AY 2009-10 allowed the appeal. 5. Before us, the Ld. DR submits…

Shriram Chits (Maharashtra) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1902/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 143(3)

…ed A/R of the appellant failed to file the relevant vouchers/bills before me during the appellate proceedings. In view of the above, relying on the decision in the case of CIT v. Calcutta Agency Ltd. 19 ITR 191 (SC); CIT v. Transport Corporation of India Ltd. 256 ITR 701(AP) and CIT v. Imperial Chemical Industries (I) Ltd. 74 ITR 17 the disallowance of Rs.46,54,789/- made by the AO is confirmed.” 4. The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) was erred in confirming addition made by the AO towards adhoc disallowance of 50% of staff meeting expenses despite filing details of expenses which 3 ITA 190…

ITO 25(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Mita Samir Shah, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 7382/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2018AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri T. A. KhanFor Respondent: Dr. K. Shivaram
Section 194CSection 37(1)Section 40

…e assessee did not deduct TDS from the payment made and the amount was liable to be disallowed u/s. 40(a)(ia). In this regard, he placed reliance upon the order of the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. Transport Corp. India Ltd. [2002] 256 ITR 701 (AP). 12. Per contra, the ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has passed a reasonable and correct order after considering all the facts of the case. He submitted that the assessee being a lady and because of lack of experience in export, and the huge value export order had entered into joint…

ACIT, Kota vs. Shiv Edibles Ltd., Kota

In the result respectfully following the decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High

ITA 940/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2017AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gagieya (CA)For Respondent: Shri Prithviraj Meena (Addl.CIT)
Section 36(1)(va)

…counts. In absence of complete particulars of the sellers as well as non-availability of the relevant vouchers, expenses debited are not fully verifiable and following the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court’s decision in case of Transport corporation of India (256 ITR 701), 5% of the expenses amounting to Rs.38,05,861/- were disallowed by the AO holding the same as unverifiable. 2.1 Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that it has maintained all the details and vouchers in respect of husk purchased and purchase register of husk has been produced for verifi…

Manisha Bipin Bhinsara, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 25(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA N0

ITA 4512/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4512/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Mrs. Manisha Bipin The Income Tax Officer- बनाम/ Bhinsara, Ward 25(2)(2), V. 501/A, Yogi Ratna, Bandra Kurla Complex, Opp Mogaveera Bank, Mumbai – 400 051. Eksar Road, Borivali (West), Mumbai – 400 092. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Amlpb7464N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri V.S. Jadhav,DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…ad , 72 ITR 194(SC) e) Sumati Dayal v. CIT , 80 Taxman 89(SC) f) CIT v. M Ganapathi Mudaliar , 53 ITR 623(SC) g) A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT 34 ITR 807(SC) h) CIT v. Calcutta Agency Limited, 19 ITR 191(SC) i) CIT v. Transport Corporation of India Limited 256 ITR 701(AP HC) j) CIT v. Imperial Chemicals Industries India Private Limited 74 ITR 17 ITA 4512/Mum/2015 5 4.Aggrieved by the assessment orders dated 07.12.2011 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act by the A.O., the assessee filed first appeal before the ld. CIT(A). 5. Before the ld. CIT(A) , the assessee submitted that there are two additions made by the A.O…

H & R Johnson India Ltd ( Now Know As A Division A of Prisim Cement Ltd), Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 34, Mumbai

In the result,appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 877/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2016AY 2005-06
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vachaspati Tripathi-DR
Section 115JSection 136Section 143(3)Section 147Section 254(1)

…अिधकरण, ‘एच’ खंडपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई आयकर आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI “H” BENCH सव"ी राजे"", लेखा सद"य एवं राम लाल नेगी, "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member & Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.ITA No.877/Mum/2012,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-2005-06 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/s. H&R Johnson India Ltd.(Now The Asst. CIT known as a Division o Prism Central Circle-34 Cement Ltd.), Windsor, 7th Floor, Room No.104, 1st Floor Vs. CST Road, Kalina…