Commissioner of Income Tax v. P.Pravin And Co.

274 ITR 534High Court2005#11410 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2020.

Read the full judgment

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax v. P.Pravin And Co.

Shri Vikram Singh Shekhawat, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle, Sikar

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 484/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jan 2020AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.C. Gupta, JCIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 154Section 234A

…uted by applying the gross profit rate, there was no need to look into the provision of Section 40A(3) of the Act. The CIT(A) had rightly deleted separate addition made by the AO u/s 40A(3) of the Act. CIT vs. G.K. Contractor,19 DTR 305; CIT vs. PravinAnd Co. 274 ITR 534; Choudhary Bros in ITA No. 1177/JP/2010 vide order dated 31-05-2010; CIT vs. BanwariLal Banshidhar, 229 ITR 229(Raj.), relied on. In the case of ITO v/s Sadhwani Brothers held that AO having rejected the books of account and applied the net profit rate for the purpose computing the income, no disallowance can be made u/s 40A(3). In the case of IT…

The ACIT, Circle- 1, Rajkot-Gujarat vs. Smt. Manishaben N. Mashru, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 355/RJT/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Jan 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Rajpal Yadavsr.No.

For Appellant: Shri M.J. Ranpura, CAFor Respondent: Shri Hargovind Singh, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “RAJKOT BENCH”, RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sr.No. ITA No. Appellant Respondent Vs. 1-2 958/RJT/2010 DCIT, Cir.1 Smt.Manishaben N. Mashru with Rajkot. Prop. Of M/s.Shree Divya Travels CO No.38/RJT/2010 2/16, Galaxy Commercial Centre Astt.Year 2003-04 Jawahar Road, Rajkot. Vs. Smt.Manishaben N. Mashru 3-4 959/RJT/2010 DCIT, Cir.1 Rajkot. with Prop. Of M/s.Shree Divya Travels CO No.39/RJT/2010 2/16, Galaxy Commercial Centre Asstt.Year 2004-05 Jawahar Road, Rajkot. Vs. Smt.Manishaben N. Mashru 5-6 960/RJT/2010 DCIT, Ci…

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

…the payee but only to the credit of its bank account without the payee actually receiving the cash. We accordingly hold that such payment is not in violation of provision of Section 40A(3) and hence no disallowance is called for." 9. In the case reported in 274 ITR 534 the Gujarat High Court as discussed the issue under consideration especially where the practicality of the payment, should be judged from the view of businessmen and not the Assessing Officer in following words: Held that Section 40A(3) was intended to serve the objective of checking tax evasion and ensure that payments exceeding Rs.2,500/- are…

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

…the payee but only to the credit of its bank account without the payee actually receiving the cash. We accordingly hold that such payment is not in violation of provision of Section 40A(3) and hence no disallowance is called for." 9. In the case reported in 274 ITR 534 the Gujarat High Court as discussed the issue under consideration especially where the practicality of the payment, should be judged from the view of businessmen and not the Assessing Officer in following words: Held that Section 40A(3) was intended to serve the objective of checking tax evasion and ensure that payments exceeding Rs.2,500/- are…

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

…the payee but only to the credit of its bank account without the payee actually receiving the cash. We accordingly hold that such payment is not in violation of provision of Section 40A(3) and hence no disallowance is called for." 9. In the case reported in 274 ITR 534 the Gujarat High Court as discussed the issue under consideration especially where the practicality of the payment, should be judged from the view of businessmen and not the Assessing Officer in following words: Held that Section 40A(3) was intended to serve the objective of checking tax evasion and ensure that payments exceeding Rs.2,500/- are…

Harbans Lal Sethi, Jaipur vs. Addl. CIT, Kota

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 495/JPR/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 May 2017AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, Addl. CIT-. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234BSection 244A

…at: “where the books of account have been rejected the revenue cannot rely on the same books of account for making any other addition.” 6.1.7 Also refer Samurai Techno Trading Co. (P) Ltd. v/s CIT (2010) 37 DTR 386 (Ker) (DPB 9-12). 6.1.8 CIT v/s Pravin & Co. 274 ITR 534 (Guj) 6.2 Very pertinently, even this very aspect has now been judiciously recognized even by the statute in terms of S.44AD / 44AF etc. i.e. presumptive taxation scheme where the assessee are not required to keep books of account which is (or the same thing where accounts though maintained but stood rejected) and therefore, an statuary estimated…

DCIT, Jaipur vs. Jadau Jewellers & Mfg (P) Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 502/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal and Shri Gulshan Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, Addl.CIT - DR
Section 142Section 144Section 153A

…e to that effect filed ; absence of banking facilities in places where cash payments are made. All such cases would come within the purview of exceptional or unavoidable circumstances”. iii) Gujarat High Court decision in the case of CIT v. P. Pravin And Co. 274 ITR 534 : held that the requirement under rule 6DD of the Income-tax Rules 1962, regarding practicability of payment otherwise than in cash and consideration of business expediency has to be judged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the revenue authorities. iv) Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench in its decision in the case of PACL India Ltd. V/…

Raj Wines, Navi Mumbai vs. CIT, Thane

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6487/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2016AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Suresh SubramanianFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar
Section 133Section 40Section 40A(3)

…7) 291 ITR 44 (Kar) have held that Section 40 A (3) is not absolute in its terms. Accordingly, where there is a genuine finding that the seller has insisted on cash payment and the payment is genuine; amount cannot be disallowed. Isn CIT vs Pravin & Co (2005) 274 ITR 534 (Guj), it was held that the practicality of the payment should be judged from the view of the businessmen and not the Assessing Officer. Various courts in the case of Girdharilal Goenka vs ClT (1989) 179 ITR 122 (CaI); Venkata Subba Rao vs ClT (1988) 173 "ITR 340 (AP); CIT vs Dalip Chand & sons (2008) 3011TR 276 (HP); Harshila Chordia vs ITO (200…

SHI vs. Hakti Transport Sangh, Thane

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

ITA 7515/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7515/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06) Shivshakti Transport Sangh, Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ K.B. Amlani C.A., Ward– 1, V. 14 Malkans, Panvel. Lazras Rd., Charai, Thane (W) – 400 602. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Abbfs 5473-P .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Vishwas Jadhav(D.R.)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 44

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “E” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7515/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06) Shivshakti Transport Sangh, Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ K.B. Amlani C.A., Ward– 1, v. 14 Malkans, PANVEL. Lazras Rd., Charai, THANE (W) – 400 602. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : ABBFS 5473-P .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee by Shri Reepal Tralshawala Revenue by : Shri Vishwas Jadhav(D.R.) सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date of Hearing : 14-03-2016 घोषणा क" तार…

Commissioner of Income Tax v. P.Pravin And Co. (274 ITR 534) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax