How many judgments cite Smt. Harshila Chordia v. ITO?

187 judgments on BharatTax cite Smt. Harshila Chordia v. ITO (298 ITR 349), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Smt. Harshila Chordia v. ITO come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 115BBE, Section 143(3), Section 69A, Section 142(1), Section 145(3).

Smt. Harshila Chordia v. ITO

298 ITR 349High Court2008#502 most cited

What is Smt. Harshila Chordia v. ITO authority for?

Cash receipts from customers against genuine delivery of goods or services cannot be added as unexplained cash credits under Section 68. The case also provides guidance on non-disallowance under Section 40A(3) for business payments made in specific contexts like agricultural markets.

187

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,854 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Smt. Harshila Chordia v. ITO · 298 ITR 349 · Section 68 · Section 40A(3) · cash credits · unexplained cash receipts · delivery of goods · genuine business receipts · business payments in cash · APMC payments · business income · Rajasthan High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 68 Section 115BBE Section 143(3)Section 69A Section 142(1)Section 145(3)Section 40A(3)Section 133A

Issues it is cited on

business expediency permanent account number section 40a(3)rejection of books of account addition under section 68 addition u/s 68 section 145(3)section 145 section 40a profits and gains of business or profession section 44ab section 115bb

Judgments citing Smt. Harshila Chordia v. ITO

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jammu vs. Sh. Darshan Kumar Mahajan, Pathankot

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 566/ASR/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 566(Asr)/2016 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Pan: Adjpm7623B

For Appellant: Sh. A. N. Mishra (D. R.)For Respondent: Sh. J. S. Bhasin (Adv.)

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 40A(3)

…o the genuineness of the payments as to freight, being to identifiable persons, so that no disallowance u/s. 40A(3) could be made. Reliance was also placed by him on decisions in Anupam Tele Services [2014] 366 ITR 122 (Guj) and Harshila Chordia v. ITO [2008] 298 ITR 349 (Raj). 4. Before us, both parties relied on the order of the authorities below as favourable to them. 5. We have heard the parties, and perused the material on record. The impugned order grants relief to the assessee on the ground of inapplicability of section 40A(3) of the Act where the genuineness of the (cash) payment/s is not in doubt or di…

DCIT Central Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Jubilee Plot and Housing Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

ITA 2258/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2258/Chny/2018. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2008-2009. Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Jubilee Plot & Housing Income Tax, Private Limited, Central Circle 2(2) No.1379, Golden Villa, Ist Block, 6Th Street, Chennai. 18Th Main Road, Vallalar Kudiyeruppu, Anna Nagar West, Chennai 600 040. [Pan Aabcj 3938J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Bharath, IRS, CITFor Respondent: Shri. K.M.Mohandass, C.A

Section 143(3)Section 40ASection 40A(3)Section 49A(3)

…on. Therefore, the objective of the said section for establishing the identity and genuineness of the recipient is fulfilled and there is no reason to disallow the said expenditure. The Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Smt. Harshila Chordia vs. ITO 298 ITR 349 has also held that where genuineness of transaction and identity of payee were established and explanation of assessee for making cash remittances was acceptable in the light of modus operandi of assessee's business, payments in cash could not be disallowed. The Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Chrome Leather Pvt. Ltd. [1999] 235…

Vrindavan Lal Gupta, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

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

ITA 321/JPR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jan 2018AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Chandra Kulhari, JCIT - DR

Section 40A(3)

…as an agent on commission basis. Therefore, the payments did not require to be disallowed in his hands. There is no iota of doubt regarding the genuineness of the payments. The Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Smt. Harshila Chordia vs ITO (2008) 298 ITR 349 held as under:- Held: (i) that there was no dispute about the genuineness of the transactions and the payment and identity of the receiver were established. The conclusion reached by the Commissioner (Appeals) was correct and the Tribunal by ignoring the scope of clause (j) of rule 6DD as explained by the Board’s Circular had 5 Shri Vrindaval L…

Radhakishan Hiralal Jaiswal, Parbhani vs. Income Tax Officer, Parbhani

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose in the terms aforesaid

ITA 412/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi

Section 40Section 40A(3)

…h banking channel. Thus, the provisions of section 40A(3) are not attracted. In support of her submissions the ld. Counsel placed reliance on the following decisions : i. Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh Vs. ITO, 191 ITR 667 (SC); ii. Smt. Harshila Chordiya Vs. ITO, 298 ITR 349 (Raj.); iii. Anupam Tele Services Vs. ITO, 366 ITR 122 (Guj.); iv. Honey Enterprises Vs. CIT, 381 ITR 258 (Del.); v. Gurdas Garg Vs. CIT, 63 taxman.com 289 (P & H). 3.4 In respect of other addition the ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 4. On the other hand Shri Ajay Mo…

ITO, WD-2(3), Durgapur vs. M/S Kajora Pachai & C. S. Shop, Burdwan

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 502/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 502/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Ito, Ward-2(3), Durgapur -Vs- M/S Kajora Pachai & C.S. Shop [Pan: Aagfk 2341 E] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri K.K. Khemka, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…accepted by the ld AO and mandated by the Notification dated 29.8.2005 issued by the Excise Department , Government of West Bengal. It is also pertinent to note that the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Smt.Harshila Chordia vs ITOreported in (2008) 298 ITR 349 (Raj) had held that the exceptions contained in Rule 6DD of Income Tax Rules are not exhaustive and that the said rule must be interpreted liberally. 20. We also find that the impugned issue is also covered by the decision of the co- ordinate bench of this tribunal in the case of Ashok Mondal vs ITO in ITA No. 873/Kol/2012 for Asst Year 2009-10…

Subham Estcon Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. JCIT, Range-2, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 183/CTK/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2011-2012

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

Section 40A(3)

…he findings of the Court are contained in para 7 to 10. The relevant findings of the Hon'ble High Court are reproduced below. "7. The respondent/assessee's case is supported by several judgments. The Rajasthan High Court in Smt. Harshila Chordia v. ITO [2008]298 ITR 349 held as under: "14. About this clause, many doubts were raised and enquiries were directed to the Board as to what shall constitute exceptional and unavoidable circumstances within the meaning of Clause (j). That led to issuance of Circular by the Board on May 31, 1977 ([1977] 108 1TR (St.) 8), which is published in Taxmann, Vol. 1, 1988 Edition.…

Subhashree Enterprises, Sambalpur vs. ACIT, Sambalpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 378/CTK/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

Section 194CSection 40Section 40A(3)

…he findings of the Court are contained in para 7 to 10. The relevant findings of the Hon'ble High Court are reproduced below. "7. The respondent/assessee's case is supported by several judgments. The Rajasthan High Court in Smt. Harshila Chordia v. ITO [2008]298 ITR 349 held as under: Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 "14. About this clause, many doubts were raised and enquiries were directed to the Board as to what shall constitute exceptional and unavoidable circumstances within the meaning of Clause (j). That led to issuance of Circular by the Board on May 31, 1977 ([1977] 108 1TR (St.) 8), which is published…

M/S Galaxy Dwellers (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5293/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Sept 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri O. P. Kanti.T. Appeal No. 5293/Del/2013 & I.T. Appeal No.3029/Del/2014 Assessment Years : 2006–2007 & 2007-08. M/S. Galaxy Dwellers (P) Ltd., Dy. Commissioner C/O. M/S. Rra Taxindia, Vs. Of Income Tax, D–28, South Extension, Part–I, Central Circle : 4, N E W D E L H I – 110 049. New Delhi. Pan : Aaccg 3782 C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, Adv.; &For Respondent: Shri A. K. Saroha, CIT [DR]

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

…y him in an independent deposition given by him before the Learned AO which was admittedly taken behind the back of the assessee. It is also pertinent to note that the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Smt. Harshila Chordia vs ITO reported in (2008) 298 ITR 349 (Raj) had held that the exceptions contained in Rule 6DD of Income Tax Rules are not exhaustive and that the said rule must be interpreted liberally.” 14. The above judgment has been followed by Kolkata bench in the case of Mr. Nirmal Kumar Das vs. ACIT (supra). Similar view is 15 I.T. Appeal No. 5293/Del/2013 AND I.T. Appeal No.3029/Del/2014 As…

ITO, Ward - 2(2), Asansol vs. Naba Kumar Mandal, Burdwan

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 1273/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 40A(3)Section 85Section 86

…ccepted by the ld AO and mandated by the Notification dated 29.8.2005 issued by the Excise Department , Government of West Bengal. It is also pertinent to note that the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Smt.Harshila Chordia vs ITO reported in (2008) 298 ITR 349 (Raj) had held that the exceptions contained in Rule 6DD of Income Tax Rules are not exhaustive and that the said rule must be interpreted liberally. 20. We also find that the impugned issue is also covered by the decision of the co- ordinate bench of this tribunal in the case of Ashok Mondal vs ITO in ITA No. 873/Kol/2012 for Asst Year 2009-10…

Amit Bhandari, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 350/JPR/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri B.P. Moondra (CA)For Respondent: Shri Raj Mehra (Addl.CIT)

Section 145(3)Section 148Section 40A(3)

…AY 2007-08 vide appeal no. ITA No. 869/JP/2010 AY 2007-08 and CO No. 88/JP/2010 (Arising out of ITA No. 869/JP/2010 AY 2007-08), the honourable ITAT allowed the appeal by Relying upon Rajasthan High Court judgments in The case of Smt. Harshil Choradia v/s ITO 298 ITR 349 where in it was held that rule 6DD(j) has to be liberally construed and ordinarily where the genuineness of the transactions and the payment and identity of the receiver is established the requirement of Rule 6DD (j) should be deemed to have been satisfied. The AR in this respect considering the satisfaction of aforesaid conditions requested to d…

DCIT, Cir-4, Kolkata vs. M/S Maruti Freight Movers Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 482/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Apr 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh, I.T.A. No. 482/Kol/2014 Assessment Years: 2009-10

Section 250Section 40A(3)Section 43B

…money or to check transactions which are not genuine and may be put as camouflage to evade tax by showing fictitious or false transactions.” 9.5. We also find that the Hon‟ble Rajasthan High court in the case of Smt Harshila Chordia vs ITO reported in (2008) 298 ITR 349 (Guj) had held that the exceptions contained in Rule 6DD of the Rules are not exhaustive and that the said rule must be interpreted liberally. 9.6. In view of our aforesaid findings and respectfully following the judicial precedents relied upon hereinabove, we hold that the subject mentioned cash payments would fall under the ambit of exception p…

M/S Shibpur Pachai Shop, Burdwan vs. ITO, WD-1(4), Asansol

In the result the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 340/KOL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm] I.T.A No. 340/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Respondent: Shri.Divakar Chakraborthy JCIT

Section 22Section 40A(3)Section 85Section 86

Srikanta Mondal, Burdwan vs. ITO, WD-2(2), Asansol, Burdwan

In the result the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 333/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm] I.T.A No. 333/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Srikanta Mondal -Vs.- I.T.O., Ward-2(2) Burdwan Asansol [Pan : Agxpm 6698 K] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri U.Dasgupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri.Divakar Chakraborthy JCIT

Section 22Section 40A(3)Section 85Section 86

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)

…he 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 (2008) 298 ITR 349 (Raj) have held that the circumstances set out in Rule 6DD and Board Circulars are illustrative and not exhaustive and the AO has to take into account the surrounding circumstances and considerations of business expediency and the facts of each particular case in exercising discretion either in favour or against the assessee. 6. We also found tha…

Smt Bimala Bala Mondal, Burdwan vs. ITO, WD-1(4), Durgapur

In the result the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 794/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Sept 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm] I.T.A No. 794/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt. Bimala Bala Mondal -Vs.- I.T.O., Ward-1(4) Burdwan Durgapur [Pan : Aeapm 9753 N] ] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : None For The Respondent : Shri.Ambitab Bhattacharya Jcit Date Of Hearing : 23.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2016. Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 5.2.2014 Of Cit(A)- Durgapur, Relating To Ay 2010-11. 2. The Assessee Is An Individual. He Is A Dealer In Country Spirits. Purchases Are Made From A Single Party Namely Ifb Agro Industries Ltd.. The Assessee In Respect Of Purchases From Ifb Agro Industries Ltd. Made A Payment Of Rs.14,31,840/- In Cash. According To The Ao The Above Payment Made Cannot Be Allowed As Deduction In Computing The Total Income Of The Assessee Because Of The Violation Of The Provision Of Section 40A(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act). The Action Of The Ao Was Confirmed By Cit(A). 3. Aggrieved By The Order Of Cit(A) The Assessee Has Preferred An Appeal Before This Tribunal. 4. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Asseseee Nor Was Any Request For Adjournment Made. I Have Heard The Submissions Of The Ld. Dr. Identical Issue With Regard To The Disallowance U/S 40A(3) Of The Act In The Case Of Assessee Who Are Engaged In The Business Of Country Spirits Who Have Paid Purchases In Cash Had Come Up For Consideration Before This Bench In The Case Of Ramnagar Pachwai & C.S. (Shop) Vs Ito Vide Ita No.148/Kol/2015 & 185&186/Kol/2014 For A.Y.2007-08 & 2008-09

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri.Ambitab Bhattacharya JCIT

Section 22Section 40A(3)Section 85Section 86

Motor Ch. Mondal, Asansol vs. ITO, WD-2(2), Asansol

In the result the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 200/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Sept 2016AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 200/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Motor Ch. Mondal -Vs.- I.T.O., Ward-2(2) Sahid Khudi Ram Sarani Asansol Neamatpur, P.O.Sitarampur-713359 [Pan : Afapm 9913K] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri U.Dasgupta, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri.Rajat Kumar Kureel(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 11.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2016. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri U.Dasgupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri.Rajat Kumar Kureel(DR)

Section 22Section 40A(3)Section 85Section 86

Naba Kumar Mondal, Asansol vs. ITO, WD-2(2), Asansol

In the result the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 164/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Aug 2016AY 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri U.Dasgupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: None(DR)

Section 22Section 40A(3)Section 85Section 86

Tushar Kanti Banerjee, Burdwan vs. ITO, WD-1(2), Asansol, Burdwan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 307/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Divakar Chakraborty, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…ccepted by the ld AO and mandated by the Notification dated 29.8.2005 issued by the Excise Department , Government of West Bengal. It is also pertinent to note that the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Smt.Harshila Chordia vs ITO reported in (2008) 298 ITR 349 (Raj) had held that the exceptions contained in Rule 6DD of Income Tax Rules are not exhaustive and that the said rule must be interpreted liberally. 3.7. We also find that the impugned issue is also covered by the decision of the co- ordinate bench of this tribunal in the case of Ashok Mondal vs ITO in ITA No. 873/Kol/2012 for Asst Year 2009-10…

M/S Bolkunda Pachwai & (S) C. S. Shop, Burdwan vs. ITO, WD.1(2), Asansol

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 166/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2016AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri U. Dasgupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…ccepted by the ld AO and mandated by the Notification dated 29.8.2005 issued by the Excise Department , Government of West Bengal. It is also pertinent to note that the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Smt.Harshila Chordia vs ITO reported in (2008) 298 ITR 349 (Raj) had held that the exceptions contained in Rule 6DD of Income Tax Rules are not exhaustive and that the said rule must be interpreted liberally. 3.7. We also find that the impugned issue is also covered by the decision of the co- ordinate bench of this tribunal in the case of Ashok Mondal vs ITO in ITA No. 873/Kol/2012 for Asst Year 2009-10…

M/S Bolkunda Pachwai & (S) C. S. Shop, Burdwan vs. ITO, WD.1(2), Asansol

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 165/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri U. Dasgupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…ccepted by the ld AO and mandated by the Notification dated 29.8.2005 issued by the Excise Department , Government of West Bengal. It is also pertinent to note that the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Smt.Harshila Chordia vs ITO reported in (2008) 298 ITR 349 (Raj) had held that the exceptions contained in Rule 6DD of Income Tax Rules are not exhaustive and that the said rule must be interpreted liberally. 3.7. We also find that the impugned issue is also covered by the decision of the co- ordinate bench of this tribunal in the case of Ashok Mondal vs ITO in ITA No. 873/Kol/2012 for Asst Year 2009-10…