Tax (1985) 155 ITR 519 (Raj) (v) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nikko Auto Ltd.

225 ITR 517High Court1997#15353 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2023.

Judgments citing Tax (1985) 155 ITR 519 (Raj) (v) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nikko Auto Ltd.

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)

…e to non-availability of goods otherwise than from the particular seller, then even if the payment is made by cash, the same would be allowable as a deduction.” (pp. 492-493) 13 M/s Shree Tirupati Associates In case of Janambhumi v. CIT [1998] 99 Taxman 451/225 ITR 517 (Gau.) with the following observations: “The circular itself indicates that these are not the only circumstances which can be said to be exceptional and unavoidable. There may be some other exceptional and unavoidable circumstances which may not be put in writing. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the ITO on the ground that the asse…

M/S. Dineshchandra R.Agrawal Infracon Pvt.Ltd., Deesa vs. The Jt.CIT, B.K.Range, Palanpur

In the result, ground number 3 of the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1754/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R

Section 234BSection 271Section 40A(3)

…page 906, it was held that where a transaction is found to be genuine and the identity of the payee is established, a liberal view on compelling and mitigating circumstances should be taken. This principle was also affirmed in the case of Janam Bhoomi Vs. CIT 225 ITR 517 and also in the case of Chrome Leather 235 ITR 708. In the present case, the mistake is clearly bona-fide and inadvertent looking into the totality of circumstances. I.T.A No. 1754/Ahd/2014 A.Y. 2010-11 Page No. 9 M/s. Dineshchandra R. Agrawal Infraction Pvt. Ltd. vs. Jt. CIT 13 In view of the above, the Ground No. 2 of assessee’s appeal is all…

ITO, W-2, Barnala vs. The Truck Operator Union, Barnala

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 893/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt.Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavthe Ito बनाम The Truck Operator Union, Ward-2, Barnala Dhanaula Road, Barnala "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaaat6497M

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR

Section 194C(2)Section 250(6)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 60A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SMT.DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER The ITO बनाम The Truck Operator Union, Ward-2, Barnala Dhanaula Road, Barnala "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAAAT6497M "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Deepak Aggarwal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing: 21/09/2022 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement: 14/10/2022 आदेश/ORDER Per Vikram Singh Yadav, Accountant Member: This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of Learned Commiss…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Suresh Kumar, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed on all the grounds

ITA 4111/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 4111/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ito, Vs M/S. Suresh Kumar, Ward-52(1), 84/367, Sec-1, Diz Area, New Delhi-110002 Gole Market, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ajgpk2729R Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.11.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.12.2020

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. DR

Section 40A(3)

…h on the party having insisted for cash payment. These payments, in our view, are covered under rule 6DD(j) read with Circular No. 220 of CBDT. The disallowance of Rs. 6,600 is accordingly deleted." 16 Suresh Kumar 30. Janambhumi v. CIT [1998] 99 Taxman 451/225 ITR 517 (Gau.) with the following observations: "The circular itself indicates that these are not the only circumstances which can be said to be exceptional and unavoidable. There may be some other exceptional and unavoidable circumstances which may not be put in writing. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the ITO on the ground that the asse…

Shri Gautam Sharma, Jodhpur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Jodhpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 120/JODH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur04 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Ramesh C.Sharmavk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 120/Jodh/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2012-13 Cuke Shri Gautam Sharma The Dcit Vs. 221-222, Shyam Nagar, Scheme, Pali Central Circle Link Road, Jodhpur Jodhpur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Awdps 1276 K Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Amit Kothari, Ca Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@Revenue By: Shri Abhimanyu Yadav, Jcit-Dr Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 29/06/2020 ?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 04/09/2020 Vkns'K@ Order Per Ramesh C. Sharma, Am This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Udaipur Dated 12-02-2019 For The Assessment Year 2012-13, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 147/ R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2.1 Due To Prevailing Covid-19 Pandemic Condition, The Hearing Of The Appeal Is Concluded Through Video Conference. The Only Grievance Of The Assessee Relates To Disallowance Of Rs.40.57 Lacs Paid Towards Purchase Of Land, By Invoking The Provisions Of Section 40A(3) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, CAFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Yadav, JCIT-DR

Section 147Section 40A(3)

…Co. (1996) 217 ITR (All.) 431. b. CIT V/s Union Agencies (1987) 166 ITR 529 (Delhi). 5 ITA 120/Jodh/2019 Shri Gautam Sharma vs DCIT, Central Circle-2, Jodhpur c. Kantilai Purshottam & Co. V/s CIT (1985) 155 ITR 519 (Raj.). d. The Jariambhumi V/s CIT (1997) 225 ITR 517 (Gau.). e. CIT V/s Brugmohan Singh & Co. (1994) 209 ITR 753 (P&H). f. CIT V/s A.D. Jayaveerapandia Nadar & Sons (2007) 207 CTR (Mad.) 428. g. Smt. Harshila Chordia V/s ITO (2008) 298 ITR 349 (Raj.) h. Mahender Singh & Part V/s DCIT (2006) 104 TTJ (Del.) 590. i. Jitu Builders P. Ltd. V/s ACIT (2009) 125 TTJ (Ahd.) (TM) 721. j. Debjyoti Dutta v. IT…

Radhey Construction Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 822/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Apr 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri S.L.Poddar (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma(Addl.CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 22Section 23Section 40A(3)

…hordia Vs. ITO (2007) 208 CTR 208(Raj.) (iv) Kanti Lal Purshottam & Co. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (1985) 155 ITR 519 (Raj) (v) Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Nikko Auto Ltd. (2002) 256 ITR 476 (P&H) (vi) Janambhumi v. CIT (1997) 141 CTR (Gau) 518: (1997) 225 ITR 517 (Gau): TC S18.2032 In view of the aforesaid facts the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer u/s 40A(3) deserves to be deleted. 3. Favourable circular of the Board:- It is submitted that under circular no. 6P dated 06.07.1968 Board has stressed that provisions of section 40A(3) come into play only when the trail of expenditure is not possible…