ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),AGRA, AGRA vs. EMCO EXPORTS, AGRA

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2020-21

5 and 9 of the Act. One should not read section 195 to mean that the moment there is a remittance; the obligation to deduct TDS automatically arises. If we were to accept such contention, it would mean that on mere payment in India, income would be said to arise or accrue in India. These are the observations made

NEW KALPANA ENT UDYOG,AURAIYA vs. I.T,O, AURAIYA

In the result. Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

section I.T.A No. 49/Agra/2015 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 40A(3) and no exceptional circumstances as enumerated in Rule 6DD could be found applicable in those cases where the payments were made in cash exceeding Rs.20,000/-. Thus, he disallowed a sum of Rs.29,87,114/- u/s 40A(3) read with Rule 6DD. 3. The assessee went in appeal before

KUSHAL VARSHNEY,ALIGARH vs. ITO WARD 4(1)(3), ALIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Kushal Varshney, Vs. Ito, 1/83, Naurangabad, Aligarh Ward-4(1)(3), Up 202001 Aligarh (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aevpv0578H Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 06/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/02/2025

section 40A(3) of the L.T. Act. Kushal Varshney 2. Because the purchases made, the disallowance of which has been made u/s 40A(3) of the LT Act are fully verifiable and the identity of the seller is also verifiable and not in doubt and the payment made is under avoidable circumstances. Thus the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S PREM MOTORS PVT LTD., GWALIOR

The appeals of the department are dismissed

5. In Ground No. 3, the revenue challenged the deletion by the CIT(A) of Rs.13,75,355/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 40A(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5.1 Brief facts are that the assessee had paid interest @ 6% per annum on the security deposit of Rs.2.00 Cr to M/s Tanushaka Automobiles Pvt. Ltd amounting

SH SANJAY BANSAL ,MORENA vs. A.C.I.T (CENTRAL), GWALIOR

In the result, assessee's appeal is dismissed

Bench: learned CIT(Appeals) who has very exhaustively passed the impugned order in 60 pages and considered all the submissions of the assessee in the tabulated form and otherwise, which need not to be repeated again for the sake of brevity. However, learned CIT(Appeals) partly allowed assessee's appeal confirming the addition only to the extent of Rs.71,44,045/- as against addition of Rs.91,06,669/-. 4. Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal on the following grounds : "1.Because in any view, th

5,00,000/- for so called unexplained deposit in Bank of India u/s 69 of the I.T. Act Rs. 57,00,000/ for so called unexplained Cash deposit in Bank Account u/s 69 of the I.T. Act Rs. 9,44,045/- for so called Cash Purchases and disallowable expenditure uls 40A(3) read with Rule

KOTHIWAL ICE AND COLD STORAGE .P.LTD,ETAH vs. NFAC , NEW DELHI

Appeals is allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Vs. Nfac, Kothiwal Ice & Storage Pvt. Ltd., Delhi Sadabad Road, Jaleshar, Etah, Uttar Pradesh Pan :Aacck1353P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Shailender Shrivastava, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06.02.2025 Order

section 40A (3) disallowance of Rs.65,79,902/- thereby holding the assessee to have made cash payments of Revenue’s expenditure to U.P. Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam. Learned lower authorities hold that the assessee could not prove its case in tune with all the relevant clauses accepting such cash expenditure payments under Rule 6DD of the Income Tax Rules

M/S BLUE LOTUS DEVELOPERS ,GWALIOR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 2(1), GWALIOR

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalm/S Blue Lotus Developers Vs. Cit(A)/Nfac, 101, The Empire, 33, City Delhi Center, Gwalior M.P.-474011 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aaifb4692D Appellant .. Respondent

section 40A(3) disallowance of Rs.22.24 lacs on the ground that the assessee had made cash payments for purchasing land from Shri Gabbar Singh. The Revenue’s case in light of the lower authorities findings is that neither the assessee has shown business exigency in making cash payments nor it’s case is covered under Rule 6DD of the Income

GOPALDAS SHIVHARE,GUNA vs. ACIT CIRCLE-3, AGRA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

section 40A(3) of the IT Act: S. No. Date of Particulars Amount Payment paid in cash 1. 8.8.2009 Metro Cold (11900 + 11500) 23,400/- 2. 8.8.2009 New Modern Hot & Cold 21,900/- (11900 + 10,000) Total 45,300/- I.T.A No. 136/Agra/2016 4 Again the assessee could not furnish any reply, or the concerned bills and vouchers

M/S R.K. BAJPAI,AURAIYA vs. CIT -1, AGRA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenam/S R.K. Bajpai, Vs..Dcit,Circle-1, Dibiyapur, Auraiya. Agra. Panno.Aaffr8521G (Assessee) (Revenue)

disallowance under section, 40a(ia) the Income Tax Act, 1961 of a sum of Rs.4,92,250/- debited towards rent of equipment. 5

TOMAR AND BROTHERS,ETAWAH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(5), ETAWAH

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: :Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2014-15

5 | P a g e the assessee. He contended that two replies were filed by the assessee on 09.09.2022 and 09.09.2023 on the e-portal vide e-acknowledgement No. 479853791090922 and 240859541090923 of the assessee and a chart was furnished providing the details of all the payments made for JCB, Poclane, Roller and tractor rent. He contended that

JVH TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,AGRA vs. ITO WARD 2(1)(1), AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshjvh Technologies Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Ito, Shop No. A28, V. S. Ward-2(1)(1), Plaza, Sector-3A, Avas Agra Vikas Colony, Sikandra, Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcj3746N Assessee By : Shri Rohit Dua, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 03/02/2026

disallowance under section 40A(3) of the Act on the ground that assessee had made cash payment in excess of Rs 20,000 and completed the assessment. This action of the Learned AO was upheld by the Learned NFAC. 5

M/S A K TRANSPORT AGENCY,FARRUKHABAD vs. CIT APPEAL, ALIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

section 40A(3) of the Act. He made disallowance under the said provision and the total income of the assessee was re-computed at Rs.39,96,550/-. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance. He held that non- I.T.A No. 328/Agra/2016 5

GIRDHARI LAL KEDAR NATH SINGHAL,AGRA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1)(1), AGRA

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

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahmangirdhari Lal Kedar Nath Singhal, Vs. Ito 1 (1)(1), Ff – 1, Bhagwati Complex, Agra. M.G. Road, Opp. Shah Cinema, Agra – 282 002 (Uttar Pradesh). (Pan : Aacfg5458N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Naveen Garg, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2025 Date Of Order : 03.09.2025

section 40A(3) of the Act as the payments exceeding Rs.10,000/- in a day had been made to these persons. Accordingly, the Ground No. 1.1 and 1.2 are dismissed.” 4. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before ITAT raising various argumentative grounds of appeal, which is not as per the ITAT Rules. However, single grievance of the assessee is disallowance

SUMIT KUMAR,AGRA vs. ITO 1(1)(2), AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Sumit Kumar, Vs. Ito, Village Rampura, Ward-1(1)(2), Gwalior Road, Agra Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Buqpk7461L Assessee By : Shri Gaurav Agarwal, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

disallow the purchases made from the aforesaid three parties under section 40A(3) of the Act. The Assessee furnished the copy of ledger account of all the three parties before the Learned CITA which are enclosed in pages 5

ANKITA PALIWAL,ALIGARH, UTTAR PRADESH vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19

5. That the claim of FTC was made by the assessee in terms of section 90 of the Income Tax Act. It is a settled principle that where is there is special agreement/ DTAA signed by the government, the specific provisions made in such agreement shall prevail over the general provisions contained in the Income Tax Act. The CBDT vide

MONIKA RATHORE,GWALIOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1, MORENA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2023-24

5. That the claim of FTC was made by the assessee in terms of section 90 of the Income Tax Act. It is a settled principle that where is there is special agreement/ DTAA signed by the government, the specific provisions made in such agreement shall prevail over the general provisions contained in the Income Tax Act. The CBDT vide

DINESH KUMAR GUPTA,AGRA vs. ITO, AGRA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

40A(3) of the IT Act 1961 but the expenses have been allowed by the AO. Hence the amount of Rs. 18,21,313/- is liable to be disallowed and added back to the income of the assessee. I therefore, have reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax of Rs, 18,21,313/-has escaped assessment within

AVNEESH KUMAR CHATURVEDI,AGRA vs. I.T.O-2(2), AGRA

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us[Assessment Year: 2008-09]

disallowance out of the expenses incurred on Diwali, Salary expense, Miscellaneous expense, and tour and travelling expenses. A notice under section 148 was issued on 19.03.2014 to the assessee in respect of two issues- one, the difference of Rs.3,61,123/- noticed by the A.O. between the figures of gross receipts and the contract receipts as per the TDS certificates