BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

61 results for “section 68”+ Section 194Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai220Delhi137Bangalore113Kolkata99Chennai61Ahmedabad57Jaipur28Raipur24Karnataka23Cuttack21Hyderabad20Indore16Cochin16Rajkot14Visakhapatnam10Surat10Allahabad9Pune8Nagpur8Lucknow6Jodhpur5Kerala5Chandigarh4Agra3Ranchi2Rajasthan1SC1Amritsar1

Key Topics

Section 4068Disallowance38Addition to Income32TDS31Section 194C25Section 13924Section 194H24Section 14A24Deduction24Section 153A

GOPINATHAN,CUMBUM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THENI

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

ITA 25/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 25/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 Shri Gopinathan, The Income Tax Officer, No. 37/4, L.F. Road, Opp. To Vs. Ward 1, Government Hospital, Cumbum, Theni. Theni District 625 516. [Pan:Ardpg2494G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Gopalan (Irs) Ret. Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 19.07.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.08.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi, Dated 12.11.2021 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012-13. Besides Challenging Confirmation Of Addition Of ₹. 4,66,455/- On Account Of Alleged Infringement Of Section 194C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short], The Assessee Has Also Challenged The Rectification Order Passed Under Section 154 Of The Act On The Pretext

For Appellant: Shri G. Gopalan (IRS) Ret. JCITFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

Showing 1–20 of 61 · Page 1 of 4

20
Section 143(3)19
Section 201(1)19
Section 148
Section 154
Section 194C
Section 194C(6)
Section 194C(7)
Section 40

68,000/- (₹.1,55,000/-), on dated 16.09.2011 15.12.2011 & 18.01.2012 (₹.1,56,500/- each), which are liable to be disallowed since the assessee has not deducted TDS as prescribed under section 194C

KAVYA TRAVEL PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO CORPORATE WARD 4 (4), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for ay: 2013-14

ITA 1790/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms.R.Anitha, JCITFor Respondent: 17.09.2019
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

section 194C has no application and the appellant is not required to deduct any TDS on such vehicle maintenance expenses. The disallowance made by the assessing officer is therefore liable to be deleted. 9. The appellant therefore prays that the disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia) on interest paid to NBFCs (Rs.57,64,891), payments to other travels (Rs.1

KAVYA TRAVEL PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO CORPORATE WARD 4 (4), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for ay: 2013-14

ITA 1791/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms.R.Anitha, JCITFor Respondent: 17.09.2019
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

section 194C has no application and the appellant is not required to deduct any TDS on such vehicle maintenance expenses. The disallowance made by the assessing officer is therefore liable to be deleted. 9. The appellant therefore prays that the disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia) on interest paid to NBFCs (Rs.57,64,891), payments to other travels (Rs.1

KONDA SRINIVASAIYER DAMODHARAN KISHORI LAL ,MADURAI vs. PCIT-1, MADURAI

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

ITA 290/CHNY/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jan 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 290/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Konda Srinivasaiyer The Principal Commissioner Of Damodharan Kishori Lal, V. Income Tax-1, No. 17 & 18, Kakathoppu Madurai. Street, Madurai – 625 001. [Pan: Afbpk-6965-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca & Shri. Shrenik Choradia, Aca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.12.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.01.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCA &For Respondent: Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40Section 68

68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act and also disallowance of 50% of sale promotional expenses. The case has been subsequently taken up for revision proceedings by the PCIT, Madurai-1, and a show cause notice u/s. 263 of the Act dated 03.02.2022 was served on the assessee. In the said show cause notice, the PCIT had taken up the issue

VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, all the appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 754/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate
Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

68,29,295/- 2009-10 2010-11 ₹. 2,96,96,493/- Vodafone Mobile Services Limited 2011-12 2012-13 ₹. 67,72,18,080/- 2013-14 2014-15 ₹. 38,81,04,344/- By holding that the discount offered by the assessee to their distributors as commission, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee was in default under section

VODAFONE CELLULAR LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, all the appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2804/CHNY/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate
Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

68,29,295/- 2009-10 2010-11 ₹. 2,96,96,493/- Vodafone Mobile Services Limited 2011-12 2012-13 ₹. 67,72,18,080/- 2013-14 2014-15 ₹. 38,81,04,344/- By holding that the discount offered by the assessee to their distributors as commission, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee was in default under section

VODAFONE CELLULAR LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, all the appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 376/CHNY/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate
Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

68,29,295/- 2009-10 2010-11 ₹. 2,96,96,493/- Vodafone Mobile Services Limited 2011-12 2012-13 ₹. 67,72,18,080/- 2013-14 2014-15 ₹. 38,81,04,344/- By holding that the discount offered by the assessee to their distributors as commission, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee was in default under section

VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, all the appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 755/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate
Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

68,29,295/- 2009-10 2010-11 ₹. 2,96,96,493/- Vodafone Mobile Services Limited 2011-12 2012-13 ₹. 67,72,18,080/- 2013-14 2014-15 ₹. 38,81,04,344/- By holding that the discount offered by the assessee to their distributors as commission, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee was in default under section

VODAFONE SOUTH LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO TDS, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1414/CHNY/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate
Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

68,29,295/- 2009-10 2010-11 ₹. 2,96,96,493/- Vodafone Mobile Services Limited 2011-12 2012-13 ₹. 67,72,18,080/- 2013-14 2014-15 ₹. 38,81,04,344/- By holding that the discount offered by the assessee to their distributors as commission, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee was in default under section

VODAFONE CELLULAR LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, all the appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1644/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate
Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

68,29,295/- 2009-10 2010-11 ₹. 2,96,96,493/- Vodafone Mobile Services Limited 2011-12 2012-13 ₹. 67,72,18,080/- 2013-14 2014-15 ₹. 38,81,04,344/- By holding that the discount offered by the assessee to their distributors as commission, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee was in default under section

VODAFONE CELLULAR LIMITED,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, all the appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 377/CHNY/2015[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate
Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

68,29,295/- 2009-10 2010-11 ₹. 2,96,96,493/- Vodafone Mobile Services Limited 2011-12 2012-13 ₹. 67,72,18,080/- 2013-14 2014-15 ₹. 38,81,04,344/- By holding that the discount offered by the assessee to their distributors as commission, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee was in default under section

VODAFONE SOUTH LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO TDS, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1415/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate
Section 131Section 133ASection 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

68,29,295/- 2009-10 2010-11 ₹. 2,96,96,493/- Vodafone Mobile Services Limited 2011-12 2012-13 ₹. 67,72,18,080/- 2013-14 2014-15 ₹. 38,81,04,344/- By holding that the discount offered by the assessee to their distributors as commission, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee was in default under section

ALBERT & CO. P. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO CORPORATE WARD 6(1), CHENNAI

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2578/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Mr. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. V. Sreedevi, JCIT
Section 201(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40

68,748 694,48,602 507,79,854 borrowings Loans and advances 41148454 983,80,578 572,32,124 to Directors 4.3.5 On the contrary, the increase in reserve and surplus was only Rs.31,65,460/-. There have not been any significant changes in the sources and application. The Appellant did not make available cash flow statements proving that

ALBERT & CO. P LTD. ,CHENNAI vs. ITO CORPORATE WARD 6(1) , CHENNAI

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1618/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Mr. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. V. Sreedevi, JCIT
Section 201(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40

68,748 694,48,602 507,79,854 borrowings Loans and advances 41148454 983,80,578 572,32,124 to Directors 4.3.5 On the contrary, the increase in reserve and surplus was only Rs.31,65,460/-. There have not been any significant changes in the sources and application. The Appellant did not make available cash flow statements proving that

ALBERT & CO. P. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO CORPORATE WARD 6(1), CHENNAI

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2577/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Mr. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. V. Sreedevi, JCIT
Section 201(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40

68,748 694,48,602 507,79,854 borrowings Loans and advances 41148454 983,80,578 572,32,124 to Directors 4.3.5 On the contrary, the increase in reserve and surplus was only Rs.31,65,460/-. There have not been any significant changes in the sources and application. The Appellant did not make available cash flow statements proving that

M/S. RAJA TRANSPORTS,,ARIYALUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1 (1),, TRICHY

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 619/CHNY/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.722/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Raja Transports, Income Tax, Circle 1(1), No. 34, Trichy Main Road, No. 44, Williams Road, Cantonment, Ariyalur 621 704. Trichy 620 001. [Pan:Aaefr4385H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.619/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 M/S. Raja Transports, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 34, Trichy Main Road, Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Ariyalur 621 704. Trichy 620 001. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Assessee By Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate &’ : Shri N. Arjunraj, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.12.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.02.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Trichy, Dated 19.03.2020 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2

For Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194CSection 40

section 194C of the Act, 30% of ₹.14,78,95,505/- i.e., ₹.4,43,68,652/- was disallowed under

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, TRICHY vs. M/S. RAJA TRANSPORTS,, ARIYALUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 722/CHNY/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.722/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Raja Transports, Income Tax, Circle 1(1), No. 34, Trichy Main Road, No. 44, Williams Road, Cantonment, Ariyalur 621 704. Trichy 620 001. [Pan:Aaefr4385H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.619/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 M/S. Raja Transports, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 34, Trichy Main Road, Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Ariyalur 621 704. Trichy 620 001. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Assessee By Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate &’ : Shri N. Arjunraj, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.12.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.02.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Trichy, Dated 19.03.2020 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2

For Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194CSection 40

section 194C of the Act, 30% of ₹.14,78,95,505/- i.e., ₹.4,43,68,652/- was disallowed under

ITO, CHENNAI vs. ALAMELU SURESH, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 410/CHNY/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Mar 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.410/Mds/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-2009)

For Appellant: Dr. Nischal, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 144ASection 194CSection 40Section 44Section 44A

194C. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer has I.T.A.No.410/Mds/2013 :- 3 -: applied the guillotine of Section 40(a) (ia). The details of such payments are listed below: Sl.No Name of Parties Telecast fee expenses 1 Social Media 2,49,079 2 Siegu Solutions Ltd 84,660 3 SAREGAMA 3,42,390 4 Pyramid Saimira 4,07,505 5 New Age Entertainment

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, TUTICORIN vs. VVD & SONS (P) LIMITED, TUTICORIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2152/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2150, 2151 & 2152/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Vvd & Sons (P) Limited, Income Tax, No. 182, Palayamkottai Road, Central Circle 2, Tuticorin 628 008. Madurai. [Pan:Aaacv8438J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit For : Shri M. Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.08.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Three Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, Dated 16.04.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13. 2. The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Delayed By Three Days, For Which, The Revenue Has Filed Affidavits For Condonation Of Delay, To Which The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Not Raised Any Serious Objection.

68,681/- now offered for purchase of coconut through bought-notes. During the search, it was noticed that the following payments were made to family members as 'Salary' for the F.Y 2009-10 under the heads: Salary details Amount in (Rs.) Special Salary 93,65,580 Commission Charges 41,07,910 Total 1,34,73,490 6. After scrutinizing

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, TUTICORIN vs. VVD & SONS (P) LIMITED, TUTICORIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2151/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2150, 2151 & 2152/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Vvd & Sons (P) Limited, Income Tax, No. 182, Palayamkottai Road, Central Circle 2, Tuticorin 628 008. Madurai. [Pan:Aaacv8438J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit For : Shri M. Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 24.08.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Three Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, Dated 16.04.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13. 2. The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Delayed By Three Days, For Which, The Revenue Has Filed Affidavits For Condonation Of Delay, To Which The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Not Raised Any Serious Objection.

68,681/- now offered for purchase of coconut through bought-notes. During the search, it was noticed that the following payments were made to family members as 'Salary' for the F.Y 2009-10 under the heads: Salary details Amount in (Rs.) Special Salary 93,65,580 Commission Charges 41,07,910 Total 1,34,73,490 6. After scrutinizing