THE ACIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.NITTA GELATINE INDIA LTD, COCHIN

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

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

disallowance under sub-section (3) of section 40A shall be made and no payment shall be deemed to be the profits

SRI.VINU SELVARAJ M/S. RADHAS TEXTILES,KOLLAM vs. THE ITO, WD-4, KOLLAM

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

Bench: Shri George George K.

section 40A(3) of the Act. 5.2 Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer by making disallowance u/s. 40A

M/S THE REGIONAL AGRO INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT COOPERATIVE OF KERALA LTD,KANNUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KANNUR RANGE

Bench: The Tribunal Within The Time Prescribed. Accordingly, The Delay Of 69 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Is Condoned.

3. The lower authorities erred in upholding the disallowance under section 40A(3) of the Act in respect of payments

THOMSON GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOMBODINJAMAKKAL vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), THRISSUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2014-15 Thomson Granites Pvt. Ltd. .......... Appellant X/616, Kambodinjamakkal Thazhekkad P.O., Thrissur 680697 [Pan: Aacct0876E] Vs. Acit, Circle - 1(1) .......... Respondent Aayakar Bhavan, Municipal Office Road Sakthan Thampuran Nagar Thrissur 680001 Appellant By: Shri Aneesh Vishwanathan, Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 09.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.03.2025

disallowed the expenditure incurred in cash on fuel or Rs. 4,44,47,632/- u/s. 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) and remuneration to the Directors of Rs. 72,00,000/- invoking provisions of section

CANON GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-1(1), THRISSUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2013-14

section 40A(3) of the Act for disallowing the deduction it should be expenditure made to a person in a day and not the total

SRI.C.SHAJI,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ITO, WARD-2(1), TRIVNDRUM

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

disallowance of Rs.2,81,63,141/- as cash purchase in excess of Rs.20,000/- citing the provisions of Section 40A(3

M/S.VIJAYA PALACE,,KOLLAM vs. THE ITO, KOLLAM

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

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

section 40(a)(ia) which was inserted by Finance (No.2) Act, 2014 with effect from 1.4.2015 cannot be made applicable to the assessment year 2013-14 which is in the present case. Being so, we are inclined to dismiss the alternate plea made by the Ld. AR. 9 The next ground is with regard to disallowance made u/s. 40A(3

JULIUS RUBEN,KOCHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

Disallowance of depreciation under section 32 and capital expenditure under section 35AD on cash payment 7 ITA No.219/Coch/2025. Sri.Julius Ruben. Under the existing provisions of the Act, revenue expenditure incurred in cash exceeding certain monetary threshold is not allowable as per sub-section (3) of section 40A

THE COMMONWEALTH TRUST INDIA LTD,KOZHIKKODE vs. THE JTCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, KOZHIKKODE, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, the appeals as well as Stay Applications filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

40A(3). During the appeal proceedings, the appellant had given details of entire payments and it is seen that many of the payments are made by cheque but description is given as `paid in cash’. Also many of the amounts are merely book entries. On examination of these amounts, only the following payments are clearly disallowable under section

THE COMMONWEALTH TRUST INDIA LTD,KOZHIKKODE vs. THE JTCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, KOZHIKKODE, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, the appeals as well as Stay Applications filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

40A(3). During the appeal proceedings, the appellant had given details of entire payments and it is seen that many of the payments are made by cheque but description is given as `paid in cash’. Also many of the amounts are merely book entries. On examination of these amounts, only the following payments are clearly disallowable under section

THE KALAKKODU SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. THE ITO, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the stay petition filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shrigeorge George K.And Shrilaxmi Prasad Sahu(Assessment Year:2018-19

disallowances made under section 32, 40(a)(ia), 40A(3), 438 etc. of the Act and other specific disallowances. relatedto

MINA WOOD INDUSTRIES,MATTANNUR vs. ITO , WARD-3, KANNUR

In the result, appeal of the appellant stands allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Keshav Dubey, Jm Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mina Wood Industries .......... Appellant Iii/656 B, Kallur, Matannur Kannur 670702 [Pan: Aagmf2716D] Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Ward -3, Kannur Appellant By: ------- None ------- Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 30.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.02.2025

3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) at a total income of Rs. 15,00,360/-. While doing so, the AO made disallowance of Rs. 13,06,452/- invoking the provisions of section 40A

P. SURENDRAN,TRIVANDRUM vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm P. Surendran Sukanya Bhavan Asst. Cit-1(2) Vadayakkadu, Kunnukuzhy, P.O., Thiruvananthapuram Vs. Thiruvananthapuram-695 035

disallowance u/s. 40A(3) made by the Assessing Officer in respect of the capital expenditure incurred by the appellant. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate the fact that section

VICT PLY INDUSTRIES,KANNUR vs. ITO, WARD 4, KNNUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2015-16 Victply Industries .......... Appellant Ap Vii/585B, Industrial Development Park Andoor, Parassinikkadavu, Kannur, Kerala [Pan: Aagfv 5189 D] Vs. Ito, Ward-4, Kannur .......... Respondent

section 40A(3) and it can be treated as a government and no disallowance attracted. Reliance in this regard can be placed

M/S.SB PUBLICATIONS P. LTD,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO, WD-1(1), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed, as indicated above

Bench: Shri George George K

40A(3) of the I.T.Act. (b) Peak credit in the name of Directors amounting to Rs.85,900. (c) Lumpsum disallowance of expenditure of Rs.66,712. We shall take up for adjudicate the issues as under. ITA No.273/Coch/2018. 2 M/s.S.B.Publications Pvt. Ltd. (a) Disallowance of Rs.16,974 by invoking the provisions of section

KKR AGRO MILLS P. LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2010-11 Kkr Agro Mills Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, Iii/678, Kkr Building, Okkal Kalady, Circle – 1(2), Ernakulam – 683 550. Kochi. Pan : Aabck 6542 K Assessee Respondent

section 40A(2) it is clear that to attract the disallowance, the expenditure incurred should be excessive and unreasonable. In the given it is factually established that the price paid is not unreasonably excessive and the transaction is not done with an intention to evade tax. Therefore in our considered view no disallowance is warranted in respect of the price

PANICHIKANDY MOHANDASAN,KASARGOD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1,KANNUR RANGE, KANNUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

3. The disallowances, inter alia, with which we are concerned include the disallowance of Rs. 16,40,710/- being the payment made to Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB) invoking provisions of section 40A

KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. THE D CIT, CIR-1(1), TVM, TVM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

disallowed u/s. 40(a)(iib) of the Act. Accordingly, the Pr. CIT set aside the assessment order dated 26/12/2016 as it was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue by invoking the provisions of section 263 of the Act. For this proposition, the Pr. CIT relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Jawahar Bhattacharjee