THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S VRV BREWERIES & BOTTELING

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

section 40A(2)(b)(iv) read with the explanation. According to Mr. Vohra, a bare reading of the said provisions would indicate, that the Assessing Officer would have jurisdiction to disallow

KEC DELCO DUSTAN (JV),GURGAON vs. ITO, WARD- 2(3), GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhua.Y..: 2015-16

disallowed expenditure @ 4% of the total expenses incurred towards KEC International Ltd. by invoking the provisions of section 40A(2)(b

KEC TRIVENI KPIPL (JV),GURGAON vs. ITO, WARD- 2(3), GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhua.Y..: 2015-16

disallowed expenditure @ 4% of the total expenses incurred towards KEC International Ltd. by invoking the provisions of section 40A(2)(b

KEC SIDHARTH (JV),GURGAON vs. ITO, WARD- 2(3), GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhua.Y..: 2015-16

disallowed expenditure @ 4% of the total expenses incurred towards KEC International Ltd. by invoking the provisions of section 40A(2)(b

KEC-VARAHA-KHAZANA (JV),GURUGRAM vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), GURUGRAM

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhua.Y..: 2015-16

disallowed expenditure @ 4% of the total expenses incurred towards KEC International Ltd. by invoking the provisions of section 40A(2)(b

HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal No. 2424/Del/ 2015 filed by the revenue in assessment year 2010-11 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

b) of section 40A (2) of the Act. Related parties are to be considered in terms of provisions of sec. 40A (2) of the Act and not as mentioned in AS-18 issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountant. Thus, we are of the view that the provisions of section 40A (2) do not apply to the present case. Further

. AMSERVE CONSULTANTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

In the result both the appeals of the assesses are allowed

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddyay: 2009-10

disallowance to the extent of 10% payment under Section 40A(2)(b) of the Act . Under the circumstances, disallowance made

HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-11, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No. 6990/Del/2017 (A.Y 2013-14)

b) of section 40A (2) of the Act. Related parties are to be considered in terms of provisions of sec. 40A (2) of the Act and not as mentioned in AS-18 issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountant. Thus, we are of the view that the provisions of section 40A (2) do not apply to the present case. Further

M/S. RELIGARE FINVEST LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. Acit, Circle-15(1), New Delhi Religare Finvest Ltd., D-3, P3B, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi Pan : Aafcs6801H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Rohit Garg, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Ca Respondent By Sh. F.R. Meena, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 28.03.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 28.04.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xviii, New Delhi, Dated 28.02.2013, Raising The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

disallowance of Rs. 81,85,383 made under section 40A(2)(b) of the Act on account of rental payments

ITO, WARD- 2(3), GURGAON vs. KEC KIEL JV, GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Pawan Singh(Hearing In Virtual Court) Income Tax Officer M/S Kec Kiel Jv, 8Th Ward-2(3), Floor, Building No. 9A, Vs Gurgaon Dlf Cyber City Phase-Iii, Gurgaon Revenue / Appellant Assessee/Respondent

section has no application to income aspect of the assessee. As the assessing Officer has made disallowance u/s 40A(2)(b

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DELHI PRESS SAMACHAR PATRA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 1 of the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

disallowance under section 40A(2)(b). The disallowance based on quantum of expenditure incurred rather than the fair market value

M/S. TRINITY GLOBAL ENTERPRISES LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

disallowance made under section 40A(2) - High Court upheld order passed by Tribunal - Whether, on facts, SLP filed against decision of High Court was to be dismissed.” 20. Hence, keeping in view the entire facts and circumstance of the case, we hold that the provisions of Section 40A(2)(b

DCIT,C-11(1), NEW DELHI vs. HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat

40A(2) of the Act. It would be pertinent to point out that similar disallowance made in the immediately preceding two assessment years, viz. AY 2010-11 and 2011-12 was also reversed by the Hon’ble Tribunal, following the aforementioned order of the Tribunal for assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09. While deciding the appeal for the assessment

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

b) of Expln. 2 to Sub-section (5) also refers to cash payment but that too is not to the employee, though undoubtedly for his benefit. 9. For the above reasons, we hold that cash payments by an assessee to his/its employees do not fall within the ambit of Section 40(a)(v) or Section 40A

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

b) of Expln. 2 to Sub-section (5) also refers to cash payment but that too is not to the employee, though undoubtedly for his benefit. 9. For the above reasons, we hold that cash payments by an assessee to his/its employees do not fall within the ambit of Section 40(a)(v) or Section 40A

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

b) of Expln. 2 to Sub-section (5) also refers to cash payment but that too is not to the employee, though undoubtedly for his benefit. 9. For the above reasons, we hold that cash payments by an assessee to his/its employees do not fall within the ambit of Section 40(a)(v) or Section 40A

KEC ASIAKOM UB JV,GURUGRAM vs. ITO, WARD- 2(3), GURUGRAM

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

disallowance u/s 40A(2)(b) of the Act by opining that the assessee should have earned income from sub-contracting. At 40A(2), which is as under:- ‘40A(2)(a) Where the assessee incurs any expenditure in respect of which payment has been or is to be made to any person referred to in clause (b) of this sub-section

KEC- PLR- KPIPL JV,GURGAON vs. ITO, WARD- 2(3), GURUGRAM

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

disallowance u/s 40A(2)(b) of the Act by opining that the assessee should have earned income from sub-contracting. At 40A(2), which is as under:- ‘40A(2)(a) Where the assessee incurs any expenditure in respect of which payment has been or is to be made to any person referred to in clause (b) of this sub-section