DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

40a(is) vide the Finance Act 2014, w.e.f. 01.04.2015 thereby reducing the disallowance on no-deduction of TDS on payment to resident from 100% of expenditure to 30%, is curative in nature and hence applicable retrospectively. Further, we place reliance on decision of Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in case of NeenaKaul v. Asstt. CIT [IT Appeal No.1386

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

40a(is) vide the Finance Act 2014, w.e.f. 01.04.2015 thereby reducing the disallowance on no-deduction of TDS on payment to resident from 100% of expenditure to 30%, is curative in nature and hence applicable retrospectively. Further, we place reliance on decision of Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in case of NeenaKaul v. Asstt. CIT [IT Appeal No.1386

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(ia) of the Act for failure to deduct TDS thereon. 11. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.6,70,864/- on account of disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of legal & professional expenses for failure to deduct TDS. 12. Whether, on the facts and circumstances

M/S GALAXY DWELLERS (P) LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri O. P. Kanti.T. Appeal No. 5293/Del/2013 & I.T. Appeal No.3029/Del/2014 Assessment Years : 2006–2007 & 2007-08. M/S. Galaxy Dwellers (P) Ltd., Dy. Commissioner C/O. M/S. Rra Taxindia, Vs. Of Income Tax, D–28, South Extension, Part–I, Central Circle : 4, N E W D E L H I – 110 049. New Delhi. Pan : Aaccg 3782 C (Appellant) (Respondent)

disallowance under section 40A(3) can be made even when genuineness of payment is not doubted. Finally, he relied upon detailed findings of learned CIT (Appeals) and requested for upholding the same. 8. We have gone through the orders of the authorities below as well as the submissions made by both the sides before us. 9

SHAKTI SINGH GULIA,BAHADURGARH vs. ITO, WARD- 4, ROHTAK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

Section 40A(3) of the Act when cogent evidences are available to prove the bona fides of the cash transactions in question together with identity of recipients. 8.3 The ld. counsel thus urged for appropriate relief by way of cancellation of the disallowance carried out by the Assessing Officer and erroneously confirmed by the CIT(A). 9

SHAKTI SINGH GULIA,BAHADURGARH vs. ITO, WARD- 4, ROHTAK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

Section 40A(3) of the Act when cogent evidences are available to prove the bona fides of the cash transactions in question together with identity of recipients. 8.3 The ld. counsel thus urged for appropriate relief by way of cancellation of the disallowance carried out by the Assessing Officer and erroneously confirmed by the CIT(A). 9

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

40A(2) of the I.T. Act. As regards the balance sum, i.e., ` 59,30,231/- (84,01,160 – 24,70,929) he applied the provisions of Section 35A of the I.T. Act. Thus in consonance with the provisions of Section 35A, the CIT(A) allowed 1/14th of the said amount, i.e., ` 4,23,588/-. Resultantly, the CIT(A) in fact

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S V.R.V. BREWERIES & BOTTELI

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

40A(2) of the I.T. Act. As regards the balance sum, i.e., ` 59,30,231/- (84,01,160 – 24,70,929) he applied the provisions of Section 35A of the I.T. Act. Thus in consonance with the provisions of Section 35A, the CIT(A) allowed 1/14th of the said amount, i.e., ` 4,23,588/-. Resultantly, the CIT(A) in fact

KEDAR NATH SAWHNEY ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-34(1), NEW DELHI

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

disallowance under sub-section (3) of section 40A shall be made and no payment shall be deemed to be the profits and gains of business or profession under sub-section (3A) of section 40A where a payment or aggregate of payments made to a person in a day, otherwise than by an account payee cheque drawn on a bank

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S XANSA INDIA LTD., NOIDA

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

disallowance of Rs.28,22,882/- made out of legal and professional charges expenses by incorrectly holding that the said payments made to various non-residents was not taxable in India and that the AO was not correct in invoking the provisions of section 40a(ia)of the I.T. Act". 3. First we deal with the appeal of the revenue. Briefly

J.D. WINES,GURGAON vs. ADDL. CIT, GURGAON

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

disallow the deduction claimed as expenditure in respect of which payment is not made by crossed cheque or crossed bank draft. The payment by crossed cheque or crossed bank draft is insisted upon to enable the assessing authority to ascertain whether the payment was genuine or whether it was out of income from undisclosed sources. The terms of section 40A

DAAWAT FOODS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) & Daawat Foods Ltd., Vs. Acit, Unit No.134, 1St Floor, Central Circle – 19, Rectangle I, New Delhi Saket District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110 017 Pan No. Aaccd 3698 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. Ms. Deepashree Rao, C.A. Shri Vibhu Gupta, C.A. Revenue By Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Cit-D.R Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/01/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-Xxxiii, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09. Ita Nos.4157 & 4158/Del/2013 Daawat Foods Ltd Vs. Acit A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 2 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under:

Section 40A(3) 8. That, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the A.O. and subsequently CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that the assessee has made cash payments to various concern which are to be disallowed U/s 40A(3) of the Act. 9

DAAWAT FOODS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) & Daawat Foods Ltd., Vs. Acit, Unit No.134, 1St Floor, Central Circle – 19, Rectangle I, New Delhi Saket District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110 017 Pan No. Aaccd 3698 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. Ms. Deepashree Rao, C.A. Shri Vibhu Gupta, C.A. Revenue By Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Cit-D.R Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/01/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-Xxxiii, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09. Ita Nos.4157 & 4158/Del/2013 Daawat Foods Ltd Vs. Acit A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 2 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under:

Section 40A(3) 8. That, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the A.O. and subsequently CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that the assessee has made cash payments to various concern which are to be disallowed U/s 40A(3) of the Act. 9

HERO MOTO CORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. NEAC, DELHI

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

40A(2) of the Act. 7.3 Without Prejudice, that the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in disallowing j purchases to the extent of Rs. 23.52 crores, with respect to purchases from aforesaid? related parties (in terms of AS-18) for which no comparable instance supporting the allegation of excessive payment, was available, on pure estimate basis

NIKHIL JAIN (L/H OF BEENA JAIN),NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-31(1), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2016-17 Nikhil Jain Vs Acit, (L/H Of Beena Jain), Circle-31(1), H-41, Green Park Extn., New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aagpj1088H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. Krishnan, Advocate & Shri Puneet Rai, Ca Revenue By : Shri Sanjiv Mahajan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.04.2021 Order

disallowance out of that expense. He submitted that as per the proviso to section 40A(3), in the case of payment made for plying, hiring or leasing goods carriages, the amount has been enhanced to Rs.35,000/- per day and not Rs.20,000/-. Therefore, the payments which did not exceed Rs.35,000/- are not coming within the purview of section

GEO CONVEST LTD vs. DCIT CIRCLE-12 (1),

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kant

section 9 and article 12 of the Indo US DTAA and that since no deduction of tax at source was made of the payments above, the amount is disallowable u/s 40a

DCIT CIRCLE-12 (1) vs. GEO CONNECT LTD,

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kant

section 9 and article 12 of the Indo US DTAA and that since no deduction of tax at source was made of the payments above, the amount is disallowable u/s 40a

M/S GEO CONNECT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kant

section 9 and article 12 of the Indo US DTAA and that since no deduction of tax at source was made of the payments above, the amount is disallowable u/s 40a