SURYA MERCHANTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the above appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 40A(3). Rule 6DD is not exhaustive but illustrative. 4 6. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Limited Vs. CIT reported in 187 ITR 688 and NTPC Vs. CIT reported in 229 ITR 383 submitted that the above additional grounds being

INCOME TAX OFFICER, C.R. BUILDING, ITO vs. SUNITA GOLD AND DIAMONDS PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

sections": [ "143(3)", "143(2)", "142(1)", "68", "115BBE", "40A(3)", "270A" ], "issues": "Whether cash deposits made during demonetization

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)

40A(2)(b). While it is so, the action of the Revenue in disallowing the certain portion of the expenditure is not justified unless the revenue demonstrates that the transaction is primarily a device to evade tax. 15.13. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Walchand & Co. (P.) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 381 held that

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

40a(ia) for alleged failure to deduct TDS u/s 194C of the Act amounting to Rs. 5063.08 crores, it can be seen that in the course of business of manufacturing two wheelers, the assessee places purchase orders on vendors of certain customized intermediary products like wheel assembly, seat assembly, etc. While placing the aforesaid purchase orders to the vendors

M/S. RELIGARE CAPITAL MARKETS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

68. The AD did seek the A's explanation on this score. Hence ground 2.6 is also dismissed. Ground 3: Grounds of appeal related to disallowance of legal and professional expenses of Rs. 42,092,318: 3.1 That on facts and circumstances of the case and law, the AD has erred in disallowing legal and professional expenses

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-11, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit as per provisions of section 40A

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-11, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit as per provisions of section 40A

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS ,GAUTAM BUDH NAGER vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit as per provisions of section 40A

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTONS ,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT CENTAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit as per provisions of section 40A

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTIONS,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-11, NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit as per provisions of section 40A

SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION,GAUTAM BUDH NAGER vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 , NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit as per provisions of section 40A

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit as per provisions of section 40A

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit as per provisions of section 40A

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit as per provisions of section 40A

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit as per provisions of section 40A

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit as per provisions of section 40A

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, NOIDA vs. SHIV SHAKTI CONSTRUCTION, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, all the Revenue’s Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

68 18 + 24 9,15,19,864 (28.68%) + 3,85,454 + 1.47,75,588 From the above table it can be seen that in a case of the appellant if the disallowances are made on account of alleged Bogus expenses and expenses incurred in cash above prescribed limit as per provisions of section 40A

DE DIAMOND ELECTRIC INDIA PVT LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT SPECIAL RANGE - 3, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

section 40A(2) cant be pressed into service where as in extant case not only due tax is deducted u/s 195 of Rs 68