M/S ESSARGEE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO -1 (5), BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Essargee Construction Ito 1(5) Pvt. Ltd. Bhopal Vs. A-10, Mezenine Floor Essarjee House Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaace 8852F Assessee By Shri Manoj Fadnis, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 31.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 03.08.2023

section 40A(3) of the Act. 5. He has further submitted that the AO has not disputed the genuineness of the transactions as it is duly recorded in the sale deeds and payment was made to the land owners who are parties to the registered sale deed. Thus, the transactions and genuineness of the payment of cash

THE DCIT1(1), INDORE vs. SHRI RAVI ARORA, INDORE

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2011-12 Dcit-5(1), Shri Ravi Arora, Indore 1007, Khatiwala Tank, बनाम/ 236, Indraprasth Tower, 6, M.G. Road, Vs. Indore. (Revenue / Appellant) (Assessee / Respondent) Pan: Agdpa8921H Assessee By Shri Yash Kukreja, Ca & Shri Hitesh Chimnani, Adv & Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri P.K.Mishra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 04.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2023

5) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 14,34,307/- without appreciating the facts without considering the fact that the assessee had made payments over Rs. 20,000/- in cash to various persons in contravention to provisions of section 40A

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S SURYA INFRA VENTURE PVT. LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

5%. Accordingly, additions made by the Ld. AO on account of disallowance of various expenses were not justified even on this count. Thus, considering the entire aspect of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that there was no justification for making additions on account of disallowance of various expenses and also on account of disallowance under Section 40A

THE AIT,ENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. SURYA INFRAVENTURE P LTD, INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

5%. Accordingly, additions made by the Ld. AO on account of disallowance of various expenses were not justified even on this count. Thus, considering the entire aspect of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that there was no justification for making additions on account of disallowance of various expenses and also on account of disallowance under Section 40A

THE ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1), INDORE vs. M/S SURYA INFRA VENTURE PVT. LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

5%. Accordingly, additions made by the Ld. AO on account of disallowance of various expenses were not justified even on this count. Thus, considering the entire aspect of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that there was no justification for making additions on account of disallowance of various expenses and also on account of disallowance under Section 40A

M/S ESSARGEE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT- 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assesse for A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

disallowance of Rs.17,50,000/- u/s 40A(3) of the Act. The assesse challenged the action of the AO before the CIT(A) but cold not succeed. 5. Before the Tribunal Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that one Shri Esam Singh Morya has filed a suit in the court of Additional District Judge, Bhopal against the sale

M/S ESSARGEE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT- 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assesse for A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

disallowance of Rs.17,50,000/- u/s 40A(3) of the Act. The assesse challenged the action of the AO before the CIT(A) but cold not succeed. 5. Before the Tribunal Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that one Shri Esam Singh Morya has filed a suit in the court of Additional District Judge, Bhopal against the sale

M/S ESSARGEE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT- 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assesse for A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

disallowance of Rs.17,50,000/- u/s 40A(3) of the Act. The assesse challenged the action of the AO before the CIT(A) but cold not succeed. 5. Before the Tribunal Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that one Shri Esam Singh Morya has filed a suit in the court of Additional District Judge, Bhopal against the sale

M/S ESSARGEE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT- 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assesse for A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

disallowance of Rs.17,50,000/- u/s 40A(3) of the Act. The assesse challenged the action of the AO before the CIT(A) but cold not succeed. 5. Before the Tribunal Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that one Shri Esam Singh Morya has filed a suit in the court of Additional District Judge, Bhopal against the sale

M/S ESSARGEE CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT-1 (1), BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assesse for A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

disallowance of Rs.17,50,000/- u/s 40A(3) of the Act. The assesse challenged the action of the AO before the CIT(A) but cold not succeed. 5. Before the Tribunal Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that one Shri Esam Singh Morya has filed a suit in the court of Additional District Judge, Bhopal against the sale

THE ACIT 3(2), INDORE vs. M/S. SIMRAN DEVELOPERS, INDORE

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ito-3(2), M/S. Simran Developers Indore 402, Mark Building, बनाम/ Saket Square, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Assessee) Pan: Ackfs 1946 B Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Assessee By None Date Of Hearing 16.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18.04.2023

section 40A(3). Therefore, we are of the view that the disallowance u/s 40A(3) is attracted in this case. We uphold the action of Page 14 of 16 Simran Developers Assessment year 2014-15 Ld. AO and so also the disallowance made by him. Thus, this ground is allowed. 19. Resultantly, this appeal of revenue is partly allowed

ACIT-2(1), UJJAIN, UJJAIN vs. M/S RUCHI J OIL PVT. LTD,, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal ITANo

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2014-15

5. It may kindly be appreciated that even presuming but not accepting that there was a failure on the part of the Respondent to report the transaction, the Respondent had a reasonable cause and penalty imposed for alleged failure in view of provisions of section 273B r.w. section 271AA, was rightly quashed

THE ACIT-2(1), UJJAIN vs. SHRI JASWINDAR SINGH OBEROI, UJJAIN

In the result, appeal of revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

disallowance under section 40A(3) shall not applicable. In the light of above , the Ld. CIT (A) held that the payment is made by the Appellant to Government Authorized agents is falling under exceptions provided under rule 6DD. The Ld. CIT (A) further observed that the ledger account of payment has been produced during the course of appellate proceedings

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 2(1), INDORE vs. M/S. IDEAL ASHIYANA PRIVATE LIMITED, INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2013-14 Acit-2(1) M/S Ideal Ashiyana Indore Private Ltd., Indore बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Assessee) Pan: Aadci 0029 F Assessee By Shri Pankaj Shah, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit-Dr Date Of Final Hearing 27.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 15.12.2022

disallowance u/s 40A(3). 13. Ld. AO has made this addition by observing and holding thus: “5. Cash payment more than Rs.20,000/- under section

MRS. JATINDER KAUR BHATIA,KHANDWA vs. ACIT- (CENTRAL) UJJAIN, UJJAIN

Appeals are dismissed and assessee’s

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

section Page 5 of 46 Mrs. Jatinder Kaur Bhatia ITA Nos. 206 & 207/Ind/2023 & ITANo.227/Ind/2023 AY 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19 40A(3) and that all actual payments made by assessee were recorded in assessee’s books of account and were verifiable. The assessee also filed copies of Ledger A/c of Hamali payments as print-outs of books of account

DCIT- (CENTRAL)-3, INDORE vs. MRS. JATINDER KAUR BHATIA, KHANDWA

Appeals are dismissed and assessee’s

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

section Page 5 of 46 Mrs. Jatinder Kaur Bhatia ITA Nos. 206 & 207/Ind/2023 & ITANo.227/Ind/2023 AY 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19 40A(3) and that all actual payments made by assessee were recorded in assessee’s books of account and were verifiable. The assessee also filed copies of Ledger A/c of Hamali payments as print-outs of books of account

DCIT- (CENTRAL)-3, INDORE vs. MRS. JATINDER KAUR BHATIA, KHANDWA

Appeals are dismissed and assessee’s

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

section Page 5 of 46 Mrs. Jatinder Kaur Bhatia ITA Nos. 206 & 207/Ind/2023 & ITANo.227/Ind/2023 AY 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2018-19 40A(3) and that all actual payments made by assessee were recorded in assessee’s books of account and were verifiable. The assessee also filed copies of Ledger A/c of Hamali payments as print-outs of books of account

THE ACIT,CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S PRAKASH OILS LTD., DHAR

In the result, the above captioned appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

5. Whether, the Ld. CIT(A) has not erred in law and on facts by holding fulfillment of conditions u/s 194C(6) is isolation as sufficient while condition u/s 194C(7) were not fulfilled while deleting disallowance made by AO u/s 40a(ia) of Rs.5,21,63,633/-” 11. The ld. CIT-DR submitted that the ld. First appellate authority