THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIT (A) vs. M/S. MANIPAL HEALTH SYSTEMS PVT. LTD.,

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

40A(2) only "legitimate needs of the business" is allowable as 1Income Tax Appellate Tribunal I.T.A No.817/2018 3 expenditure and, as such, the assessing authority rightly disallowed it? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in setting aside the disallowance made under section

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S RAJMAHAL SILKS

The appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

40A(3) can be only on the basis of profit and loss account and only on those expenditures claimed in terms of Section 28 to Section 37 of the Act and the notional presumption of cash payments having been made, disallowance

SMT SAIRA BANU vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,VINEET SARAN

Section 40A(3)? iii. Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that disallowance has to be made 4 under

M/S. KESARVAL BEVERAGES LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSISONER OF

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

disallowed under Section 40A(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for brevity). Aggrieved

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, vs. M/S CORPORATION BANK

In the result, the third substantial question of law is also answered

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

disallowance under Section 40a(ia) and disallowance under Section 36(1)(vii) of the Act. 3. The assessee thereupon filed

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S WIPRO LTD

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

Section 40A(9) of the Act. In other words, the AO disallowed the deduction of the donation made to Khandesh

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI.M. ABDUL ZAHID

Bench: KRISHNA S.DIXIT,PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

disallowed purchases/expenditures in terms of Section 37(1); 7 despite notice the assessee failed to explain as to why certain purchases should not be treated as having been made in violation of the provisions of Section 40A

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI.M ABDUL ZAHID

Bench: KRISHNA S.DIXIT,PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

disallowed purchases/expenditures in terms of Section 37(1); 7 despite notice the assessee failed to explain as to why certain purchases should not be treated as having been made in violation of the provisions of Section 40A

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. M/S JAY MINERALS

Bench: KRISHNA S.DIXIT,PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

disallowed purchases/expenditures in terms of Section 37(1); 7 despite notice the assessee failed to explain as to why certain purchases should not be treated as having been made in violation of the provisions of Section 40A

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. SHRI G BALRAJ, PWD

In the result, question No

Bench: S.N.SATYANARAYANA,JAYANT PATEL

section 40a(ia) could not be applied and the Assessing Officer could not have made the disallowance of the same

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 4 vs. M/S JUPITER

Appeal is allowed in part accordingly

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

disallowance made by assessing authority under Section 40A(2) of the Act alternatively under Section 37 of the Act even

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S FORTUNA PROJECTS

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

disallowance under Section 40A(3) and 40(a)(ia) of the Income - Tax does not arise as there was no claim

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIT (A) vs. M/S. MANIPAL HEALTH SYSTEMS PVT. LTD.,

In the result, this appeal is dismissed

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA

disallowance made under Section 40A(2) of the Act by holding that the assessing authority has not doubted the payment

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S MOOKAMBIKA DEVELOPERS

The appeals stand allowed to the extent as indicated above, and the matter is

Bench: VINEET SARAN,A.V.CHANDRASHEKARA

disallowance made by the Appellate Commissioner under Section 40A(3) of the Act was wrong and the disallowance to the extent

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ADC INDIA COMMUNICATIONS LTD

The appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for by the learned

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,C.M. POONACHA

disallowance made under section 40A(7) of the Act on claim of contribution made to approved gratuity fund ignoring that

TIMES VPL LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONR OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the order passed by the

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,P.G.M.PATIL

disallowed under Section 40a(ia) of the Act is hereby set aside and it is held that the provisions of Section

TEKTRONIX (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED

In the result, the appeal

Bench: SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

section 40A(3) is not applicable. The disallowance u/s 40A(3) is not possible. But again the issue would be from

M/S TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR MOTOR P LTD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL

disallowances made under Section 40a(i) and (ia) of the Act. The assessee thereupon furnished the information vide communication dated