BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

500 results for “disallowance”+ Section 40A(9)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,341Mumbai1,277Chennai559Kolkata500Bangalore491Ahmedabad166Pune142Jaipur133Hyderabad132Raipur123Surat93Indore84Amritsar79Chandigarh57Visakhapatnam43Cuttack42Nagpur42Rajkot41Cochin30Lucknow28Karnataka24Agra24Allahabad22Jodhpur18Guwahati13Dehradun12Patna11SC10Varanasi8Calcutta5Ranchi5Jabalpur2Punjab & Haryana2Telangana2Kerala1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 40A(3)80Addition to Income72Section 143(3)61Disallowance61Section 6830Section 80I30Section 153A29Section 25029Section 4027Deduction

KRISHNA PRASAD POTNURI,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 40(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 450/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Aug 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Krishna Prasad Potnuri...............................................................…………………………………….…..Appellant (Prop. Calcutta South Transport Co.) 20, Phears Lance Bowbazar Kolkata – 700 012 [Pan : Afqpp 3888 Q] Income Tax Officer, Ward-40(1), Kolkata....................................................…………………..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri S.M. Das, Addl. Cit, D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 6Th , 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 3Rd, 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40A(3)

disallowance based on surmises and hence has to be deleted. 3.1. The ld. D/R, on the other hand, referred to page 2 of the assessment order and submitted that the assessee had admitted before the Assessing Officer that he was not aware of the provisions of Section 40A(3) of the Act and had voluntarily agreed for an addition

Showing 1–20 of 500 · Page 1 of 25

...
24
Section 143(1)22
Limitation/Time-bar13

SHRI DINESH KUMAR GHOSH ,PASCHIM MEDINIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 38, , MIDNAPORE

In the result, this ground and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2015/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 2015/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Dinesh Kumar Ghosh.......………………………………....…………………………………………Appellant Garhbeta-Iii,Karamsole P.O. Kiaboni P.S. Garhbeta Paschim Medinipur – 721 253 [Pan : Arkpg 5318 G] Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-38, Midnapore…….........…..…......Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri C.J. Singh, Jcit D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 3Rd, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 26Th, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Kolkata, (Ld. Cit(A)) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (The ‘Act’), Dt. 27/06/2018, For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Is An Individual & Is In The Business Of Trading In Wood & Timber. He Filed His Return Of Income On 29/10/2013, Disclosing Total Income Of Rs.10,29,280/-. The Assessing Officer Completed Assessment U/S 144 Of The Act, Vide His Order Dt. 10/03/2016, Determining The Total Income At Rs.1,22,27,660/- Interalia Making A Disallowance Of Rs.1,11,97,683/- U/S 40A(3) Of The Act, On The Ground That The Assessee Had Made Cash Payments In Excess Of Rs.20,000/- For Supply Of Timber To Various Local Merchants. Aggrieved The Assessee Carried The Matter In Appeal. Before The Ld. First Appellate Authority, The Assessee Submitted That None Of The Cash Payments In Question Exceeded The Limit Prescribed U/S 40A(3) Of The Act. He Produced A Cash Book & Ledger Account To Demonstrate The Fact That The 2

Section 144Section 250Section 40A(3)

section 40A(3) of the Act. ” 8. Applying the propositions of law laid down in the above referred case, to the facts of the case on hand, we delete the entire disallowance made u/s 40A(3) of the Act, as factually and legally incorrect. In the result, this ground and appeal of the assessee is allowed. 9

ACIT, CIR-2, DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR vs. S. N. CONSTRUCTION, BANKURA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1205/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm] I.T.A No. 1117/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2011-12 S.N. Construction -Vs- Acit, Circle-2, Durgapur [Pan: Abafs 9119 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 1205/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Acit, Circle-2, Durgapur -Vs- S.N. Construction [Pan: Abafs 9119 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Saikat Maulik, FCAFor Respondent: Gautam Kumar Mondal, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40A(3)

disallowance is called for by invoking the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act”. 9. The “ C” Bench of the Kolkata

S. N. CONSTRUCTION,BANKURA vs. ACIT, CIR-2, DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1117/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm] I.T.A No. 1117/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2011-12 S.N. Construction -Vs- Acit, Circle-2, Durgapur [Pan: Abafs 9119 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 1205/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Acit, Circle-2, Durgapur -Vs- S.N. Construction [Pan: Abafs 9119 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Saikat Maulik, FCAFor Respondent: Gautam Kumar Mondal, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40A(3)

disallowance is called for by invoking the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act”. 9. The “ C” Bench of the Kolkata

SHRI DALJIT SINGH ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 40, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 769/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godarai.T.A. No.769/Kol/2018 (Assessment Year: 2010-11)

Section 250Section 40A(3)

section 40A(3) has been brought on the statute books has been clearly satisfied in the instant case. Therefore, being a 9 I.T.A. No.769/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Daljit Singh case of genuine business transaction, no disallowance

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. HINDUSTAN URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.(HINDUSTAN VIDYUT PRODUCT LTD.,), NEW DELHI

ITA 1616/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 246ASection 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 40ASection 9(1)(vii)

disallowing assessee’s export commission payments of ₹63,56,458/- and ₹19,88,798/- on account of non-deduction of TDS thereby invoking sec. 40A(a)(i) of the Act. We treat the former assessment year 2011-12 as the “lead” assessment year containing the CIT(A)’s following detailed discussion on the issue. “5. I have considered the order

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. HINDUSTAN URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.(HINDUSTAN VIDYUT PRODUCT LTD.,), NEW DELHI

ITA 1615/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 246ASection 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 40ASection 9(1)(vii)

disallowing assessee’s export commission payments of ₹63,56,458/- and ₹19,88,798/- on account of non-deduction of TDS thereby invoking sec. 40A(a)(i) of the Act. We treat the former assessment year 2011-12 as the “lead” assessment year containing the CIT(A)’s following detailed discussion on the issue. “5. I have considered the order

INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-12(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S STANDARD LEATHER PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 2620/KOL/2013[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Sept 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2010-11

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

Section 40A(3) for Rs.78,45,580/- and disallowed @ 20% thereon Rs.15,69,116/-. It is also made clear that without the payment being made by bearer cheque these goods could not have been procured and it would have hampered the supply of goods ITA No.2620/Kol/2013 A.Y. 2010-11 ITO Wd-12(1), Kol. vs. M/s Standard Leather

SPEED & MOVERS INDIA PVT. LTD.,BEHALA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-10(4), KOLKATA

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

ITA 310/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Oct 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz & Hz)

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

9,45,100/- 4. Car Hire Charges (Freight Rs.19,93,575/- Charges) Since the above payments were made by the assessee in cash in violation of provisions of section 40A(3) and there were no exceptional circumstances explained by the assessee for making the said payments in cash as specified in Rule 6DD, the Assessing Officer disallowed

HARIDAS SOM,HOOGHLY vs. ITO, WARD - 22(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed

ITA 14/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy., Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm] I.T. A No. 14/Kol/2018 A.Y 2013-14 Haridas Som V/S. I.T.O. Ward 22(3), Kolkata Pan: Ajhps8867K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.Banerjee, Adovate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Halder, JCIT, ld.Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

section 40A(3) of the Act. The Learned AO relying on all these facts sought to disallow a sum of Rs. 60,50,890/- u/s 40A(3) of the Act. 4.1. On first appeal, the Learned CITA upheld the addition of Rs. 60,50,890/- made by the Learned AO and further sought to disallow another

M/S EXCEL ENGINEERS,KOLKATA vs. J.C.I.T (OSD) CIR - 51,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

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

ITA 1588/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Nov 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Subhas Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Debnath Lahiri, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

section 194C of the Act warranting disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The ld AO is directed to delete this disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act in the sum of Rs. 68,49,395/-. Accordingly, the Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is allowed. 3. The ld AR during the course of hearing stated that

M/S MRINALINI BIRI MANUFACTURING CO.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA

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

ITA 85/KOL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.85/Kol/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Dhrubajyoti Roy, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(v)Section 37(1)Section 40

disallowed in cases to which these provisions of the section apply. Sub-section (7) of section 40A was inserted by the Finance Act, 1975 with retrospective effect from 1-4-1973. It is necessary to appreciate the purpose and object intended to be achieved by this sub-section in order to arrive at the true meaning of the provision

RANJAN DEBNATH ,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT - 9, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1372/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S. Godara]

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)

9) TMI 685 – ITAT, Kolkata, as the genuineness of the purchases of plastic crates from steel industries is not in doubt and as the amounts in question were directly paid into the bank account of the supplier i.e. Supreme Industries. He requested that the directions given by the Pr. CIT to be modified. 4. The ld. DR on the other

MR. NIRMAL KUMAR DAS,MIDNAPORE vs. ACIT, CIR-HALDIA, MIDNAPORE

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 391/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2015AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2010-11 Mr. Nirmal Kumar Das V/S. Acit, Circle-Haldia, W/H/A17, Durgachak Basudevpur, P.O. Housing Estate, P.O. Khanjan Chak, Haldia, Durgachak, Hldia, Purba Purba Medinipur, Pin – Medinipur, Pin. 721602 721602 [Pan No.Acupd 7343 M] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 40(3)Section 40A(3)

disallowance could be made under section 40A(3) – Held, yes [Para 23] [In favour of the assessee]” CIT vs Smt. Shelly Passi reported in (2013) 350 ITR 227 (P&H) In this case the court upheld the view of the tribunal in not applying section 40A(3) of the Act to the cash payments when ultimately, such amounts were deposited

DCIT, CIR-4, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MARUTI FREIGHT MOVERS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 482/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Apr 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh, I.T.A. No. 482/Kol/2014 Assessment Years: 2009-10

Section 250Section 40A(3)Section 43B

section 40A(3) of the Act was a technical disallowance for violation of specific provisions of Income Tax Act. Before us, the learned AR of the assessee has relied on the decision of the Ahmedabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Vijaykumar P. Desai (Individual & HUF) (supra), wherein the Tribunal has held as under: “6. We find that

DCIT, CIRCLE - 2, MINAPORE, PASCHIM MEDINIPUR vs. SHRI JUGAL KISHORE DAS, PASCHIM MEDINIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1707/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Sept 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] Assessment Year : 2010-11 D.C.I.T., Circle-2, -Versus- Shri Jugal Kishore Das Midnapore Paschim Medinipur (Pan: Adxpd 2305 B) (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant: Shri David Z.Chawngthu, Addl. Cit(Sr.Dr) For The Respondent: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 10.08.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2017. Order Per J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-(A)-Xxxvi, Kolkata Relating To A.Y. 2010-11 On The Following Grounds : “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Xxxvi, Kolkata Was Not Justified In Deleting Addition Aggregating To Rs 86,55,000/-, Made U/S 40A(3) On Account Of Cash Payments Of Rs 45,80,000/- To M/S United Spirits & Rs 40,75,000/- To M/S Vtr Marketing, ; 2. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) - Xxxvi, Kolkata Was Not Justified In Deleting Addition Of Rs 86,55,000/- U/S 40A(3), Ignoring Assessee'S Own Statement Recorded On Oath U/S 131 On 15/03/2013, That Payments Exceeding Rs 20,000/- Were Made In Violation Of The Provisions Of Section 40A(3) Read With Rule-6Dd ; 3. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) -Xxxvi, Kolkata Was Not Justified In Deleting Addition Of Rs 86,55,000/- U/S 40A(3), Ignoring The Fact That The Assessee Failed To Substantiate His Claim That Payments Were Made In Violation Of The Provisions Of Section 40A(3) Read With Rule-6Dd Due To Commercial Expediency ;”

For Appellant: Shri David Z.Chawngthu, Addl. CIT(Sr.DR)For Respondent: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate
Section 131Section 40ASection 40A(3)

section 40A(3) - steps Into aid such assessees and concerns. In this context, the statutory mandate in rule 6DD(k), at least in the circumstances of the case, has to be construed as to mean that but for the cash payment, the assessee would have been deprived of the benefit of supplies itself. The High Court clarifies that the interpretation

SMT SHILA MONDAL,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WD-2(2), ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 336/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Aug 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 22Section 40ASection 40A(3)Section 5

disallowing u/s. 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 9. Rule 6(2) of West Bengal Excise (Supply of Country Sprit on Payment of Duty) Rules, 2005 defines that No retail vendor of country spirit shall deposit duty direct into the local treasury for issue of country sprit to be taken by him from the warehouse concerned. Duty, cost

SRI MALAY MONDAL,BURDWAN vs. I.T.O WD - 2(2),ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 903/KOL/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Sept 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 40A(3)

section 40A(3) of the Act and confirmed the disallowance made by the AO on this count. 8. Aggrieved by such order of the CIT-A, now the assessee is in appeal by raising the above mentioned grounds. 9

ITO, WD-2(3), DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR vs. M/S KAJORA PACHAI & C. S. SHOP, BURDWAN

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 502/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 502/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Ito, Ward-2(3), Durgapur -Vs- M/S Kajora Pachai & C.S. Shop [Pan: Aagfk 2341 E] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri K.K. Khemka, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

disallowance of the entire cash purchases results in abnormal trading profit for the assessee which it could never earn. We find a purposive construction should be resorted to while applying the provisions of the Act. Hence it would be more relevant to get into the intention of the legislature. In our opinion, the primary object of enacting section 40A

M/S RAMNAGAR PACHAI & C. S. (S) SHOP,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WD-2(3), ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 186/KOL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: S/Shri S. K. Tulsiyan & R. N. Ram, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

disallowed, then effectively the ld AO would be taxing the entire sale proceeds as income of the assessee which would only result in an anomalous situation. He further argued that the law cannot be interpreted in such a manner as it would result in creating absurdity if section 40A(3) is invoked in a strict sense. The assessee