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.

145 results for “disallowance”+ Section 40A(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,508Mumbai1,462Chennai654Kolkata645Pune595Bangalore536Ahmedabad409Hyderabad245Jaipur239Raipur145Surat137Chandigarh134Indore129Amritsar117Visakhapatnam116Cuttack106Cochin98Rajkot66Nagpur60Lucknow41Agra35Jodhpur27Allahabad27Karnataka26Guwahati20Dehradun19Patna19Ranchi13SC11Varanasi9Calcutta7Jabalpur6Telangana4Panaji3Punjab & Haryana2Rajasthan1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1J&K1Kerala1

Key Topics

Disallowance66Section 40A(3)62Section 143(3)45Addition to Income44Section 14A29Deduction28Section 36(1)(va)23Section 80I20Depreciation17Section 68

SHUBH KARAN MAHNOT, AMBIKAPUR,AMBIKAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-AMBIKAPUR, AMBIKAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed/allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 155/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 155/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shubh Karan Mahnot Prop. M/S. Bikaner Agencies, Tulshi Chowk, Near Primary School, Gangapur, Ambikapur (C.G.)-497 001 Pan : Aalhs2528G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- Ambikapur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

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 the payments made to a person in a day, otherwise than by an account payee cheque drawn on a bank

Showing 1–20 of 145 · Page 1 of 8

...
16
Section 143(1)15
Section 143(2)12

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), BILASPUR vs. MESERS NARMADA DRINKS PRIVATE LIMITED, BILASPUR

In the result ground No. 2 & 3 of the appeal of the revenue stands rejected

ITA 89/RPR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No. 89/Rpr/2020) (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs M/S Narmada Drinks Private Limited Circle-1(1), Aayakar Bhawan, Sirgitti Industrial Area, Tifra, Bilaspur Mahima Complex, Bilaspur (C.G.) (C.G.) Pan: Aaacn5880C (अपीलाथ" /Applicant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R.B. Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.K. Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 21.09.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.11.2023

For Appellant: Shri R.B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40ASection 40A(3)Section 92C

disallowances pertaining to section 14A and 40A(3) was not considered as justified by the department, thus, to challenge the same the present appeal is filed before us. 5

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. MESERS SHREE JAGDAMBA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 37/RPR/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 37 To 42/Rpr/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A
Section 40A(3)

Section 40A(3) of the Act was examined in the original proceedings. In A.Y. 2009-10, the AO in the original assessment proceedings carried out certain disallowance under s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. In A.Y. 2010-11, certain lumpsum disallowances were carried out by the AO. In A.Ys. 2011- 12 & 2012-13, the profit was estimated @ 5

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. MESERS SHREE JAGDAMBA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 38/RPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 37 To 42/Rpr/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A
Section 40A(3)

Section 40A(3) of the Act was examined in the original proceedings. In A.Y. 2009-10, the AO in the original assessment proceedings carried out certain disallowance under s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. In A.Y. 2010-11, certain lumpsum disallowances were carried out by the AO. In A.Ys. 2011- 12 & 2012-13, the profit was estimated @ 5

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. MESERS SHREE JAGDAMBA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 41/RPR/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 37 To 42/Rpr/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A
Section 40A(3)

Section 40A(3) of the Act was examined in the original proceedings. In A.Y. 2009-10, the AO in the original assessment proceedings carried out certain disallowance under s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. In A.Y. 2010-11, certain lumpsum disallowances were carried out by the AO. In A.Ys. 2011- 12 & 2012-13, the profit was estimated @ 5

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. MESERS SHREE JAGDAMBA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 39/RPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 37 To 42/Rpr/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A
Section 40A(3)

Section 40A(3) of the Act was examined in the original proceedings. In A.Y. 2009-10, the AO in the original assessment proceedings carried out certain disallowance under s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. In A.Y. 2010-11, certain lumpsum disallowances were carried out by the AO. In A.Ys. 2011- 12 & 2012-13, the profit was estimated @ 5

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. MESERS SHREE JAGDAMBA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 42/RPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 37 To 42/Rpr/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A
Section 40A(3)

Section 40A(3) of the Act was examined in the original proceedings. In A.Y. 2009-10, the AO in the original assessment proceedings carried out certain disallowance under s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. In A.Y. 2010-11, certain lumpsum disallowances were carried out by the AO. In A.Ys. 2011- 12 & 2012-13, the profit was estimated @ 5

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. MESERS SHREE JAGDAMBA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 40/RPR/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 37 To 42/Rpr/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A
Section 40A(3)

Section 40A(3) of the Act was examined in the original proceedings. In A.Y. 2009-10, the AO in the original assessment proceedings carried out certain disallowance under s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. In A.Y. 2010-11, certain lumpsum disallowances were carried out by the AO. In A.Ys. 2011- 12 & 2012-13, the profit was estimated @ 5

SHRI TIRATH RAJ SHUKLA,BHILAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), BHILAI

In the result, appeal of the assesee is partly allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 7/RPR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 07/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shri Tirth Raj Sukla 1/3, Maitri Nagar, Risali, Bhilai (C.G.). Pan : Atqps4633J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1(2), Bhilai (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By :Shri S.R Rao, Advocate Revenue By :Shri G.N Singh, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri S.R Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 69C

5 Shri Tirth Raj Sukla Vs. ITO-1(2) record, as well as considered the judicial pronouncements that have been pressed into service by them to drive home their respective contentions. 7. Ostensibly, a perusal of the assessment order reveals that the A.O had made addition of the aforesaid amount of Rs.45.65 lac (supra) under both the Sections i.e 40A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. MURLI KUMAR AGRAWAL (HUF), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 161/RPR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 161/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Murli Kumar Agrawal (Huf) Konark Industries Paragaon, Paragaon, Nayapara, Rajim-493 881 Pan : Aaehm7729L ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri B. Subramanyam, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40A(3)

Section 40A(3) of the Act, as under: 5 ACIT, Circle-1(1), Raipur Vs. Murli Kumar Agrawal (HUF) Accordingly, the A.O disallowed

SAMPAT LAL DEWANGAN,DHAMTARI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 11/RPR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 10 & 11/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 Sampat Lal Dewangan Narenderajewellers, Dhamtari (C.G.)-493 773 Pan :Aetpd8959C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bangalore. ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Bikram Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Choudhury N.C Roy, SR. DR
Section 143(1)Section 40A(3)

Section 40A(3) of the Act, therefore, the assessee despite qualification by the auditor had not offered any disallowance to the said effect in his return of income. Elaborating on his aforesaid contention, the Ld. AR took us through a chart showing the breakup of the disallowance of Rs. 5

SAMPAT LAL DEWANGAN,DHAMTARI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 10/RPR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 10 & 11/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 Sampat Lal Dewangan Narenderajewellers, Dhamtari (C.G.)-493 773 Pan :Aetpd8959C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bangalore. ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Bikram Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Choudhury N.C Roy, SR. DR
Section 143(1)Section 40A(3)

Section 40A(3) of the Act, therefore, the assessee despite qualification by the auditor had not offered any disallowance to the said effect in his return of income. Elaborating on his aforesaid contention, the Ld. AR took us through a chart showing the breakup of the disallowance of Rs. 5

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-2(1)BHILAI, BHILAI(CG) vs. M/S SMS SHIVNATH INFRASSTRUCTURE PVT LTD., DURG, DURG(CG)

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 87/BIL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.87/Rpr/2017 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Acit-2(1), Bhilai Vs M/S Sms Shivnath Infrastructure Pvt Ltd.,Toll Plaza, Near Dhamdhanaka, Durg. Pan No. :Aadcs 2258 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.107/Rpr/2016 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/S Sms Shivnath Infrastructure Vs Pr.Cit-2, Raipur Pvt Ltd.,Toll Plaza, Near Dhamdhanaka, Durg. Pan No. :Aadcs 2258 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Hirani, Adv. & MukeshFor Respondent: Shri Debashis Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250(4)Section 36Section 80ISection 80l

40A(3), 43B etc. of the Act and other specific disallowances, related to the business activity against which the Chapter VI-A deduction has been claimed result in enhancement of the profit of the eligible business and that deduction under chapter VI-A is admissible on the profits so enhanced by the disallowance. 12. The CIT(A) accordingly allowed

M/S SMS SHIVNATH INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD,DURG(CG) vs. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 107/BIL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.87/Rpr/2017 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Acit-2(1), Bhilai Vs M/S Sms Shivnath Infrastructure Pvt Ltd.,Toll Plaza, Near Dhamdhanaka, Durg. Pan No. :Aadcs 2258 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.107/Rpr/2016 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/S Sms Shivnath Infrastructure Vs Pr.Cit-2, Raipur Pvt Ltd.,Toll Plaza, Near Dhamdhanaka, Durg. Pan No. :Aadcs 2258 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Hirani, Adv. & MukeshFor Respondent: Shri Debashis Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250(4)Section 36Section 80ISection 80l

40A(3), 43B etc. of the Act and other specific disallowances, related to the business activity against which the Chapter VI-A deduction has been claimed result in enhancement of the profit of the eligible business and that deduction under chapter VI-A is admissible on the profits so enhanced by the disallowance. 12. The CIT(A) accordingly allowed

HARSHDEEP SINGH JUNEJA,RAIPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 106/RPR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 106/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Harshdeep Singh Juneja 21/537, Katora Talab Road, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Acupj6153B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: S/Shri Praveen Khandelwal &For Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 40ASection 40A(3)

section 40A(3A). The CPC, Bengaluru while processing the returned income of the assessee in the backdrop of the aforesaid qualification by the auditor, i.e. payment 5 Harshdeep Singh Juneja Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Raipur made by the assessee in a manner other than that prescribed u/s. 40A(3) of the Act, therein, vide its letter dated 21.01.2019 communicated

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 4(1), RAIPUR vs. M/S SUPER IRON AND STEEL PVT LTD.,, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and Cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 261/RPR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.261/Rpr/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Acit-4(1), Raipur Vs M/S Super Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd., Pritpal Farm House, Vip Road, Raipur(C.G.) Pan No. : Aaics 2579 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) & Cross Objection No.13/Rpr/2017 (Arising Out Of Ita No.261/Rpr/2017) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) M/S Super Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit-4(1), Raipur Pritpal Farm House, Vip Road, Raipur(C.G.) Pan No. : Aaics 2579 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N.Singh, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)Section 68

Section 40A(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Excessive or Unreasonable Payments - Where revenue was not in a position to point out how assessee evaded payment of tax by alleged payment of higher commission to its sister concern, since sister concern was 5 & CO No.13/RPR/2017 also paying tax at higher rate, disallowance

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1(1), RAIPUR vs. BHARAT AGRO INDUSTRIES, RAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed as above

ITA 511/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am

For Appellant: Shri Jalaj Prakash, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 250Section 40A(3)

5 DCIT, Circle-1(1), Raipur vs. Bharat Agro Industries, Raipur procuring the forest produce and confirming payments from the tribals, villagers, and farmers. The appellant relied on the decisions of jurisdictional High Court and ITAT. supporting their argument that where the genuineness of payment and the party are not in dispute, no disallowance under section 40A

NISHANT JAIN,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), BILASPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 510/RPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 510, 511 & 512/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Nishant Jain Ring Road No.2, Shanti Nagar, Near Sidhasikhar Vistar, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495 001 Pan: Agepj9793M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: S/shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal &For Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

disallowed. 37. Alternatively, the Ld. AR submitted that as the assessee had in his statement recorded u/s. 131 of the Act in reply to Question No.17, on being confronted with the violation of Section 40A(3) of the Act, had offered an additional business income @8% of turnover (as against 5

NISHANT JAIN,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), BILASPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 511/RPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 510, 511 & 512/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Nishant Jain Ring Road No.2, Shanti Nagar, Near Sidhasikhar Vistar, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495 001 Pan: Agepj9793M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: S/shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal &For Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

disallowed. 37. Alternatively, the Ld. AR submitted that as the assessee had in his statement recorded u/s. 131 of the Act in reply to Question No.17, on being confronted with the violation of Section 40A(3) of the Act, had offered an additional business income @8% of turnover (as against 5

NISHANT JAIN,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, BILASPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 512/RPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 510, 511 & 512/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Nishant Jain Ring Road No.2, Shanti Nagar, Near Sidhasikhar Vistar, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495 001 Pan: Agepj9793M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: S/shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal &For Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

disallowed. 37. Alternatively, the Ld. AR submitted that as the assessee had in his statement recorded u/s. 131 of the Act in reply to Question No.17, on being confronted with the violation of Section 40A(3) of the Act, had offered an additional business income @8% of turnover (as against 5