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.

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

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,342Mumbai1,275Chennai553Pune533Kolkata489Bangalore487Ahmedabad353Hyderabad228Jaipur214Raipur142Surat133Indore118Chandigarh111Amritsar108Visakhapatnam103Cuttack96Cochin81Rajkot62Nagpur44Lucknow33Agra32Allahabad27Karnataka24Jodhpur23Guwahati16Dehradun12Patna12Ranchi12SC10Varanasi8Calcutta5Jabalpur5Punjab & Haryana2Telangana2Kerala1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Panaji1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Disallowance66Section 40A(3)61Addition to Income44Section 143(3)43Section 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)

9. Apart from that, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that as the respective payments towards godown rent, i.e., with respect to four godowns, were below the specified limit of Rs.10,000/- each; therefore, on the said count also, no disallowance of the same was called for u/s. 40A(3) of the Act. Apropos the payment towards electricity charges

Showing 1–20 of 142 · 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

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. The first ground of appeal is pertaining to deleting the disallowances of Rs. 17,47,155/- made u/s 14A of the I.T. Act. 6. At the start, Ld. CIT DR on behalf

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% without rejecting

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% without rejecting

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% without rejecting

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% without rejecting

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% without rejecting

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% without rejecting

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

9. Ostensibly, the aforesaid statutory provision, i.e. sub-section (3) of Section 40A of the Act only contemplates disallowance of the assessee

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 would not be correct in law and in the circumstances and facts of the case. In view of the above the disallowance of Rs.2,09,35,340/- is deleted. Appeal on this ground is allowed.” 8. The revenue being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(Appeals) has carried the matter in appeal before

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. On the basis of his aforesaid contention, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that the disallowance u/s. 40A(3) of Rs.5,15,610/- could not be sustained and was liable to be struck down. 9

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. On the basis of his aforesaid contention, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that the disallowance u/s. 40A(3) of Rs.5,15,610/- could not be sustained and was liable to be struck down. 9

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

disallowance could be made under section 40A(2) - Held, yes - Whether even otherwise, subsidiary company was not a related person of assessee within meaning of section 40A(2)(b) and, therefore, section 40A(2) was not attracted in instant case - Held, yes 8. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. 9

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)

disallowance under section 40A(3) can be made. Considering the totality of facts and arguments presented by the appellant, and the fact that purchases amounting to Rs.22.44.67.846 were verified and confirmed during the assessment proceeding, and that the remaining payments followed the same processes and procedures, I find merit in the appellant's argument. Further, there was no adverse material

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

9 Nishant Jain Vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur ITA Nos. 510 to 512/RPR/2024 10 Nishant Jain Vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur ITA Nos. 510 to 512/RPR/2024 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had before the CIT(Appeals) duly demonstrated that out of the mobilization and machinery advance of Rs.1,56,87,000/- received by him from Executive

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

9 Nishant Jain Vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur ITA Nos. 510 to 512/RPR/2024 10 Nishant Jain Vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur ITA Nos. 510 to 512/RPR/2024 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had before the CIT(Appeals) duly demonstrated that out of the mobilization and machinery advance of Rs.1,56,87,000/- received by him from Executive

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

9 Nishant Jain Vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur ITA Nos. 510 to 512/RPR/2024 10 Nishant Jain Vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur ITA Nos. 510 to 512/RPR/2024 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had before the CIT(Appeals) duly demonstrated that out of the mobilization and machinery advance of Rs.1,56,87,000/- received by him from Executive

SHRI PRITAM SINGH GABEL,JANJGIR-CHAMPA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-JANJGIR CHAMPA, JANJGIR CHAMPA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 154/RPR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.154/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shri Preetam Singh Gabel, M/S. Preetam Tractors, Baradwar Road, P.O. Sakti, Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) Pan : Agipg1118M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(2)(b)

9 Shri Preetam Singh Gabel Vs. ITO, Ward Janjgir Champa fact that in the preceding years sales commission paid to such related parties was accepted by the department. On the basis of aforesaid facts, it was the claim of the Ld. AR that as the assessee’s claim for deduction of commission expenses had been looked into and accepted

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

9. If an expenditure incurred by assessee for the purpose of developing a housing project was not allowable on account of non deduction of TDS under law such disallowance would ultimately increase assessee‟s profits from business of developing housing project. The ultimate profits of assessee after adjusting disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act would qualify