Section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.36

Section 40A(3) falls under section 40A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 36 (Expenses or payments not deductible in certain circumstances) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 36 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 40A(3) is Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT (225 ITR 746), cited in 514 of the 3,278 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 40A(3)

Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT
225 ITR 746 · 1997 · Supreme Court
514
citing judgments

Income is not taxable until it actually accrues or is received; hypothetical income, based on a mere claim not yet settled, is not chargeable to tax.

CIT v. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd.
319 ITR 204 · 2009 · High Court
378
citing judgments

Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which disallows expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income, is not applicable if the assessee has not earned any exempt income in the relevant assessment year.

CIT v. Walchand & Co.
65 ITR 381 · 1967 · Supreme Court
314
citing judgments

The necessity and reasonableness of business expenditure, including the utilization of borrowed funds, must be judged from the perspective of a businessman based on commercial expediency, and cannot be dictated by revenue authorities. The onus is on the assessee to demonstrate the business purpose and commercial expediency.

Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh v. ITO
191 ITR 667 · 1991 · Supreme Court
254
citing judgments

Section 40A(3) is not absolute, and its application considers business expediency, practical difficulties, and other relevant factors, while keeping in mind its objective to curb the practice of ploughing unaccounted money into the system.

Smt. Harshila Chordia v. ITO
298 ITR 349 · 2008 · High Court
187
citing judgments

Cash receipts from customers against genuine delivery of goods or services cannot be added as unexplained cash credits under Section 68. The case also provides guidance on non-disallowance under Section 40A(3) for business payments made in specific contexts like agricultural markets.

CIT v. Banwari Lal Banshidhar
229 ITR 229 · 1998 · High Court
162
citing judgments

When the Assessing Officer rejects the books of account and computes income by applying a net profit rate, a separate disallowance under section 40A(3) for cash payments cannot be made.

Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT
63 ITR 232 · 1967 · Supreme Court
142
citing judgments

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) cannot permit a new ground requiring fresh investigation of facts unless it remands the matter or requests a report from the lower appellate authority. The ITAT possesses the power to remand or remit cases back to the authorities below in appropriate circumstances.

CIT v. Alagendran Finance Ltd.
293 ITR 1 · 2007 · Supreme Court
129
citing judgments

The limitation period for initiating revision proceedings under Section 263 concerning matters not subject to reassessment begins from the date of the original assessment order, not the reassessment order. The doctrine of merger does not apply to issues not examined during reassessment proceedings.

Anupam Tele Services v. ITO
366 ITR 122 · 2014 · High Court
124
citing judgments

Section 40A(3) disallowances are not absolute; genuine and bonafide cash payments, where the payee's identity is established and business expediency is proven, fall outside its scope, as the section's purpose is to curb unaccounted money, not disallow genuine expenditure.

Palam Gas Service v. CIT
394 ITR 300 · 2017 · Supreme Court
110
citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS is mandatory, applying even to amounts already paid and not merely 'payable', based on a purposive construction of the provision, irrespective of the timing of payment or liability.

Judgments on Section 40A(3)

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Vinod Sharma, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3347/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. R.K Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2011-12 Assistant Commissioner Of Sh. Vinod Sharma A-2/165, 2Nd Floor, Safdarjung Income Tax, Circle – 62 (1), Vs New Delhi Enclave, New Delhi -110029 Pan No.Aujps32935K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Rinku Singh, Sr. Dr Department By None Date Of Hearing: 14/03/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 30/04/2019

Section 201Section 40Section 40A(3)

Smt. Archana Vilas Baviskar, Ahmedabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 775/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad)

For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Somugyan Pal, Sr. D.R
Section 40A(3)Section 68

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)

Dinanath Ornament Stores, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1, Haldia (Now ITO, Ward - 27(1), Haldia)

In the result this ground of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1307/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 1304/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2005-06 I.T.A. No. 1305/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07 I.T.A. No. 1306/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1307/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dinanath Ornament Stores….………………………………....…………………………………………Appellant C/O., D.J. Shah & Co Kalyan Bhawan 2, Elgin Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Aabfd 9969 G] Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Haldia......................................................….………..…......Respondent (Now) Income Tax Officer, Ward-27(1), Haldia Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 20Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 23Rd, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- All These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 7, Kolkata, (Ld. Cit(A)) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (The ‘Act’), Dt. 21/03/2017 For The Assessment Years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2009-10. 2. As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Filed Its Return Of Income On 31/03/2006 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.72,973/- For The Assessment Year 2005- 06, Rs. 87,925/- For The Assessment Year 2006-07 On 31/03/2007, Rs.1,04,340/-

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 40A(3)

Dinanath Ornament Stores, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1, Haldia (Now ITO, Ward - 27(1), Haldia)

In the result this ground of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1306/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 1304/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2005-06 I.T.A. No. 1305/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07 I.T.A. No. 1306/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1307/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dinanath Ornament Stores….………………………………....…………………………………………Appellant C/O., D.J. Shah & Co Kalyan Bhawan 2, Elgin Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Aabfd 9969 G] Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Haldia......................................................….………..…......Respondent (Now) Income Tax Officer, Ward-27(1), Haldia Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 20Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 23Rd, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- All These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 7, Kolkata, (Ld. Cit(A)) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (The ‘Act’), Dt. 21/03/2017 For The Assessment Years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2009-10. 2. As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Filed Its Return Of Income On 31/03/2006 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.72,973/- For The Assessment Year 2005- 06, Rs. 87,925/- For The Assessment Year 2006-07 On 31/03/2007, Rs.1,04,340/-

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 40A(3)

Dinanath Ornament Stores, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1, Haldia (Now ITO, Ward - 27(1), Haldia)

In the result this ground of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1305/KOL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 1304/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2005-06 I.T.A. No. 1305/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07 I.T.A. No. 1306/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1307/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dinanath Ornament Stores….………………………………....…………………………………………Appellant C/O., D.J. Shah & Co Kalyan Bhawan 2, Elgin Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Aabfd 9969 G] Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Haldia......................................................….………..…......Respondent (Now) Income Tax Officer, Ward-27(1), Haldia Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 20Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 23Rd, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- All These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 7, Kolkata, (Ld. Cit(A)) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (The ‘Act’), Dt. 21/03/2017 For The Assessment Years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2009-10. 2. As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Filed Its Return Of Income On 31/03/2006 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.72,973/- For The Assessment Year 2005- 06, Rs. 87,925/- For The Assessment Year 2006-07 On 31/03/2007, Rs.1,04,340/-

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 40A(3)

Dinanath Ornament Stores, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1, Haldia (Now ITO, Ward - 27(1), Haldia)

In the result this ground of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1304/KOL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 1304/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2005-06 I.T.A. No. 1305/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07 I.T.A. No. 1306/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1307/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dinanath Ornament Stores….………………………………....…………………………………………Appellant C/O., D.J. Shah & Co Kalyan Bhawan 2, Elgin Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Aabfd 9969 G] Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Haldia......................................................….………..…......Respondent (Now) Income Tax Officer, Ward-27(1), Haldia Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 20Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 23Rd, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- All These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 7, Kolkata, (Ld. Cit(A)) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (The ‘Act’), Dt. 21/03/2017 For The Assessment Years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2009-10. 2. As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Filed Its Return Of Income On 31/03/2006 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.72,973/- For The Assessment Year 2005- 06, Rs. 87,925/- For The Assessment Year 2006-07 On 31/03/2007, Rs.1,04,340/-

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 40A(3)

New Barh Jewellers, Purba Medinipur vs. ITO, Ward - 1 [Now ITO, Ward - 27(1)], Haldia

In the result this ground of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1303/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 1302/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1303/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 New Barh Jewellers.............……………………………………....…………………………………………Appellant C/O., D.J. Shah & Co Kalyan Bhawan 2, Elgin Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Aacfm 2915 P] Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Haldia......................................................….………..…......Respondent (Now) Income Tax Officer, Ward-27(1), Haldia Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri C.J. Singh, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 20Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 23Rd, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- Both These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 7, Kolkata, (Ld. Cit(A)) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (The ‘Act’), Dt. 21/03/2017 For Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2009-10. 2. As The Issues Arising In Both These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Filed Its Return Of Income On 31/03/2008 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.1,09,361/- For The Assessment Year 2007-08 & On 14/10/2010 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.87,089/-. Later A Survey Operation U/S 133A Of The Act Was Conducted On The Business Premises Of The Assessee Company 23/04/2008 & The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny. The 2

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 40A(3)

New Barh Jewellers, Purba Medinipur vs. ITO, Ward - 1 [Now ITO, Ward - 27(1)], Haldia

In the result this ground of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1302/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 1302/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1303/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 New Barh Jewellers.............……………………………………....…………………………………………Appellant C/O., D.J. Shah & Co Kalyan Bhawan 2, Elgin Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Aacfm 2915 P] Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Haldia......................................................….………..…......Respondent (Now) Income Tax Officer, Ward-27(1), Haldia Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri C.J. Singh, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 20Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 23Rd, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- Both These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 7, Kolkata, (Ld. Cit(A)) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (The ‘Act’), Dt. 21/03/2017 For Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2009-10. 2. As The Issues Arising In Both These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Filed Its Return Of Income On 31/03/2008 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.1,09,361/- For The Assessment Year 2007-08 & On 14/10/2010 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.87,089/-. Later A Survey Operation U/S 133A Of The Act Was Conducted On The Business Premises Of The Assessee Company 23/04/2008 & The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny. The 2

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 40A(3)

Asish Kumar Barh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1, Haldia (Now ITO, Ward - 27(1), Haldia)

In the result this ground of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1301/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 1297/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2005-06 I.T.A. No. 1298/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07 I.T.A. No. 1299/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1300/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2008-09 I.T.A. No. 1301/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ashish Kumar Barh…………….………………………………....…………………………………………Appellant C/O., D.J. Shah & Co Kalyan Bhawan 2, Elgin Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Adcpb 6079 K] Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Haldia......................................................….………..…......Respondent (Now) Income Tax Officer, Ward-27(1), Haldia Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 20Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 23Rd, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- All These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 7, Kolkata, (Ld. Cit(A)) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (The ‘Act’), Dt. 21/03/2017 For The Assessment Years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. 2. As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Filed Its Return Of Income On 31/03/2006 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,55,324/- For The Assessment Year

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250

Asish Kumar Barh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1, Haldia (Now ITO, Ward - 27(1), Haldia)

In the result this ground of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1300/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 1297/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2005-06 I.T.A. No. 1298/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07 I.T.A. No. 1299/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1300/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2008-09 I.T.A. No. 1301/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ashish Kumar Barh…………….………………………………....…………………………………………Appellant C/O., D.J. Shah & Co Kalyan Bhawan 2, Elgin Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Adcpb 6079 K] Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Haldia......................................................….………..…......Respondent (Now) Income Tax Officer, Ward-27(1), Haldia Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 20Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 23Rd, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- All These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 7, Kolkata, (Ld. Cit(A)) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (The ‘Act’), Dt. 21/03/2017 For The Assessment Years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. 2. As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Filed Its Return Of Income On 31/03/2006 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,55,324/- For The Assessment Year

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250

Asish Kumar Barh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1, Haldia (Now ITO, Ward - 27(1), Haldia)

In the result this ground of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1299/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 1297/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2005-06 I.T.A. No. 1298/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07 I.T.A. No. 1299/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1300/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2008-09 I.T.A. No. 1301/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ashish Kumar Barh…………….………………………………....…………………………………………Appellant C/O., D.J. Shah & Co Kalyan Bhawan 2, Elgin Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Adcpb 6079 K] Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Haldia......................................................….………..…......Respondent (Now) Income Tax Officer, Ward-27(1), Haldia Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 20Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 23Rd, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- All These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 7, Kolkata, (Ld. Cit(A)) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (The ‘Act’), Dt. 21/03/2017 For The Assessment Years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. 2. As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Filed Its Return Of Income On 31/03/2006 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,55,324/- For The Assessment Year

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250

Asish Kumar Barh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1, Haldia (Now ITO, Ward - 27(1), Haldia)

In the result this ground of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1298/KOL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 1297/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2005-06 I.T.A. No. 1298/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07 I.T.A. No. 1299/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1300/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2008-09 I.T.A. No. 1301/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ashish Kumar Barh…………….………………………………....…………………………………………Appellant C/O., D.J. Shah & Co Kalyan Bhawan 2, Elgin Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Adcpb 6079 K] Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Haldia......................................................….………..…......Respondent (Now) Income Tax Officer, Ward-27(1), Haldia Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 20Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 23Rd, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- All These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 7, Kolkata, (Ld. Cit(A)) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (The ‘Act’), Dt. 21/03/2017 For The Assessment Years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. 2. As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Filed Its Return Of Income On 31/03/2006 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,55,324/- For The Assessment Year

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250

Asish Kumar Barh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1, Haldia (Now ITO, Ward - 27(1), Haldia)

In the result this ground of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1297/KOL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 1297/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2005-06 I.T.A. No. 1298/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07 I.T.A. No. 1299/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 I.T.A. No. 1300/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2008-09 I.T.A. No. 1301/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ashish Kumar Barh…………….………………………………....…………………………………………Appellant C/O., D.J. Shah & Co Kalyan Bhawan 2, Elgin Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Adcpb 6079 K] Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Haldia......................................................….………..…......Respondent (Now) Income Tax Officer, Ward-27(1), Haldia Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 20Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 23Rd, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- All These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 7, Kolkata, (Ld. Cit(A)) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (The ‘Act’), Dt. 21/03/2017 For The Assessment Years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. 2. As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Filed Its Return Of Income On 31/03/2006 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,55,324/- For The Assessment Year

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250

Pranab Kumar Barh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1, Haldia (Now ITO, Ward - 27(1), Haldia)

In the result this ground of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1296/KOL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2006-07
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 40A(3)

Pranab Kumar Barh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1, Haldia (Now ITO, Ward - 27(1), Haldia)

In the result this ground of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1295/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2009-10
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 40A(3)

Pranab Kumar Barh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1, Haldia (Now ITO, Ward - 27(1), Haldia)

In the result this ground of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1294/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2008-09
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 40A(3)

Pranab Kumar Barh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1, Haldia (Now ITO, Ward - 27(1), Haldia)

In the result this ground of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1293/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2019AY 2007-08
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 40A(3)

M/S. Angre Port (P) Ltd., Ratnagiri vs. Income-Tax Officer

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1046/PUN/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2148/Pun/2013 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Angre Port (P) Ltd., Formerly Jaigad Ports Infrastructure (P) Ltd., Plot No.221, Midc, Mirjole, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Ratnagiri – 415612 …. Pan: Aabcj5401A Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward-3, Ratnagiri

For Appellant: Shri Mihir NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghei
Section 143(3)Section 194

M/S. Angre Port (P) Ltd., Ratnagiri vs. Income-Tax Officer

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2148/PUN/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2148/Pun/2013 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Angre Port (P) Ltd., Formerly Jaigad Ports Infrastructure (P) Ltd., Plot No.221, Midc, Mirjole, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Ratnagiri – 415612 …. Pan: Aabcj5401A Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward-3, Ratnagiri

For Appellant: Shri Mihir NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghei
Section 143(3)Section 194