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, Ghaziabad vs. M/S Ram Chemeli Chadha Viswas Girls College, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2817/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2009-10 Acit, Circle -2, Vs Ram Chameli Chadha Vishwas Girls College, Ghaziabad. C-22, Meerut Road, Industrial Area, Ghaziabad. Pan: Aaatr8501R Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Tarun Rohatgi, Ca Revenue By: Smt. Ashima Neb, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 11.04.2019 Order Per K. Narasimha Chary, Jm This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 12.2.2013 In Appeal No. 1180/11-12 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Ghaziabad {“Cit(A)”} For Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Purely Charitable Founded By The Renowned Philanthropist Late Shri K.L. Chadha Vishwas Who Was Its Honorary Secretary. Only Object Of The Society Is To Encourage Education Amongst Girls. Late Shri K.L. Chadha Was A 2 Follower Of Swami Vishwas Ji Maharaj, A Renowned Saint Of Modem Times. Its Constitution & Regulations Were Duly Approved By Various Concerned Government Authorities. His Holiness Swami Vishwas Ji Maharaj Is Its Chairman. The Society Has Been Granted Exemption U/S 12A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Meerut Vide Certificate No.40(36)/Registration/Ghaziabad/ 1996-97/14619 Dated 21.7.1997. For The Asstt. Year 2009-10, They Have Not Filed Their Return Of Income And, Therefore, The Learned Ao Issued Notice U/S 142(1) On 12.3.2010. In View Of The Non-Response Of The Assessee, Penalty Had To Be Imposed But Ultimately, The Assessee Filed The Return Of Income On 31.3.2011 Declaring Nil Income.

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Rohatgi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 144Section 40A(3)Section 68

ITO, WD-29(2), Kolkata vs. M/S S. M. Construction, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1535/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Apr 2019AY 2010-2011

Bench: Sri Aby T. Varkey & Shri M. Balaganesh] I.T.A. No. 1535/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Income Tax Officer, Ward-29(2), Kolkata...........…..................................………..…..........Appellant M/S. S.M. Construction.......……………………………………....……………………………………...Respondent C/O- Suvayoo Basu Flat No. 1A, Merlin Dev Bhowanipore 10, Debendra Ghose Road Kolkata – 700 025 [Pan : Aazfs 7493 Q] Appearances By: Shri Raja Ram Chowdhury, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sanakar Halder, Cit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 1St, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 5Th, 2019 O R D E R Per M. Balaganesh, Am :- This Appeal Of Revenue Arises Out Of The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 8, Kolkata [‘Ld. Cit(A)] Dt. 27/10/2015, Against The Assessment Order Of The Jcit, Range-29 (In Short The Ld. Assessing Officer ) U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The First Issue To Be Decided In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Deleting The Disallowance Made U/S 40A(3) Of The Act, In The Sum Of Rs.2,27,51,443/-, In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. The Interconnected Issue Involved Therein Is With Regard To The Violation Of Provisions Of Rule 46A Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962 (In Short ‘The Rules’) By The Ld Cit(A), In Respect Of Admission Of Certain Evidences Without Affording An Opportunity Of Being Heard To The Ld. Assessing Officer. 3. The Brief Facts Of The Issue Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In Civil Contract Business. The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2010-11 Was Filed On 29/09/2010, Declaring Total Income Of Rs.8,49,910/-. During

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)