1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>ITAT affirms CIT(A) decision on cash expenditure for land purchase, dismissing Revenue's appeals.</h1> The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance under u/s 40A(3) for cash expenditure on land purchase, as the expenditure was not ... - Issues involved: Appeal against order of CIT(A) regarding disallowance under u/s 40A(3) for AY 2005-06 & 2006-07.Summary:The appeals by the Revenue challenged the CIT(A)'s deletion of disallowance u/s 40A(3) of Rs. 14,43,280/- made by the Assessing Officer for cash expenditure on land purchase. The CIT(A) found that the expenditure was not claimed in the profit & loss account but debited to work-in-progress, following a similar precedent. The ITAT also upheld this view in a related case. The Revenue contended that the CIT(A)'s order was erroneous, but after hearing both sides, the ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating that the disallowance under u/s 40A(3) was not applicable as the expenditure was not claimed in the profit & loss account. The ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeals, affirming the CIT(A)'s order for both cases.Detailed Judgment:In both cases, the Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s deletion of the disallowance u/s 40A(3) of Rs. 14,43,280/- for cash expenditure on land purchase. The CIT(A) found that the expenditure was not claimed in the profit & loss account but debited to work-in-progress, following a similar precedent set in a related case. The ITAT also upheld this view in the related case. The Revenue contended that the CIT(A)'s order was erroneous, but after hearing both sides, the ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating that the disallowance under u/s 40A(3) was not applicable as the expenditure was not claimed in the profit & loss account. The ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeals, affirming the CIT(A)'s order for both cases.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
