Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal affirms CIT(A)'s decision on sundry creditors & expense disallowances, dismisses Revenue's appeal</h1> The Tribunal upheld the ld. CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 1,39,84,675/- on account of sundry creditors, emphasizing the genuineness of ... Addition on account of sundry creditors - no compliance of the notice u/s 133(6) - Held that:- No exercise has been done so as to virtually see what is the outcome of notice issued under section 133(6) nor any enquiry or possible efforts were made by the Assessing Officer regarding the same. The disallowance was made only for the reason that there was no compliance of the said notice under section 133(6) of the Act by M/s Larsen & Toubro Limited. We have also to understand the practical position of the fact that M/s Larsen & Toubro Limited doing huge business in India will always as expected to keep their books of account proper and transactions perfect. It is seen that all the transactions are made through banking channel. The Department has not doubted the genuinity of the transactions, therefore, we are of the considered view that as for the facts discussed hereinabove, there is no infirmity with the findings of the ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition Disallowances of expenses claimed by the assessee under various heads - CIT-A restricted part disallownace - Held that:- Since the assessee is a proprietorship concern, the element of personal use of telephone and vehicle cannot be ruled out. But we find that the disallowances made by the Assessing Officer are on higher side and the disallowance restricted by the ld. CIT(A) to the extent mentioned above are quite reasonable and, therefore, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) in restricting the disallowances to the extent mentioned. Revenue appeal dismissed. Issues:1. Deletion of addition of Rs. 1,39,84,675/- on account of sundry creditors.2. Restriction of disallowances of expenses claimed by the assessee under various heads.Deletion of Addition of Rs. 1,39,84,675/- on Account of Sundry Creditors:The Revenue appealed against the deletion of the addition of Rs. 1,39,84,675/- on account of sundry creditors and the restriction of expenses disallowances. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment at an income of Rs. 1,56,96,880/-, making various additions and disallowances. The ld. CIT(A) analyzed the facts and found that the addition was made due to non-compliance of notice under section 133(6) by sundry creditors. The appellant submitted the account copies of the parties, proving the transactions were through banking channels. The ld. CIT(A) referred to legal precedents and ruled in favor of the appellant, deleting the addition. The Tribunal upheld the ld. CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing that the purchases and sales were verified, and no adverse inference was drawn regarding the correctness of the books of accounts.The Tribunal referred to a similar case and legal precedents to support the decision to delete the addition, stating that the sundry creditors' balances were adequately explained by the purchases made. The Tribunal highlighted that the genuineness of purchases was accepted, and no adverse inference was warranted. The Tribunal also noted that the Assessing Officer failed to conduct a thorough inquiry despite issuing notices under section 133(6). The Tribunal upheld the relief granted by the ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,39,84,675/-, emphasizing the lack of infirmity in the ld. CIT(A)'s findings.Restriction of Disallowances of Expenses:Regarding the restriction of disallowances under various heads, the ld. CIT(A) observed that the Assessing Officer did not provide specific findings on unverifiable expenses. Considering the nature of the assessee's proprietorship business, personal expenses related to telephone and vehicle usage were acknowledged. The ld. CIT(A) restricted the disallowances under telephone and vehicle expenses to reasonable amounts, disagreeing with the higher disallowances made by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal concurred with the ld. CIT(A)'s decision, finding the restricted disallowances reasonable and sustaining the order.In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the decisions of the ld. CIT(A) regarding the deletion of the addition on account of sundry creditors and the restriction of disallowances on expenses. The Tribunal pronounced the order in favor of the assessee on 26/02/2018.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found