Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of ITAT allowed the appeal of the assessee-company (A Co.), engaged in manufacturing and trading of agro-based products, and deleted the disallowance made u/s 40A(3) of the Act. The AO had invoked s.40A(3) on cash payments by A Co. purportedly as expenditure, and CIT(A) had upheld the addition due to absence of evidence that such expenses were incurred on behalf of another entity (B Ltd.) and reimbursed. ITAT held that the AO's addition was based solely on the ledger account in B Ltd.'s books and that no contrary material disproved A Co.'s claim that the cash payments were made on behalf of B Ltd. Further, A Co. had not claimed these payments as its own expenditure. Consequently, ITAT ruled that any expenditure, if at all, pertained to B Ltd., not A Co., and no disallowance u/s 40A(3) was sustainable in A Co.'s hands.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
