TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (6) TMI 733
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e provision made by the assessee for Development of Land is ascertained liability?. (ii) Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 74,51,000/- made by the Assessing officer u/s 40A(3) of the IT Act, 1961. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is a colonizer and its business is of buying agricultural land, getting it converted into residential/commercial land after obtaining necessary permission from Jaipur Development Authority, dividing the land into plots and selling these plots directly as well as through brokers. The company is also selling plots on commission basis owned by someone else after developing the land. During th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Assessee's own case by Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur - M/s Shree Salasar Overseas (Pvt) Ltd. vs. CIT-I Jaipur ITA No. 433/JP/2011 with reference to order u/s 263 passed by CIT. (b) Assessee's own case by Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur - M/s Shree Salasar Overseas (Pvt) Ltd. vs. ACIT, Circle-2, Jaipur in ITA No.910/JP/2013 (AY 2005-06), 911/JP/2013 (AY 2007-08) and 912/JP/2013 (AY 2008-09) with reference to order by AO u/s 148 on same issue. The ld. AR submitted that the ld. AO rejected the assessee's claim on the same ground and on same facts and law on which he has disallowed the provision for development expenses for A.Ys. 2005-06, 2007-08 and 2008-09. In respect of earlier years, the ld. CIT(A) allowed the provision for development expenses and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s future liability of development expenses against the sale of plots booked by it in these years. Thus the order of ld. CIT(A) for A.Y. 2005-06, 2007-08 and 2008-09 are upheld in this regard." 2.4 The ld DR is heard who has relied on the order of the AO. 2.5 We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. Undisputedly, there is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case. The issue in question is covered in favour of the assessee by the earlier decisions of the Coordinate Benches in assessee's own case. Respectfully following the earlier decisions of the Coordinate Benches, provision for development expenses of Rs. 5,18,11,442/- is allowed as an eligible deduction against the profits and gain....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Accordingly it was held that no deduction for the above said amount of Rs. 74,51,000/- is available to the assessee in view of the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act, hence the same was disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee for this year. 3.2 The ld. AR submitted that the Hon'ble ITAT Jaipur Bench in assesse's own case for A.Y. 2006-07, A.Y. 2007-08 and A.Y. 2008-09 has deleted the disallowance made by the AO by applying the provisions of section 40A(3). The facts and circumstances of the business are same. The circumstances of the payment made to the farmers are also same. Therefore the disallowance made by AO deserves to be deleted. 3.3 It was further submitted that genuineness of transactions and ident....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....only for 74.51 lacs. 3.5 In respect of details of cash payments of Rs. 74.51 lacs, it was further submitted that the 5 payments totalling to Rs. 23,00,000/- was made on 10.5.2009 which was Sunday, 14 payments totalling to Rs. 46,00,000/- were made on 24.05.2009 which was also on Sunday. On Sunday, the banks remains closed and therefore covered under exceptions mentioned in clause 6DD. The remaining 2 payments of Rs. 5,00,000/- and Rs. 51,000/- were made on 15.10.2009 and 27.07.2009 after banking hours. 3.6 It was further submitted that the ld. AO failed to appreciate the relaxation provided under Second proviso to section 40A(3) of Income Tax Act. The second Proviso to section 40A(3) is as under: "Provided further that no dis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 6. CIT vs. Chrome Leather Co. Pvt. Ltd. (235 ITR 708) 3.8 The ld DR is heard who has argued the matter at length and relied upon the order of the AO. 3.9 We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. It is noted that during the year under consideration, the assessee has made cash payments of Rs. 74.51 lacs in respect of 21 separate transactions towards purchase of agriculture land. Out of 21 transactions, 19 payments were made to various farmers on Sunday and the remaining two payments totalling to Rs. 5,51,000/- was made after the close of the banking hours. Undisputedly the genuineness of the transactions and identity of the parties have been clearly spelt out by the assessee and forms part of t....