2022 (1) TMI 591

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application was filed seeking adjournment. A perusal of the order sheet entries of hearings conducted in the present appeal reveal that whenever the appeal was called up for hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Notice issued through registered post for todays hearing was returned back with the noting that despite three attempts made, i.e. on 07/10/21, 08/1021 and 09/10/21, nobody was found at the stated address. It is evident that the assessee does not seem to be interested in pursuing the appeal. The appeal was, therefore, proceeded to be heard and decided ex-parte. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under: "1. The order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law, having....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ts of which were made in cash. He therefore, disallowed the said amount totaling to Rs. 4,66,000/- u/s. 40A(3) of the Act. The appellant has contended that being first year of business, it was interested in buying land and since the farmers were unknown and insisted on cash payments, the said payments were made in cash. I find that the appellant has not filed any documentary evidences in support of its claim. The appellant has claimed exemption from provisions of section 40A(3) by relying on Rule 6DD(g). However, the name and addresses of the seller of land have not been submitted. Thus, it is not established whether the area itself was served with a banking facility or not. Moreover, the land purchased was part of the appellant&#3....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....de of the assessee and has further relied on a decision of ITAT Indore Bench in the case of Kunjika Construction (supra) which he stated was passed on identical facts. the addition was upheld. 7. In view of the above categorical findings of the Ld. CIT(A) demonstrating ineligibility of the assessee from exemption from the rigors of section 40A(3) of the Act, we see no reason to interfere in the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 8. In view of the above the order of the Ld. CIT(A) confirming the addition of Rs. 4,66,000/- made under Section 40A of the Act is upheld. Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee is dismissed. 9. Ground No. 3 relates to the issue of addition made of Rs. 6,44,785/- on account of preliminary expenses. 10. The finding of....