Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.26 seconds)
M/S. Hind Industries Ltd., New Delhi vs Dcit, New Delhi on 30 August, 2023 cites

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Andhra ... vs Jayalakshmi Rice And Oil Mills ... on 15 January, 1971

On perusal of the ITAT Bangalore Bench in case of CIT Vs. Ranukeswara Rice Mills (supra) we are in agreement with the conclusion drawn by the ld CIT(A) that in that case the payment was made by appellant for purchase of agricultural produce through an agent one M/s. K. Parameswarappa & co. called as (KP) and hence that case was covered under the exceptions granted under 6DD(f) of the Rules.
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 38 - A N Grover - Full Document

R.C. Nirula & Sons Huf, New Delhi vs Acit, New Delhi on 11 February, 2019

8. Further, drawing our attention towards relevant part of the first appellate order the ld CIT DR submitted that the ld first appellate authority granted part relief to the assessee deleting the part disallowance of Rs. 25,23,81,862/- for purchase of raw material which was paid through account payee cheques and was not falling within the rigours of section 40A(3) of the Act. Regarding remaining part of the sustained disallowance the ld CIT DR submitted that the ld CIT(A) after considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, in detail, found that the benefit of exception provided in Rule 6DD(f) of the Rules was not available to the assessee as the applicant failed to prove identity of the suppliers and genuineness of the purchase. The ld CIT DR submitted that the first appellate authority rightly relied on the judgment of C. V. George and Sons Vs. ACIT (2006) 286 ITR 389 and also rightly distinguished the judgment of ITAT Bangalore Bench and in case of CIT Vs. Renukeswara Rice Mills (2005) 93 ITD 263. The ld CIT DR submitted that the assessee claimed to have purchased frozen meat from the farmers in huge quantity in violation of section 40A(3) of the Act but it is surprising that how can the farmers have equipment and facility to convert the raw meat into frozen meat in their villages.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 17 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Hynoup Food & Oil Industries (P) Ltd. ... on 18 March, 1998

17. In the present case the assessee could not establish that the purchase were made through agent. The ld CIT(A) also noted that the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT Vs. Hynooup Food and Oil India (P) Ltd (supra) held that in absence of any evidence in support of identity and genuineness of the appellant benefit of section 6DD(f) of the Rules cannot be applied in favour of the assessee therefore, the AO was right in making disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Act therefore, the ld CIT(A) was correct and justified in upholding the same. The ld CIT(A) before upholding the disallowance noted from the relevant fact that the cash purchase aggregating to Rs. 23,39,05,551/- made from 54 individuals were in respect of purchase of frozen meat being a produce of raw meat that is processed for long term storage, was to be produced by meat processing undertakings having plant and machinery for converting raw meat into frozen meat. Thus, we are in agreement Page | 12 ITA No. 6660/Del/2014 M/s. Hind Industries Ltd to the conclusion drawn by the ld CIT(A) that frozen meat could be purchased only from the meat processing units and therefore, the said suppliers, who are claimed to be illiterate villages with no bank accounts, cannot be held as cultivators or producer of frozen meat. Therefore, the explanation of assessee being devoid of merits and far away truthful factual positions was rightly discussed by the ld AO CIT(A). Hence, the payment of assessee made in cash in violation of section 40A(3) of the Act is not eligible for benefit of exceptions envisages under Rules 6DD(f). In totality of the facts and circumstances, we are unable to see any valid reason to interfere with the findings recorded by the ld CIT(A) while sustaining the part disallowances u/s 40A(3) of the Act and hence we uphold the same. Accordingly, grounds of assessee being devoid of merits are dismissed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 52 - Cited by 55 - Full Document
1