2018 (11) TMI 1176 - HC - Income Tax

Disallowance u/s 40A(3) - cash payments made to sellers of the agricultural land - assessee-company contended that the Tribunal has rightly allowed the appeal after considering the case as per the provisions of Section 40A(3) - Held that - From the perusal of the order of the Tribunal, it is evident that the Tribunal allowed the appeal following the decision of this Court in Gurdas Garg s case 2015 (8) TMI 569 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT . The said order no longer exists as the same has been re-called in a review application filed by the revenue. In such circumstance, it would be appropriate to remand the matter back to the Tribunal to decide the appeals and the cross-objections afresh after examining the facts of each case in detail.

Summary

Issues involved:
- Appeal against disallowance under Section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
- Reliance on a previous court decision
- Review application filed by the Income Tax Department

Analysis:
1. The judgment involved the disposal of six appeals and two cross-objections where a common issue was present, related to the disallowance under Section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2. The facts of the case were extracted from one of the appeals, where the Revenue filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Act against the Tribunal's order dated 30.03.2016 concerning the assessment year 2009-10.

3. The appellant raised substantial questions of law regarding the deletion of the addition made on account of disallowance under Section 40A(3) of the Act, concerning cash payments made for the purchase of land by the real estate developer assessee.

4. The Tribunal allowed the appeal and deleted the addition based on a previous court decision in the case of Gurdas Garg, which was later recalled in a review application filed by the Revenue.

5. The appellant argued that the Tribunal's decision was based on a recalled court order, while the assessee's counsel contended that the Tribunal rightly considered the provisions of Section 40A(3) of the Act.

6. The High Court noted the changed position due to the recalled court order and the Tribunal being the final fact-finding authority, leading to the decision to remand the matter back to the Tribunal for a fresh examination of the facts in each case.

7. Consequently, the High Court ordered the remand of the appeals and cross-objections for a detailed re-examination by the Tribunal in light of the changed circumstances and the absence of the previously relied-upon court decision.

This detailed analysis covers the key issues, arguments presented, and the final decision of the High Court in the judgment.