Case Laws Analysis
REFERRED Gurdas Garg v. CIT(A) 2019 TaxPub(DT) 2324 (P&H-HC)
REFERRED M.K. Agrotech (P) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT 2019 TaxPub(DT) 0030 (Karn-HC)
REFERRED Pr. CIT v Keerthi Agro Mills (P) Ltd. 2018 TaxPub(DT) 3778 (SC)
REFERRED Pr. CIT v. Samwon Precision Mould Mfg. India (P) Ltd. 2018 TaxPub(DT) 1130 (Del-HC)
REFERRED CIT v. Keerthi Agro Mills (P) Ltd. 2017 TaxPub(DT) 4497 (Ker-HC)
REFERRED Hotel Nagas (P) Ltd. v. CIT 2016 TaxPub(DT) 2422 (Mad-HC)
REFERRED CIT v. The Solution 2016 TaxPub(DT) 1925 (Raj-HC)
REFERRED Honey Enterprises v. CIT 2016 TaxPub(DT) 1011 (Del-HC)
REFERRED Sri Laxmi Satyanarayana Oil Mill v. CIT 2014 TaxPub(DT) 3874 (AP-HC)
REFERRED Anupam Tele Services v. ITO 2014 TaxPub(DT) 1537 (Guj-HC)
REFERRED R.C. Goel v. CIT 2013 TaxPub(DT) 0749 (Del-HC)
REFERRED Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Smt. Shelly Passi 2013 TaxPub(DT) 0377 (P&H-HC)
REFERRED Vijay Kumar Talwar v. CIT 2011 TaxPub(DT) 0693 (SC)
REFERRED CIT v. Arthur Andersen & Co. 2009 TaxPub(DT) 0388 (Bom-HC)
REFERRED Smt. Harshila Chordia v. Income Tax Officer 2007 TaxPub(DT) 0716 (Raj-HC)
REFERRED Assistant CIT v. Sri Saraswathi Iron Foundry 2006 TaxPub(DT) 1764 (Karn-HC)
REFERRED Kamath Marbles v. Income Tax Officer & Ors. 2003 TaxPub(DT) 0877 (Ker-HC)
REFERRED Walford Transport (Eastern India) Ltd. v. CIT 1999 TaxPub(DT) 1443 (Gau-HC)
REFERRED Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh Etc. v. Income Tax Officer 1991 TaxPub(DT) 1528 (SC)
REFERRED Kalyankumar Ray v. CIT 1991 TaxPub(DT) 1526 (SC)
REFERRED Girdharilal Goenka v. CIT 1989 TaxPub(DT) 0731 (Cal-HC)
REFERRED CIT v. Khemchand Ramdas 1938 TaxPub(DT) 0055 (Privy Council)
 
The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 3719 (Karn-HC) : (2020) 428 ITR 0186 : (2021) 277 TAXMAN 0169

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 40A(3)

Since the place at which cash payment to agriculturists/farmers for purchase of land was made in excess of prescribed limit, had banking facility, therefore, assessee's case was not covered in the exception clause as provided under section 40A(3) read with rule 6DD and, therefore, AO was justified in making disallowance.

Business disallowance under section 40A(3) - Cash payment in excess of prescribed limit - Payments made by assessee to agriculturists/farmers for purchase of land - Place, at which payment was made, had banking facility

AO by applying section 40A(3) disallowed cash payments made by assessee to agriculturists/farmers for purchase of land. Assessee took the stand that transaction took place at the place where there were no banking facilities. Held: Since AO found that the place, at which payment was made, had banking facility ,therefore, assessee's case was not covered in the exception clause as provided under section 40A(3) read with rule 6DD and, therefore, AO was justified in making disallowance.

REFERRED :

FAVOUR : Against the assesse

A.Y. : 2006-07



IN THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

SUBSCRIBE TaxPublishers.inSUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT