9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Interpretation of Section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 regarding disallowance of expenditure exceeding Rs. 2,500 made in cash for business purposes.
Detailed Analysis: The judgment by the High Court of Madras involved a reference under the Income Tax Act, 1961, where the Department sought clarification from the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the application of Section 40A(3). The Tribunal initially rejected the reference, but upon the Department's appeal, the Tribunal was directed to state a case on the matter. The primary question for consideration was whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that Section 40A(3) applies only if each item of expenditure on a single bill exceeds Rs. 2,500. The case revolved around two purchase bills made by the assessee for the acquisition of commodities in cash, with one bill amounting to Rs. 2,668 and the other to Rs. 2,518. The Income Tax Officer disallowed these payments as business expenditure under Section 40A(3) since they were made in cash exceeding Rs. 2,500. The Tribunal, however, accepted the assessee's argument that each individual item of expenditure should be considered separately, irrespective of the combined payment exceeding the threshold. The High Court disagreed with the Tribunal's interpretation, emphasizing that Section 40A(3) focuses on the payment made by the assessee exceeding Rs. 2,500 and the manner of payment, rather than individual items of expenditure. The Court clarified that if the payment exceeds the limit and is made in cash, it should be disallowed unless specific circumstances exempt it. The Tribunal's approach of isolating each expenditure item and relating it to the payment amount was deemed incorrect, as it deviated from the statutory intent of the provision. The Court highlighted that the Tribunal's method rendered the payment inquiry irrelevant, as it equated expenditure with payment, leading to a flawed interpretation of the law. The proper approach, as per the Court, is to assess whether the payment for the expenditure exceeds Rs. 2,500 and the mode of payment, without dissecting individual expenditure items. Consequently, the Court ruled against the assessee, stating that the Tribunal's interpretation was legally flawed, and upheld the disallowance of the payments exceeding Rs. 2,500 made in cash for business expenses. The Department was awarded costs, including counsel fees.
|
