2015 (11) TMI 3 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance u/s 40A(3) - cash payment in excess of limits prescribed - Held that - The assessee has furnished the ledger copy, as maintained by the supplier, in their books of accounts. A perusal of the same demonstrates that supply of country liquor is made, only when the payment is made by the assessee to the supplier, who accounts for the same towards the cost of country liquor government dues, taxes, etc. Thus the payments in question were made in exceptional circumstances and hence fall within the exception read with rule 6DD. Thus, the disallowance under section 40A(3) is deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues: Violation of section 40A(3) - Cash payments to supplier, Interpretation of Rule 6DD(b) of IT Rules 1962, Applicability of judgments on direct cash payments, Ledger discrepancies

In this case, the primary issue revolved around the violation of section 40A(3) due to cash payments made by the assessee to the supplier, leading to a disallowance of expenses by the Assessing Officer. The assessee contended that the payments were directly deposited into the supplier's bank account, arguing no violation of the said section. The dispute was further analyzed in light of the judgment by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh, emphasizing that section 40A(3) should be read in conjunction with Rule 6DD to regulate business transactions and prevent the use of unaccounted money. The Tribunal referenced the Bangalore bench's decision in Sri Renukeswara Rice Mills, highlighting that direct bank payments ensure traceability and compliance with the objectives of section 40A(3). The Tribunal ultimately ruled in favor of the assessee, noting that the payments were made under exceptional circumstances and fell within the exception provided by Rule 6DD of the IT Rules, leading to the deletion of the disallowance under section 40A(3).

Another issue addressed in the judgment was the addition of a minor amount due to discrepancies in the ledger accounts of the assessee and the supplier. The assessee did not press this ground, citing the trivial nature of the amount, resulting in the dismissal of this issue.

In conclusion, the appeal filed by the assessee was partially allowed, with the Tribunal ruling in favor of the assessee regarding the section 40A(3) violation issue based on the exceptional circumstances surrounding the cash payments. The judgment provided a detailed analysis of relevant legal provisions, judicial interpretations, and factual considerations to arrive at a reasoned decision.