9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1191X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee. - ITA No. 450/Kol/2018 - - - Dated:- 3-8-2018 - Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member And Sri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member For The Assessee : Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA, appeared For The Revenue : Shri S.M. Das, Addl. CIT, D/R. ORDER Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM :- This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Kolkata (hereinafter the Ld. CIT(A) ), dt. 03/01/2018, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act ), relating to Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The assessee is an individual and is in the business of transportation. He is a proprietary concern under the name and style of M/s Calcutta South Transport Co. He filed his return of income on 26th September, 2014, declaring total income at ₹ 12,77,840/-. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) determining the income of at ₹ 2,19,26,760/-, interalia making a disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Act, for the reason that the assessee made cash payments for hiring trucks beyond the limits prescribed u/s 40A(3) of the Act. Aggrieved the assessee carried the matter in appeal. Before the ld. First A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... limit of ₹ 35,000/-. He also disputed the argument of the assessee that the payments were through a commission agent. 4. We have heard rival contentions. On careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, perusal of the papers on record, orders of the authorities below as well as case law cited, we hold as follows:- The assessee is a transport contractor. During the course of scrutiny proceedings, he submitted the following submissions:- My nature of business i.e. transportation business which exclusively transports goods from Kolkata to extreme parts of the southern partof India. All my truck run from Kolkata to extreme south covering almost 2500-3000 Kms. We have to pay transportation charges of ₹ 50,000/- per truck to carry the goods. At most 80% of the agreed transportation is to be paid to the driver for the purpose of Diesel toll tax, drivers fooding and en-route expenses. Hence we have to pay the amount to carry on our business. Therefore I would like to state that my case falls under the exceptional circumstances category which does not fall under the provisions of section 40A(3) of the IT Act 1961. The limit of payments in cash a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15.11.2013. In the said case, it was held as below:- 6. The learned AR of the assessee submitted before us that since in all the years the issue involved is identical, therefore, the same are argued together. He submitted that a search action under section 132 was carried out in the assessee‟s case on 11.02.2010. The AO found that certain cash payments were made in excess of limit prescribed under section 40A(3), and hence, he made the impugned additions. He submitted that the assessee was engaged in the business of transportation, and has entered into contract with M/s. Hindustan Lever Ltd., Reliance, Kalpataru, etc. for transportation of goods. Copies of few such agreements are placed at page nos.77 to 102 of the paper book. He submitted that consequent to the aforesaid arrangement, such goods are transported through trucks owned by it as well as through hired trucks. It was submitted that as regard payments in respect of hiring charges of the trucks, the said payment was made in cash by the assessee to brokers who, in turn, was required to make payments to the concerned truck owner/drivers on behalf of the assessee. He submitted that the fact that the payments hav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eliance on the decision of the ITAT, Ahmedabad bench in the case of Vijaykumar P. Desaid (Individual HUF) - ITA No.46 to 57/Ahd/2013 and 85 to 96/Ahd/2013 consolidated order dated 29.8.2013, and also on the decision of the Hon‟ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sri Shanmuga Ginning Factory 37 taxmann.com 422 (Mad.). In the alternative, the learned AR submitted that the assessee has on one hand received freight from various companies, and on the other hand, it has passed on considerately portion of the same to its brokers for making payments in respect of hiring charges. The assessee retains only a small amount from the gross receipts received from the concerned companies, and the same ranges between 2.79% to 3.83% of such gross receipts. He placed reliance on page no.17 of the paper book. It was argued that merely for the sake of convenience, assessee recorded freight income received from the companies as well as the freight expenses paid through brokers. It is submitted that what the assessee earns as income is merely the freight difference and the same is in the nature of commission. When the assessee earns merely freight difference, the freight paid to the brok ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that on this aspect, it is noted by the learned CIT(A) that as per the remand report of the AO, the AO had issued notices u/s 133(6) of the Act to all eighteen persons whose names were available in the seized materials regarding cash payments exceeding ₹ 20,000/- and all of them had confirmed that they were acting as agents on behalf of these two assessees for making purchases on their behalf and they were getting commission in the range of 0.75% to 1%, They had also confirmed that they were receiving cash payment from these two assessees and were in turn making cash payment to the raddiwalas from whom they were making purchases on behalf of these two assessees. These facts are noted by the learned CIT(A) from the remand report In the remand report, it was also reported by the AO that the AO had also issued notice u/s 131 of the Act to three such agents on random basis out of total eighteen agents and out of these three persons, two appeared before the AO and confirmed that they were acting as agent for these two assessees for making purchases on behalf of these two assessees. It was also confirmed by them that they were taking payment in cash from these two assessees and p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -Genuineness of the transaction was not doubted by the AO or by the Tribunal-Identity of the payee was also not questioned7 CIT(A) found that the payments were made to keep harmonious relationship with the principal-Same clearly satisfies the requirement of the provisions of r. 6DD(j)(1)- Disallowance under s. 40A(3) not justified. 9.3. We find that the Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Anupam Tele Services vs ITO reported in (2014) 366 ITR 122 (Guj) wherein the head notes are reproduced as below:- Business Expenditure-Disallowance-Validity of-Cash payment exceeding prescribed limit-Assessee acted as agent of Tata for distributing mobile cards and recharge vouchers-Assessee made payments by account payee cheques till August 2005- Subsequently TATA issued circular and assessee was required to make payment by cash, since it had bank account with cooperative bank-Assessee made payment in cash on different dates and such payment exceeded ₹ 20,000 each-AO disallowed payment made in cash invoking provisions of s 40A(3)-CIT(A) deleted disallowance made by AO holding that genuineness of transaction was not disputed and assessee took a very practical step in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e decisions of different High Courts referred to above, it clearly emerges that the purpose of s. 40A(3) of the Act is not to penalize the assessee for making cash payment of an amount of ₹ 2,500 or above. The purpose is only preventive and to check evasion of tax and flow of unaccounted money or to check transactions which are not genuine and may be put as camouflage to evade tax by showing fictitious or false transactions. 9.5. We also find that the Hon‟ble Rajasthan High court in the case of Smt Harshila Chordia vs ITO reported in (2008) 298 ITR 349 (Guj) had held that the exceptions contained in Rule 6DD of the Rules are not exhaustive and that the said rule must be interpreted liberally. 9.6. In view of our aforesaid findings and respectfully following the judicial precedents relied upon hereinabove, we hold that the subject mentioned cash payments would fall under the ambit of exception provided in Rule 6DD(k) of the Rules in the facts and circumstances of the case and accordingly the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act could not be made applicable in the instant case. Hence we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld CIT(A) in this regard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om disclosed sources. The terms of section 40A(3) are not absolute. Consideration of business expediency and other relevant factors are not excluded. The genuine and bona fide transactions are not taken out of the sweep of the section. It is open to the assessee to furnish to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer the circumstances under which the payment in the manner prescribed in section 40A(3) was not practicable or would have caused genuine difficulty to the payee. It is also open to the assessee to identify the person who has received the cash payment. Rule 6DD provides that an assessee can be exempted from the requirement of payment by a crossed cheque or crossed bank draft in the circumstances specified under the rule. It will be clear from the provisions of section 40A(3) and rule 6DD that they are intended to regulate the business transactions and to prevent the use of unaccounted money or reduce the chances to use black- money for business transactions. - Mudiam Oil Co. v. ITO [1973] 92 ITR 519 (AP). If the payment is made by a crossed cheque on a bank or a crossed bank draft, then it will be easier to ascertain, when deduction is claimed, whether the payment was genu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the section. It is open to the assessee to furnish to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer the circumstances under which the payment in the manner prescribed in section 40A(3) was not practicable or would have caused genuine difficulty to the payee. It is also open to the assessee to identify the person who has received the cash payment. Rule 6DD provides that an assessee can be exempted from the requirement of payment by a crossed cheque or crossed bank draft in the circumstances specified under the rule. 25. Here, it is relevant to note that there has been no change in the provisions of section 40A(3) in so far as considerations of business expediency and other relevant factors are concerned, as existed at relevant point in time and as considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the provisions of section 40A(3) as exist now and relevant for the impunged assessment year i.e. AY 2013-14. However, Rule 6DD(j) has been amended and by notification dated 10.10.2008, it now provides for an exception only in a scenario where the payment was required to be made on a day on which banks were closed either on account of holiday or strike. A question which arises for considera ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r create black money and to ascertain whether the payment was genuine or whether it was out of the income from disclosed sources. And Section 40A(3) continues to provide that no disallowance shall be made in such cases and under such circumstances as may be prescribed having regard to the nature and extent of the banking facilities available, consideration of business expediency and other relevant factors. In our view, given that there has been no change in the provisions of section 40A(3) in so far as consideration of business expediency and other relevant factors are concerned, the same continues to be relevant factors which needs to be considered and taken into account while determining the exceptions to the disallowance as contemplated under section 40A(3) of the Act so long as the intention of the legislature is not violated. We find that our said view find resonance in decisions of various authorities, which we have discussed below and thus seems fortified by the said decisions. 29. We refer to the decision of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in case of Smt. Harshila Chordia vs. ITO (supra), where the facts of case were that the assessee had made certain cash paymen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bunal. 31. It was accordingly held by the Hon'ble High Court that it is the relevant consideration for the assessing authority under the Income Tax Act that before invoking the provisions of section 40A(3) in light of Rule 6DD as clarified by circular of the CBDT that whether the failure on the part of the assessee in adhering to requirement of provisions of section 40A(3) has any such nexus which defeats the object of provision so as to invite such a consequence. This is particularly so, because the consequence provided u/s 40A(3) for failure to make payments through bank is not absolute in terms nor automatic but exceptions have been provided and leverage has been left for little flexing by making a general provision in the form of clause (j) in rule 6DD. Thereafter, the Hon'ble High Court refers to the clause 6DD(j) and the circular dated 31st May, 1977 issued by the Board in the context of what shall constitute exceptional and unavoidable circumstances within the meaning of section Clause (j). The Hon'ble High Court observed that the circular in paragraph 5 gives a clear indication that rule 6DD(j) has to be liberally construed and ordinarily where the genuine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ertain sum (in the present case twenty thousand rupees) must be made by way of account payee cheque drawn on a bank or account payee bank draft. 19. As held by the Apex Court in case of Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh (supra). ..In our opinion, there is little merit in this contention. Sec. 40A(3) must not be read in isolation or to the exclusion of r. 6DD. The section must be read along with the rule. If read together, it will be clear that the provisions are not intended to restrict the business activities. There is no restriction on the assessee in his trading activities. Sec. 40A(3) only empowers the A.O. to disallow the deduction claimed as expenditure in respect of which payment is not made by crossed cheque or crossed bank draft. The payment by crossed cheque or crossed bank draft is insisted on to enable the assessing authority to ascertain whether the payment was genuine or whether it was out of the income from undisclosed sources, The terms of s. 40A(3) are not absolute. Considerations of business expediency and other relevant factors are not excluded. Genuine and bona fide transactions are not taken out of the sweep of the section. It is open to the assessee to furnish ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k account on behalf of the assessee; ( iv) It is not disputed that the Tata Tele Services Ltd. did not act on such promise; ( v) if the assessee had not made cash payment and relied on cheque payments alone, it would have received the recharge vouchers delayed by 4/5 days and thereby severely affecting its business operations. We would find that the payments between the assessee and the Tata Tele Services Ltd. were genuine. The Tata Tele Services Ltd. had insisted that such payments be made in cash, which Tata Tele Services Ltd. in turn assured and deposited the amount in a bank account. In the facts of the present case, rigors of s. 40A(3) of the Act must be lifted. 23. We notice that the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in case of Smt. Harshila Chordia vs. ITO (2007) 208 CTR (Raj) had observed that the exceptions contained in r. 6DD are not exhaustive and that the said rule must be interpreted liberally. 34. In case of M/s Ajmer Food Products Pvt. Ltd., Ajmer vs. JCIT (supra), a similar issue has come up before the Co-ordinate Bench and speaking through one of us, it was held as under: 4.5 The genuineness of the transaction as w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... insisted for payment in cash and that as a result thereof, payments had to be made immediately to settle the deals. The Tribunal did not doubt this case. The Tribunal, however, held that the claim for deduction was not sustainable. In view of Section 40A(3) as the payments which were over ₹ 20,000/- were made in cash. The Hon'ble High Court accordingly observed that the Tribunal has not disbelieved the transactions or the genuineness thereof nor has it disbelieved the fact that payments having been made. More importantly, the reasons furnished by the appellant for having made the cash payments, which we have already adverted to, have not been disbelieved. In our view, assuming these reasons to be correct, they clearly make out a case of business expediency. 36. The Co-ordinate Bench in case of M/s Dhuri Wine vs DCIT (ITA No. 1155/chd/2013 others dated 09.10.2015) has held that the proposition so laid down by the Hon'ble High Court in case of Gurdas Garg (supra) is quite unambiguous to the effect that even if the case of the assessee does not fall in any of the clauses of Rule 6DD of the Income Tax Rules, invoking the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... value, stamp duty, Court fee and mode of payment - cash/cheque. Therefore, as far as the identity of the persons from whom the purchases have been made and genuineness of the transactions of purchase of various plots of land and payment in cash is concerned, the same is evidenced by the registered sale deeds and there is no dispute which has been raised by the Revenue either during the assessment proceedings or before us. The identity of the sellers and genuineness of the transactions is therefore fully established in the instant case. 40. From perusal of the assessment order, it is further noted that the AO, on perusal of the details of the properties purchased, as per copies of the sale deed furnished, held that the assessee had made cash payments regularly and no specific circumstances have been brought to his knowledge that the cash payments were made due to some unavoidable circumstances. It was held by the AO that maximum cash payments were made to persons residing in Jaipur city and in single family, repeated cash payments were made which itself shows that there were no unavoidable circumstances to make cash payments to the sellers. What is therefore relevant to note ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent has been made by cheque. This makes out a case that the assessee has business expediency under which it has to make payment in cash and in absence of which, the transactions could not be completed. The second proviso to section 40A(3) refers to the nature and extent of banking facility, consideration of business expediency and other relevant factors which means that the object of the legislature is not to make disallowance of cash payments which have to be compulsory made by the assessee on account of business expediency. Further, the source of cash payments is clearly identifiable in form of the withdrawals from the assessee's bank accounts and the said details were submitted before the lower authorities and have not been disputed by them. It is not the case of the Revenue either that unaccounted or undisclosed income of the assessee has been utilised in making the cash payments. 43. In the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and respectfully following the legal proposition laid down by the various Courts and Coordinate Benches referred supra, we are of the view that the identity of the persons from whom the various plots of land have been purchased and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
