9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 1449X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clause (k) of Rule 6DD of Income Tax Rules, 1962. Thus, cash payments made in excess of prescribed limit for purchase of materials comes under provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act, and hence, there is no error in the reasons given by the AO to make additions towards cash payment u/s.40A(3). There is no error in the reasoning given by the learned CIT(A) to sustain additions made by the AO towards cash payments u/s.40A(3) - Decided against assessee. - SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Mr. AR V Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT ORDER PER G.MANJUNATHA, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... purchase of cement, sand, bricks and jelly in excess of prescribed limit provided u/s. 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and hence, called upon the assessee to explain as to why cash payments in excess of Rs. 20,000/- cannot be disallowed u/s. 40A(3) of the Act. In response, the assessee vide letter dated 29.01.2016 submitted that in civil construction business cash payments for purchase of certain materials is unavoidable. Therefore, the assessee argued that payment made for purchase of raw materials on urgent requirements cannot be considered in light of provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act. The Assessing Officer, however, was not convinced with explanation furnished by the assessee and according to him, payments made in cash for pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allowance, albeit u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act, as no TDS has been deducted while making contractual payment to its aforesaid agents. Therefore, he opined that payment made by the assessee in cash for purchases is in violation of provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act and thus, cannot be allowed as deduction, accordingly, confirmed additions made by the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 5. None appeared on behalf of the assessee, despite various dates of hearings was provided. It is apparent from order sheet notings that on five occasions starting from 21.12.2020 to 07.09.2021, the assessee neither appeared nor sought adjournment of hearing by filing petition for adjournment. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and hence, there is no error in the reasons given by the Assessing Officer to make additions towards cash payment u/s.40A(3) of the Act. As regards various case laws relied upon by the assessee, we find that all those cases are rendered under different set of facts and hence, no application to the facts of the present case. 6. In this view of the matter, and considering facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that there is no error in the reasoning given by the learned CIT(A) to sustain additions made by the Assessing Officer towards cash payments u/s.40A(3) of the Act and hence, we are inclined to uphold order of the learned CIT(A) and dismiss appeal filed by the assessee. 7. In the result, appeal filed by the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
