CIT v. CPL Tannery

318 ITR 179High Court2009#1762 most cited

What is CIT v. CPL Tannery authority for?

Disallowance under Section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is not justified for cash payments if they are genuine, made out of business expediency, and the assessee's bona fides are not disputed, even after the 2009 amendments to the section.

64

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. CPL Tannery · Section 40A(3) · cash payment disallowance · business expediency · genuine transactions · bona fide payments · 318 ITR 179 · Calcutta High Court · amended provisions · exigency of business

Judgments citing CIT v. CPL Tannery

Smt Bimala Bala Mondal, Burdwan vs. ITO, WD-1(4), Durgapur

In the result the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 794/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Sept 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm] I.T.A No. 794/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt. Bimala Bala Mondal -Vs.- I.T.O., Ward-1(4) Burdwan Durgapur [Pan : Aeapm 9753 N] ] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : None For The Respondent : Shri.Ambitab Bhattacharya Jcit Date Of Hearing : 23.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2016. Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 5.2.2014 Of Cit(A)- Durgapur, Relating To Ay 2010-11. 2. The Assessee Is An Individual. He Is A Dealer In Country Spirits. Purchases Are Made From A Single Party Namely Ifb Agro Industries Ltd.. The Assessee In Respect Of Purchases From Ifb Agro Industries Ltd. Made A Payment Of Rs.14,31,840/- In Cash. According To The Ao The Above Payment Made Cannot Be Allowed As Deduction In Computing The Total Income Of The Assessee Because Of The Violation Of The Provision Of Section 40A(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act). The Action Of The Ao Was Confirmed By Cit(A). 3. Aggrieved By The Order Of Cit(A) The Assessee Has Preferred An Appeal Before This Tribunal. 4. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Asseseee Nor Was Any Request For Adjournment Made. I Have Heard The Submissions Of The Ld. Dr. Identical Issue With Regard To The Disallowance U/S 40A(3) Of The Act In The Case Of Assessee Who Are Engaged In The Business Of Country Spirits Who Have Paid Purchases In Cash Had Come Up For Consideration Before This Bench In The Case Of Ramnagar Pachwai & C.S. (Shop) Vs Ito Vide Ita No.148/Kol/2015 & 185&186/Kol/2014 For A.Y.2007-08 & 2008-09

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri.Ambitab Bhattacharya JCIT
Section 22Section 40A(3)Section 85Section 86

…from the provisions of section 40A(3) and rule 6DD that they are intended to regulate business transactions and to prevent the use of unaccounted money or reduce the chances to use black money for business transactions." CIT vs CPL Tannery reported in (2009) 318 ITR 179 (Cal) The contention of the assessee that he purchased goods from suppliers who are producers of hides and skins, has not been refuted either by the AO or by the CITA. The second contention of the assessee that owing to business expediency, obligation and exigency, the assessee had to make cash payment for purchase of goods so essential for carry…