CIT v. Smt. Shelly Passi

350 ITR 227High Court2013#2788 most cited

What is CIT v. Smt. Shelly Passi authority for?

Disallowance under Section 40A(3) for cash payments is not warranted if the genuineness of the transaction and the identity of the payee are established, particularly when the payee ultimately deposits the cash into a bank account, as the primary objective of preventing tax evasion is not defeated.

42

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Smt. Shelly Passi · Shelly Passi · Section 40A(3) · cash payments · disallowance · genuineness of payment · payee identity · deposit in bank · object of section 40A(3) · tax evasion · business expenditure

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Smt. Shelly Passi

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

…n for its transaction to seller, and later admitted payment and there was no doubt about genuineness of payment, no disallowance could be made under section 40A(3) - Held, yes [Para 23] [In favour of the assessee]" CIT vs Smt. Shelly Passi reported in (2013) 350 ITR 227 (P&H) In this case the court upheld the view of the tribunal in not applying section 40A(3) of the Act to the cash payments when ultimately, such amounts were deposited in the bank by the payee. 18. We are not inclined to ignore the intention of the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act by giving a plain reading of the same as argued by the ld…