CTO v. Swastik Roadways
3 SCC 640Reported decision2004#3271 most cited
What is CTO v. Swastik Roadways authority for?
The rigours of Section 40A(3) should not be invoked without examining the genuineness of the transactions and whether they were free from tax evasion, as the consequences for non-compliance must have a nexus to the object of preventing tax evasion.
36
judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.
Also referred to as
CTO v. Swastik Roadways · section 40A(3) · genuineness of transaction · tax evasion · nexus · object of provision · business expediency · honest transactions · penalize tax evader · Rule 6DD(j)