Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether cash payments made towards bottling charges were disallowable under section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, or were saved by rule 6DD(j) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 on the footing that rule 14 of the Karnataka Excise Licences (General Conditions) Rules, 1967 required cash-only transactions.
Analysis: Section 40A(3) disallows deduction where expenditure above the prescribed limit is paid otherwise than by account payee cheque or bank draft. Rule 6DD(j) creates a limited exception where payment by cheque or draft was not practicable, or would have caused genuine difficulty, due to exceptional or unavoidable circumstances, and the assessee also proves genuineness of payment and identity of the payee. Rule 14 of the Karnataka Excise Licences (General Conditions) Rules, 1967 governs sale of liquor for cash by a licencee and does not govern purchases made by the assessee from bottling agents or the Government. As the alleged cash-compulsion under rule 14 did not apply to the purchase transaction, the case did not fall within rule 6DD(j).
Conclusion: The cash payments were not protected by rule 6DD(j) and the disallowance under section 40A(3) was attracted; the Revenue succeeded.