https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364722 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, finding that Section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act did not apply as the cash payments were not claimed as business expenditure or capitalized for future depreciation. The land was deemed a capital asset, not stock-in-trade, and the cash payment was not considered part of the land's value. Consequently, the disallowance of cash payments under Section 40A(3) was unjustified, and the interest charges under Sections 234B and 234C were to be adjusted accordingly. The assessee's appeal was allowed, and the disallowance of Rs. 1.50 crores was deleted. en-us Tue, 31 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Aug 2018 12:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364722 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, finding that Section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act did not apply as the cash payments were not claimed as business expenditure or capitalized for future depreciation. The land was deemed a capital asset, not stock-in-trade, and the cash payment was not considered part of the land's value. Consequently, the disallowance of cash payments under Section 40A(3) was unjustified, and the interest charges under Sections 234B and 234C were to be adjusted accordingly. The assessee's appeal was allowed, and the disallowance of Rs. 1.50 crores was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 31 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364722