https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16027 The court upheld the validity of section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which disallows 20% of cash payments exceeding Rs. 20,000 in business expenditure calculations. It found the provision aims to regulate financial transactions and prevent black money circulation, citing precedent supporting its constitutionality. The deletion of rule sub-clauses was deemed a lawful measure to strengthen business transaction oversight and combat tax evasion. The court rejected the petitioner's claim regarding the addition of Rs. 6,83,258 in income-tax assessment, affirming the validity of the amended provision and dismissing the writ petition. en-us Mon, 02 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 31 Aug 2009 15:40:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16027 The court upheld the validity of section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which disallows 20% of cash payments exceeding Rs. 20,000 in business expenditure calculations. It found the provision aims to regulate financial transactions and prevent black money circulation, citing precedent supporting its constitutionality. The deletion of rule sub-clauses was deemed a lawful measure to strengthen business transaction oversight and combat tax evasion. The court rejected the petitioner's claim regarding the addition of Rs. 6,83,258 in income-tax assessment, affirming the validity of the amended provision and dismissing the writ petition. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 02 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16027