https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26222 The Court refrained from answering the questions raised in the references due to the unavailability of Circular No. 220 during the assessment proceedings. Instead, they emphasized the importance of allowing parties to present evidence regarding the applicability of rule 6DD(j) as per the Circular. The judgment highlighted the need to consider all relevant circumstances and evidence before determining the application of rule 6DD(j)(i) and (ii) in cases of cash payments exceeding Rs. 2,500 under section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. en-us Fri, 13 Oct 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:36:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26222 The Court refrained from answering the questions raised in the references due to the unavailability of Circular No. 220 during the assessment proceedings. Instead, they emphasized the importance of allowing parties to present evidence regarding the applicability of rule 6DD(j) as per the Circular. The judgment highlighted the need to consider all relevant circumstances and evidence before determining the application of rule 6DD(j)(i) and (ii) in cases of cash payments exceeding Rs. 2,500 under section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 13 Oct 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26222