https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427768 The Tribunal found the disallowance unjustified under Section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act, directing the deletion of the addition made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Tribunal considered business expediency and the genuineness of transactions, emphasizing that genuine expenses should not be excluded based on the Supreme Court's decision. The case involved cash payments exceeding Rs. 20,000 for grit purchases and carriage, with the assessee arguing that payments to illiterate suppliers in remote locations were legitimate, supported by increased profit ratios. en-us Tue, 13 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Sep 2022 08:14:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427768 The Tribunal found the disallowance unjustified under Section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act, directing the deletion of the addition made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Tribunal considered business expediency and the genuineness of transactions, emphasizing that genuine expenses should not be excluded based on the Supreme Court's decision. The case involved cash payments exceeding Rs. 20,000 for grit purchases and carriage, with the assessee arguing that payments to illiterate suppliers in remote locations were legitimate, supported by increased profit ratios. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 13 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427768