https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456750 ITAT Chennai upheld addition under Section 40A(3) for payments made through bearer cheques to creditors. The assessee failed to establish business exigency justifying non-compliance with prescribed payment modes. Despite claiming business closure and no ongoing purchases, the assessee could not explain why payments weren't made through crossed cheques, bank drafts, or electronic transfers. The tribunal rejected the assessee's arguments, noting that Rule 6DD exceptions require proof of compelling business circumstances. The CIT(A)'s decision sustaining the addition was confirmed, emphasizing that assessees must demonstrate genuine business exigency to claim exceptions under the proviso to Section 40A(3). en-us Wed, 15 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Aug 2024 20:08:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456750 ITAT Chennai upheld addition under Section 40A(3) for payments made through bearer cheques to creditors. The assessee failed to establish business exigency justifying non-compliance with prescribed payment modes. Despite claiming business closure and no ongoing purchases, the assessee could not explain why payments weren't made through crossed cheques, bank drafts, or electronic transfers. The tribunal rejected the assessee's arguments, noting that Rule 6DD exceptions require proof of compelling business circumstances. The CIT(A)'s decision sustaining the addition was confirmed, emphasizing that assessees must demonstrate genuine business exigency to claim exceptions under the proviso to Section 40A(3). Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 15 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456750