AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (4) TMI 755
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ances of the case, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-I, Nashik is not justified in confirming the disallowance made by the AO of Rs. 10,34,294/- by invoking the provisions of Section 40A(3) of the Act. 2. Without prejudice to other Grounds of Appeals and on the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-I, Nashik has erred in holding that appellant's case is not covered under any of the exceptions mentioned in Rule 8DD of the Income Tax Rules particularly when the town is not served by any bank to the payee. 3. Without prejudice to other Grounds of Appeals and on the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-I,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he AO of Rs. 35,900/- on account of tuition fees paid in respect of grandchildren of the appellant. 8. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-I, Nashik is not justified in confirming the disallowance made by the AO of Rs. 55,050/- on account of handling charges paid to Mr. Balu Malode by invoking provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act particularly when the entire payment was made during the year and no amount was payable as on 31.03.2009. Without prejudice to above, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-I, Nashik is not justified in not allowing the basic limit of Rs. 50,000/- for applicability of provisions of section 194C of the Act. 9. Without prejudic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the view that the cash payments were in contravention of provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act and hence, the addition of Rs. 10,34,294/- was made in the hands of assessee. 5. The explanation of the assessee before the CIT(A) was that the said cash payments were made because transporters were located outside Nashik and did not have the bank account in Nashik. He further stated that the cash was required for drivers of the transporters for various expenses such as fuel, payment of tolls and repairs, etc. Another contention raised by the assessee was that all cash payments were genuine and also the TDS was deducted wherever applicable. The CIT(A) noted that the cash payments have been made to various transporters including those located ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e explanation of the assessee vis-à-vis cash payments to drivers of transporters vehicles was that the payments were made in order to look after various expenses on road. However, the claim of the assessee was rejected by both the authorities below as the responsibility of the cash expenditure to be incurred on road was of the transporters, for which the transporters are supposed to handover cash to the drivers of the vehicles. The assessee on the other hand, further claimed that the TDS provisions were complied with wherever applicable. In the entirety of the above said facts and circumstances, we find some force in the claim of the assessee. However, in the absence of any details being available before us, we deem it fit to restore....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ous dates and each payment was less than Rs. 20,000/-, total aggregating amount was more than Rs. 50,000/-. The contention of the assessee was that since the total payment was less than Rs. 75,000/-, the provisions of section 194C were not attracted. The claim of the assessee was rejected since the figure of Rs. 75,000/- was substituted for Rs. 50,000/- w.e.f. 01.07.2010. The second contention of the assessee that the amount was paid and was not payable on the close of the year, was also rejected. 12. The assessee is in appeal against the aforesaid findings of authorities below. 13. We find no merit in the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in this regard. The year under appeal before us is assessment year 2009-10, under which a....