TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (6) TMI 882
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the AO nor the ld. CCIT had given any reason to initiate security proceedings in the circumstances of the present case. 2. For that the ld. CIT(Appeals) was unjustified in holding that the order was passed within the stipulated time. 3. For that the ld.CIT(A) was unjustified in giving opinion that the AO would be free to take action in the hands of the recipients of the gifts under appropriate action as the direction is beyond his jurisdiction. 4. For that the ld. CIT(A) should have allowed the deduction of Rs. 60,000/- & R.30,000/- wrongly disallowed by the AO u/s 40A(3) and his direction to examine afresh is beyond the jurisdiction as the evidences about payments though had been produ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e, the details of the same are given by the AO at page 2 which are as under :- "Rs. 25,000/- paid in cash on 03.05.2004 Rs. 25,000/- paid in cash on 13.07.2004 Rs. 25,000/- paid in cash on 19.11.2004 Rs. 25,000/- paid in cash on 07.03.2005 Rs. 30,000/- paid in cash on 15.03.2005 Rs. 30,000/- paid in cash on 29.03.2005" The AO has stated that cash payment exceeding Rs. 20,000/- on each occasion in respect of the above payments were made and accordingly disallowed 20% of it u/s 40A(3) of the Act and added back to the income of the assessee. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). 4.1. On behalf of the assessee, it was contended that the said pa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... authorities below was that the payment was made for purchase of bricks which were manufactured locally as cottage industry without the aid of power and hence Section 40A(3) would not be applicable in respect of the above payment made to Shri Goffar Mollah for purchase of bricks. He submitted that the above disallowance is not justified. 6. On the other hand, the ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below. 7. We have carefully considered the orders of the authorities below and the relevant clauses of Rule 6DD of IT Rules as applicable to the Assessment Year under consideration. 8. We find that the learned CIT(A) has referred to Rule 6DD(g) of the Income-tax Rules,1962. In Rule 6DD, as subs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., for the first time, the learned AR of the assessee stated that the payment of Rs. 1,60,000 made to Goffer Mollah, Prop. of Rubi Enterprises was on account of purchase of bricks, which is a cottage industry and bricks were manufactured without aid of power and therefore, the payment is not disallowable u/s.40A(3) in view of the provisions contained in Rule 6DD(g) of the Act stood during the relevant Assessment Year under consideration and prior to the Income-tax (Eighth Amendment) Rules 2007,. which reads as under : (g) where the payment is made for the purchase of the products manufactured or processed without the aid of power in a cottage industry, to the producer of such products; Considering the above provision in Ru....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... disallowance of Rs. 23,100/- claimed by the assessee on account of giving donations to various clubs and puja committees. 9. We have heard the ld. Representatives of the parties and have perused the orders of the authorities below. 10. During the course of hearing the ld. AR referred to pages 9 to 15 of the paper book and submitted that the aggregate amount of Rs. 23,100/-was paid by the assessee to various puja committees and clubs which were in the vicinity of place where the assessee was carrying on the business. He submitted that the said payment was made to enable the assessee to carry on the business smoothly in the business interest. 11. The ld. DR has not controverted the above submissions of the....