Disallowance u/s 40A(3) Remanded for Review Considering Bank Holiday, Agent Payment & Business Exigenc

Chandra Moolchand Jain Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)

Conclusion: Assessee had given cash to her employee who was the supervisor or the agent who in turn made payment to the sellers of the gold and therefore the same would not fall within the scope of section 40A(3) in view of the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of S.K. Joynal Abedin v. CIT. Therefore, assessee was required to substantiate that the payment made to 61 parties on bank holiday, the payment was made by the agent and further the business exigency also demanded payment of cash.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.