This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Sec. 40A(3) is to curb / reduce black money transactions not business expediencies
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- Anupam Tele Services Vs ITO (Gujarat High Court)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Courts
- All High Courts, Gujarat High Court
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
In the present case, neither the genuineness of the payment nor the identity of the payee were in any case doubted. These were the conclusions on facts drawn by the Appellate Commissioner. The Tribunal also did not disturb such facts but relied solely on Rule 6DD (j) of the Rules to hold that since the case of the assessee did not fall under the said exclusion clause nor was covered under any of the clauses of Rule 6DD, consequences envisaged in Section 40A(3) of the Act must follow.
In our opinion, the Tribunal committed an error in coming to such a conclusion. We would base our conclusions o...
Tentative:
The gravest of all doubts, more so of a rudimentary nature, that instantly arises in own mind is this, – does not such a conclusion as reached in assessee’s favour, prima facie, fly in the face of the crucial non-obstante clause as embodied in the opening words of section 40A(1).
Further, contrary to the impression appears to be given, on a quick reading of the Supreme Court judgment in Attar Singh Gurmukh Singh’s case, that is seen to have been decided against the assessed .
May be, experts at large have a different approach / perception; if so, being passed over to them, for further deliberation and enlightenment.