Section 40A(3)

Cash payments in excess of Rs. 20,000 made on bank/public holidays towards purchase of construction materials in the activity of real estate development could not be subjected to disallowance under section 40A(3) in view of rule 6DD(J)....

Assessee was not entitled to claim gifts and presents given to the customers by way of cash as business expenditure as the same was against the provisions contained u/s 40A(3)...

Since assessee failed to demonstrate that the conditions of the bid for purchase of gold jewellery required assessee to effect payments in cash and there was no explanation as to what stopped assessee from effecting payments through banking channel, therefore, AO was justified in disallowing the cash purchase of jewellery under section 40...

When income of the assessee was computed by applying gross profit rate, there was no need to look into the provisions of section 40A(3), as applying the gross profit rate takes care of expenditure otherwise by way of cross cheque also. Following the same the action of Tribunal could not be held as unjustified....

The provisions of section 68 cannot be applied to sundry creditors and the assessee cannot be applied to sundry creditors and the assessee cannot be asked to prove the 3 ingredients of cash credits in respect of sundry creditors....

When cash payment was done on insistence of the seller, amount was duly recorded in the sale deed and no doubt was raised with regard to the genuineness of the transaction, disallowance u/s 40A(3) not justifiable....

Disallowance under section 40A(3) with respect to cash payment made by assessee to farmers on Sunday for purchase of agricultural land could not be disallowed as Sunday was bank holiday and rule 6D(J)  was clearly attracted in assessees case as payment was made due to commercial expediency....

Where assessee’s debtor directly made payment through banking channel to assessee’s creditor to square up their account, provisions of section 40A(3) would not be attracted....

Kalyan Constructions Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad) Where assessee had not claimed cash payment of Rs. 1.50 crores for purchase of land as business expenditure or treated as stock or capitalized the same in order to claim depreciation in the future, disallowance under section 40A(3) could not be made. FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGMENT This [&hellip...

Ayub Ali Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur) The assessee has entered into an agreement with a Government Hospital in Bikaner whereby it operates the MRI and CT Scan machines. The nature of such activities therefore demand a continuous supply of electricity and the assessee cannot risk the life of the patients especially those admitted in emergency [&h...