Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2024 (1) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (1) TMI 272 - PATNA HIGH COURTDisallowance u/s 40A(3) - assessee, who is the appellant, is a government contractor showed payments exceeding Rs. 20,000/- in cash on various dates for materials purchased - specific ground on which the disallowance was made by the Assessing Officer is with respect to no substantiating bills or vouchers having been produced - HELD THAT:- The supplies admittedly have been obtained from a third party and it was delivered at the work site in trucks. If the payments are made to the different truck drivers, definitely there would have been vouchers obtained evidencing the receipt of such payments by the truck drivers. The Books of Accounts does not show the payments having been made by the appellant separately and not together as indicated in the Cash Book. If the payments were made at different points, definitely the Cash Book also would have indicated such payments having been made at the different sites in the registers maintained by the contractor at such different sites. It is the consolidated Day Book and Cash Book of the assessee which is produced before the AO which does not indicate such payments having not been made on a consolidated basis; which is the only inference available from the Cash Book of the assessee, which has been entered on a daily basis. We find that the Accounts Book cannot be relied on to challenge the disallowance made and the amendment made with effect from 01.04.2009 is not at all applicable in the above case. We specifically notice that Sunil Kumar [2016 (4) TMI 637 - PATNA HIGH COURT] was a case in which the AO had disallowed the aggregate payments made on a single day by several vouchers to a single person which aggregate amounts exceeded Rs. 20,000/-. It was specifically noticed by the Division Bench that in the present case not a single payment has been made through any voucher exceeding Rs. 20,000/- and hence it was not open to the AO to have aggregated the said payments. Such aggregation of payments would have been possible after 01.04.2009 is the corollary to the declaration made in the decision. We bow to the proposition as laid down by the Division Bench and notice specifically that there are no vouchers produced to substantiate the claim of separate payments having been made on a single day at the work spots where the delivery of the goods supplied were made. No reason to entertain the appeal and the question of law is decided against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. The disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on the ground of no substantiating documents having been furnished to the Assessing Officer by way of bills/vouchers is found to be perfectly in order, on the facts available in the instant case, which is in accordance with the provision even as it existed prior to the amendment of 01.04.2009. Appeal dismissed.
|