TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 564X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the expenditure incurred paid by way of cash is contrary to section 40A(3) of the Act. The assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) which appeal came to be allowed. Against which a second appeal was filed by the Revenue which appeal has been dismissed by the Tribunal confirming the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Against these two orders ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MANJUNATH and A. S. BOPANNA JJ. M. V. Seshachala for the appellant. A. Shankar for the respondent. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by 1. K. L. MANJUNATH J. - This appeal is by the Revenue challenging the concurrent findings of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench in I. T. A. No. l9l3I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stion of law would arise for consideration in this appeal: "(1) Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the cash payment of Rs. 37,17,798 made by the assessee did not attract the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act and therefore no explanation under rule 6DD of the Rules was required to be assigned by the assessee." 5. Having heard the counsel for the parties, it is noticed by u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he claim made by the assessee was rejected. 6. The Tribunal as well as the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on facts have held that it is not an expenditure claimed by the assessee, but it is a payment made to the sub-contractor pursuant to an agreement. There fore, we are of the opinion, that whether it is a business expenditure to attract the provision of section 40A(3) of the Act or an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
