9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 692X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income of Rs. 31,65,530/-. The same was accepted after being processed under Section 143(1) of the Act and refund of Rs. 6,693/-was ordered. The case was subsequently selected for scrutiny and by an order passed under Section 143(3) of the Act, the income of the appellant was determined at Rs. 59,75,530/- and a tax of Rs. 19,37,824/- along with interest was imposed. Challenging the said order, an appeal was filed, which was dismissed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) (for short 'CIT'), Bangalore, vide order dated 15.04.2008. Aggrieved by the said order of the CIT, the assesseeappellant challenged the same before the ITAT (for short 'Tribunal'), Bangalore, which was also dismissed on 27.02.2009 Aggrieved by the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of the payment was made by cash. Since in the declaration made by the appellant before the assessing officer it was stated that she was carrying on the business as dealer in Superior Kerosene Oil as well as sale and development of land, the Assessing Officer found that purchase of three plots of land, for which payment had been made in cash, was for business purpose and as such Section 40A(3) of the Act was attracted as the payments in cash were of over Rs. 20,000/- and as such disallowed 20% and brought it to taxable income of assessee which was also affirmed by both the appellate authorities. The submission of Sri A.Shankar, learned counsel appearing of the appellant is of two fold. Firstly, it is contended that the land was purchased a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0 ITR 902 viii. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax -vs- Sri Saraswathi Iron Foundry [2006] 287 ITR 313 (Karn) It has been vehemently contended on behalf of the appellant that the purpose of Section 40A(3) of the Act is not to penalize the assessee for making cash payment but it is only preventive and to check evasion of tax and flow of unaccounted money or to check transactions which are not genuine and since, in the facts of the present case, the genuineness of the transaction is not disputed and the sellers are identified and have acknowledged having received the payments in cash, the provisions of Section 40A(3) of the Act would not be attracted. Learned counsel for the appellant has further contended that though appellant had disclo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ght to have given opportunity to the appellant to produce further evidence in support of her case, which was not done. It has been submitted that even before the Tribunal no opportunity was given and the finding recorded by the authorities below are against the record as the books of accounts clearly reflect the purchase of property as capital asset and at no stage opportunity was given to the appellant to produce any evidence as no notice was given prior to rejecting the contention of the appellant. 3. On the other hand, Sri K.V.Aravind, learned counsel appearing for the revenue has submitted that the appellant has not demonstrated any business exigency because of which payment had to be made in cash and according to him other relevant fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
