Assessing Officer invoked section 40A(3) on ground that assessee purchased stock-in-trade other than by account payee cheque or bank draft. Tribunal held that word ‘payment’ was to be read in conjunction with expression ‘in a sum exceeding 20,000 rupees as contained in section 40A(3) and when an expenditure was incurred for which payment was not made in cash or monetary terms, provisions of section 40A(3) would have no application. High Court held that Tribunal was justified in holding that provision of section 40A(3) could not be invoked. SLP of Revenue is dismissed on the ground that there was gross delay of 521 days in filing this special leave petition and since explanation offered was not sufficient in law so as to condone delay. (AY. 2007-08)
CIT v. Bhartiya Hotels (P.) Ltd. (2024) 299 Taxman 510 / 465 ITR 230 (SC) Editorial: CIT v. Bhartiya Hotels (P.) Ltd(2022) 143 taxmann.com 70 /( 2024)465 ITR 227 (Cal)(HC)
S. 40A(3) : Expenses or payments not deductible-Cash payments exceeding prescribed limits-Delay of 521 days-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [Art. 136]