Natesan Krishnamurthy v. ITO (2025) 476 ITR 12 /304 Taxman 592 (SC) Editorial : Natesan Krishnamurthy v. ITO (2019) 262 Taxman 127/ 178 DTR 177 / (Mad)(HC)/ (2019) 13 ITR-OL 80 /2019 SCC OnLine Mad 2366)

S. 40A(3) :Expenses or payments not deductible-Cash payments exceeding prescribed limits-Purchase of jewellery-Failure to show circumstances that required assessee to effect payments in cash-SLP of assessee dismissed. [R. 6DD, Art. 136]

 

High Court dismissed the appeal on the ground that the assessee failed   to demonstrate a situation which compelled him to make payment in cash which would have exempted him From application of the provisions of section 40A(3) of the  Act and the Tribunal rightly held that it did not fall under any of the exceptional clauses under rule 6DD of the Income-tax Rules, 1962.  SLP of assessee dismissed. (AY. 2013-14)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*