Vaduganathan Talkies v. ITO (2020) 428 ITR 224 / 275 Taxman 599(Mad) (HC)

S. 40A(3) :Expenses or payments not deductible – Cash payments exceeding prescribed limits -Banking facilities available — No Evidence of compelling circumstances justifying payments — Disallowance justified. [ R.6DD ]

Dismissing the petition the Court held that  only 25 per cent. of the payments effected by the assessees were in cash and the remaining 75 per cent. were through banking channels, that is, by cheque or demand draft. These factors would work against the assessees because the assessees were fully aware of the legal position that over and above Rs. 20,000, the assessees would not be entitled to effect payment in cash in a day. The fact that the assessees had been regularly effecting payments in cash would be a circumstance which would work against the assessee. The genuineness of the transaction was hardly a matter, which should weigh in the minds of the Assessing Officer while examining whether the assessees had violated section 40A(3). The disallowance was justified and no substantial question of law arose from the order.( AY.2014-15, 2015-16)