SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1975 Supreme(All) 391

R.L.GULATI, C.S.P.SINGH
U. P. Hardware Store – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner Of Income-Tax – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.R.Agarwal, Bharatji Agarwal, Deokinandan

JUDGMENT

R.L. Gulati, J.

1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

2. The assessee is a registered firm carrying on the business of iron and hardware. The proceedings relate to the assessment year 1970-71. During the course of examination of the books of accounts of the assessee, the Income-tax Officer discovered that the assessee had made payments in cash exceeding the sum of Rs. 2,500 for some of the purchases. The total of such payments came to Rs. 55,471. Being of the view that under Section 40A(3) read with Rule 6DD of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, such payments could not be allowed as deduction, the Income-tax Officer required the assessee to show cause why the payments amounting to Rs. 55,471 be not disallowed. After considering the explanation filed by the assessee, the Income-tax Officer came to the conclusion that the conditions laid down in Rule 6DD were not satisfied and he accordingly disallowed the sum of Rs. 55,471 claimed as deduction and added it to the income of the assessee. The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax and its second appeal was also dismissed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribu






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top