Cash Deposit by Debtors to Creditors
This query is : Resolved
03 January 2010
Disallowed or not if any Debtors is depositing cash above Rs.20,000/- into Creditors bank A/c
Thanks in advance
Thanks in advance
03 January 2010
Whose point of view are you talking about...
If creditors receive cash no disallowance to him.
If debtors deposit cash then disallowed in debtors hand as payment of more than rs. 20000 by cash
If creditors receive cash no disallowance to him.
If debtors deposit cash then disallowed in debtors hand as payment of more than rs. 20000 by cash
04 January 2010
Since it is through banking channels it would not be disallowed.
04 January 2010
If payment towards any expenditure exceeds Rs 20,000, it must be by
means of account-payee crossed cheque or draft. If not, the entire
expenditure is not eligible for deduction.
The monetary limit of Rs 20,000 is prescribed in Section 40A(3) and
there are certain exceptions to the disallowance, which are
mentioned in Rule 6 DD.
Cash payment by the buyer into the bank account of the supplier of
merchandise does not fall within the exception and, hence, liable
for disallowance. In the K. Abdu & Co vs ITO (2008 170 Taxman 297
Kerala) case, cash payment into the bank account of the supplier was
held as breach of Section 40A(3) and liable for disallowance.
means of account-payee crossed cheque or draft. If not, the entire
expenditure is not eligible for deduction.
The monetary limit of Rs 20,000 is prescribed in Section 40A(3) and
there are certain exceptions to the disallowance, which are
mentioned in Rule 6 DD.
Cash payment by the buyer into the bank account of the supplier of
merchandise does not fall within the exception and, hence, liable
for disallowance. In the K. Abdu & Co vs ITO (2008 170 Taxman 297
Kerala) case, cash payment into the bank account of the supplier was
held as breach of Section 40A(3) and liable for disallowance.
08 January 2010
thanks all of your for your cooperation.
16 February 2013
Pls Refer The Case:-
Bangalore Tribunal in Sri Renukeswara Rice Mills Vs Income-Tax Officer (reported in 93 ITD 263 - 278 ITR 77
Its Allowed.
The whole purpose of Sec 40A(3) is to break the mechanism of traill less transsactions, & this transactions has very much established the trail what was required.
Bangalore Tribunal in Sri Renukeswara Rice Mills Vs Income-Tax Officer (reported in 93 ITD 263 - 278 ITR 77
Its Allowed.
The whole purpose of Sec 40A(3) is to break the mechanism of traill less transsactions, & this transactions has very much established the trail what was required.
You need to be the querist or approved CAclub expert to take part in this query .
Click here to login now
Click here to login now
Similar Resolved Queries
Unanswered Queries
- Is this income indian or foreign income?
- 15ca /15cb whose income tax login? remitter or nri seller's login?
- TDS U/S. 194NF
- GST on export of services and Input Credit
- RCM applicability on Rent Paid by Registered Person to Unregistered Landlord for Residental Building
- ITC temporary reversal and reclaim
- Regarding Documentation & Compliances for Opening of Unit of Pvt Ltd.
- Applicable TDS rate for sale of property in Nov 2024
- GST ON EXPORT COMMISSION
- Should I report my US salary for January, February, March in Schedule FA?
- Inventory of finished goods
- LAST YEAR 2022-23 ITC IN NEXT YEAR 2023-24 REPORITNG IN GSTR-9
- MIS MATCH OF INVOICE NUMBER
- IGST Credit-Show cause notice issued-confusion
- Issue of gst e invoice
- How to adjusted advances given or receipt
- Foreign vendor without PAN unable to to register due to non receipt of OTP on foreign number ?
- 133(6) DIN INVALID format error - ->WHERE TO REPLY 133(6) notice?
- Query for dubts
- Regarding einvoice taken on nil rated sales
Trending Online Classes
CAclubindia
