Case LawHigh Court › Ita/492/2009 Of Commissioner Of Income T...

Ita/492/2009 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kottayam v. M/S.swapna Traders, Chungam, Alappuzha

High Court 08 Dec 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/492/2009 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kottayam v. M/S.swapna Traders, Chungam, Alappuzha
Date of order
08 Dec 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Ita/492/2009 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kottayam v. M/S.swapna Traders, Chungam, Alappuzha, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: Question raised is whether the Tribunal was justified inupholding the order of the C.I.T.(Appeals) who held that disallowanceunder Section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act is not called for, for cashremittances made by the assessee in the Bank accounts of the suppliers.We have heard Senior Counsel appea...

Decision: Consequently the appeal is dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DECEMBER 2009 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 ITA.No. 492 of 2009() --------------------- ITA.1157(COCH)/2004 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/APPELLANT/REVENUE ----------------------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/ASSESSEE ---------------------------------- M/S.SWAPANA TRADERS, CHUNGAM, ALAPPUZHA. ADV. SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN (E) FOR R1 THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/12/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. .................................................................... I.T. Appeal No.492 of 2009 .................................................................... Dated this the 8th day of December, 2009. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Question raised is whether the Tribunal was justified inupholding the order of the C.I.T.(Appeals) who held that disallowanceunder Section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act is not called for, for cashremittances made by the assessee in the Bank accounts of the suppliers.We have heard Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant and Adv.Sri.P.Balakrishnan appearing for the respondent. 2. We find from the Tribunal's order that Tribunal has confirmedthe order of the C.I.T.(Appeals) following decision of the SupremeCourt wherein Supreme Court has held that the purpose of Section40A(3) is to discourage generation of black money. When assesseehad made cash remittances to the Bank account of the suppliers, theamount gets accounted and therefore, the violation is only technical. We, therefore, do not find any ground to interfere with the order of theTribunal. Consequently the appeal is dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIRJudge pms V.K.MOHANANJudge
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan