SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, JHUNJHUNU

ITA 235/JPR/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7220 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 22-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Business expenditure; Bonafide belief; Onus to prove
• Section: 40A(3); 143(3); 143(2); 13; 22; 20

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENC HES B JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRA M SINGH YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR :2015-16 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS 106, ASHOKA APARTMENT, ROAD NO. 2, JHUNJHUNU (RAJ.) CUKE VS. ACIT, CIRCLE, JHUNJHUNU LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: ABXFS4482L VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI VEDANT AGARWAL (ADV.) & SHRI SATISH G UPTA (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SMT RUNI PAL (JCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 08/01/2020 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 28/01/2020 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-4, JAIPUR DATED 28.01.2019 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS TA KEN THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. ON THE FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, LD. LOWER AUTHORITIES GROSSLY ERRED IN MAKING AND CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 71,55,130/- U/S 40A(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 2. ON THE FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE & IN LA W, LD. CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THERE IS NO CASE MAD E OUT THAT APPELLANT WAS UNDER BONAFIDE BELIEF THAT PAYEE IS A GOVT. AGE NCY. WHEREAS LD. CIT(A) HIMSELF AT PARA 4 AT PAGE 5 OF APPEAL ORDER REPRODUCED ASSESSEES SUBMISSION THAT THE DISALLOWANCE IS BAD IN LAW BEC AUSE THE PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE TO THE AVVNL., WHICH IS A BODY OF GOVERNM ENT OF RAJASTHAN. WE WOULD LIKE YOUR KIND ATTENTION ON THE DECISION O F HONBLE ITAT ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 2 JODHPUR BENCH IN THE CASE OF SUMIT INDUSTRIES ITA N O. 12/JODH/2008, WHERE IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHAN ESTABLISHED RAJASTHAN ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION IN JANU ARY, 2000 AND AVVNL WAS DECLARED BODY OF GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHAN. 3. ON THE FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE & IN LA W, LD. CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION DESPITE OF HIS HOLDING THAT JUDGMENT CITED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE APPLICABLE TO FA CTS OF THIS CASE. 2. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT T HE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN BUSINESS OF MINING AND CRUSHING OF STONES AND SALE OF GRITS. THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED ON 26.06.2015 DECLARING TOTAL INCO ME OF RS. 77,93,960/- WHICH WAS TAKEN UP FOR LIMITED SCRUTINY THROUGH CAS S, THE NOTICE U/S 143(2) WAS ISSUED AND ASSESSMENT COMPLETED U/S 143(3) DATE D 29.12.2017 WHERE THE ADDITION OF RS. 71,55,130/- WAS MADE U/S 40A(3) OF THE ACT. 3. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE PAYMENT TOWARDS ELECTRICITY CHARGES AMOUNTING TO RS. 71,55,130/- IN CASH TO THE AJMER V IDYUT NIGAM LIMITED (AVVNL) AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO SH OW CAUSE AS TO WHY THE AMOUNT OF RS. 71,55,130/- MAY NOT BE DISALLOWED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT. IN RESPONSE, THE ASSESSE E SUBMITTED THAT ITS MINING SITE IS LOCATED 3 KM AWAY FROM THE NEAREST VILLAGE CHAPOLI AND TEHSIL UDAIRPURWATI IS ALSO 20 KM AWAY FROM THE SAID VILLA GE. ALL THE ELECTRICITY BILLS NEED TO BE DEPOSITED IN AVVNL, UDAIRPURWATI OFFICE ONLY. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT AVVNL, UDAIRPURWATI DOES NOT ACCEPT THE ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES OF EVERY BANK, AND EXCEPT CHEQUES OF ONLY L OCAL CLEARING BANKS OF UDAIRPURWATI ONLY, AND ITS BANK ACCOUNT IS WITH VIJ AYA BANK, JHUNJHUNU, WHICH HAS NO BRANCH IN UDAIRPURWATI. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMI TTED THAT IN EACH OF THE CASES OF CASH DEPOSITS, THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN WITHDRA WN FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 3 OF THE ASSESSEES FIRM AND THEN PAYMENT HAS BEEN MA DE TO THE AVVNL. IN ALL THESE CASES, THE QUESTION OF IDENTITY/SOURCE OF THE RECEIPT CANNOT BE DOUBTED AS FUNDS WITHDRAWN FROM BANK AND PAYMENT HAS BEEN M ADE TO THE GOVT. AUTHORITY AND HAS BEEN CLEARLY ESTABLISHED. REFERR ING TO THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 6DD(B), IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE AVVNL IS ALSO A G OVERNMENT BODY AND THEREFORE, THE PAYMENT WAS MADE TO THE GOVERNMENT B ODY AND LOOKING TO THE PRACTICAL PROBLEMS INVOLVED IN MAKING THE PAYMENTS THROUGH CHEQUES, THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE SAID TO BE IN VIOLATION OF PROVI SIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE PAYMENTS WERE MADE ONLY AFTER THE DUE DATE AND ONLY CHEQUE OF LOCAL CLEARING BANK ARE ACCEPTED BY AVVNL. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE NATURE OF THE BUSINESS OF THE AS SESSEE IS SUCH THAT THE MAXIMUM SALE COLLECTION IS GENERATED THROUGH BANKIN G MODE ONLY. AND IN ALL THESE CASES, IT HAPPENS THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT H AVING SUFFICIENT BANK BALANCE ON THE DUE DATE AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT IN A POSITION TO MAKE THE PAYMENT BEFORE DUE DATE AND HE WAS FORCED DUE TO THE BUSINESS CIRCUMSTANCES TO PAY THE ELECTRICITY BILL ONLY AFTE R DUE DATE. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FIRST WITHDRAW THE CASH FROM HIS BANK ACCOUNT THAN ONLY DEPOSITED THE PAYMENT TO AVVNL AS THERE IS A CLEAR DIRECTIONS ON THE BILL AS WELL AS OF DEPARTMENT THAT THE PAYMENT THROUGH CHEQ UE WILL BE ACCEPTED ONLY BEFORE TWO DAYS FROM THE DUE DATE AND ALSO OF THE L OCAL CLEARING BANK ONLY. FOR CONFIRMATION OF THE SAID FACTS, THE COPY OF CASH BO OK FOR RESPECTIVE DATES AND COPY OF INSTRUCTIONS GIVEN ON ELECTRICITY BILL WERE PRODUCED FOR VERIFICATION. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING THE BANK ACCOUNT IN VIJAYA BANK AT JHUNJHUNU WHICH IS AN OUTSTATION BRANCH AND VIJA YA BANK DO NOT HAVE ANY BRANCH IN UDAIRPURWATI. AS PER AVVNL DIRECTIONS, TH E CHEQUE MUST BE OF LOCAL CLEARING BANK ONLY. CHEQUE ISSUED BY THE VIJAYA BAN K, JHUNJHUNU WILL BE CONSIDER AS OUTSTATION CHEQUE AND IT WILL TAKE 10 D AYS TO GET THE CHEQUE CLEARED IN ACCOUNT OF AVVNL. IT WAS PRACTICALLY NOT POSSIBLE FOR THE ASSESSEE TO ARRANGE THE PAYMENTS AT LEAST 10 DAYS BEFORE THE BI LLING DUE DATE AND ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 4 MOREOVER THE AVVNL DOES NOT ACCEPT OUTSTATION CHEQU E SO THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING A VALID REASON TO MAKE THE PAYMENT IN CASH O NLY. IT WAS ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING A VALID BUSI NESS REASONS WHICH FORCE HIM TO MAKE THE ELECTRICITY PAYMENT IN CASH AND ALS O THE PAYER AND THE RECEIPT ARE GENUINE AND EXPENDITURE ON ELECTRICITY CHARGES SHOULD NOT BE DISALLOWED U/S 40A (3) OF THE ACT. 4. THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE CONSIDERED BUT NOT FOUND ACCEPTABLE TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. AS PER THE ASS ESSING OFFICER, FOR AVAILING THE EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 40A(3) OF THE IT ACT, 1 961, BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON ASSESSEE TO ESTABLISH THAT HIS CASE FALL UNDER ANY OF THE CLAUSES OF (A) TO (M) OF RULE 6DD OF THE RULES. THE PLEA TAKEN BY THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE THAT AVVNL IS AN UNDERTAKING OF GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHAN, HENCE CO VERED BY EXCEPTION PROVIDED UNDER RULE 6DD(B) OF THE RULES, 1962 WAS N OT FOUND ACCEPTABLE. THE AVVNL IS A LIMITED COMPANY, WHICH IS A SEPARATE ENT ITY. FURTHER, THE PLEA TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE AVVNL DID NOT EXCEPT CHEQU ES AFTER DUE DATE AND ALSO WITHIN DUE DATE ACCEPTED ONLY LOCAL CLEARING CHEQUE S HAVE NO FORCE AS PAYMENT OF BILLS AFTER DUE DATE IS A DEFAULT OF THE ASSESSE E. IT SHOULD HAVE MADE PAYMENT WITHIN TIME AND NOT THROUGH CASH. FURTHER, WHEN THE ASSESSEE IS REGULARLY DOING BUSINESS ACTIVITIES IN THAT AREA, T HEN IT SHOULD OPEN ITS BANK ACCOUNT IN LOCAL AREA. IN THE PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES , THE BRANCHES OF BANKS ARE EASILY AVAILABLE IN THE REMOTE AREAS. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE COULD HAVE USED NET BANKING OR OTHER ELECTRONIC PAYMENT OPTION FOR PAYM ENT TO AVVNL. THE OTHER PLEA TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE THAT IT WAS PRACTICALLY NOT POSSIBLE FOR THE ASSESSEE TO ARRANGE THE PAYMENTS AT LEAST 10 DAYS BEFORE THE BILLING DUE DATE, WAS ALSO NOT FOUND ACCEPTABLE IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE L IABILITY OF PAYMENT TO AVVNL IS A REGULAR FEATURE OF EACH MONTH, WHICH IS PRE DE CIDED AND ESSENTIAL PART OF ITS BUSINESS. MOREOVER, THE FACTS OF OTHER CASES ON WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS RELIED ON ARE DIFFERENT FROM THE FACTS OF THIS CASE . HENCE, PROVISIONS OF SECTION ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 5 40A(3) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 ARE CLEARLY APPLICABLE I N THIS CASE AND ADDITION WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTE R IN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A). AS PER LD. CIT(A), THERE IS NO CASE MADE O UT BY THE ASSESSEE THAT IT WAS UNDER A BONA FIDE BELIEF THAT JVVNL IS A GOVERN MENT AGENCY, FURTHER, THERE ARE DIRECT DECISION OF THE JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR W HEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT AVVNL/JVVNL ARE TREATED AS PRIVATE ENTITIES. FURTHE R, THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO NOT MADE OUT ANY CASE THAT ITS CASE FALLS IN THE AMBIT OF RULE 6DD(A) TO (M). FURTHER, THE DECISION RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE I N CASE OF ARUNA RANI VS. ITO (ITA NO. 613/JP/2015) & ACIT VS. RAHUL PANCHOLI (ITA NO. 949/JP/2013) WERE HELD DISTINGUISHABLE BY THE LD. CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY , ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS SUSTAINED AND AGAINST THE SAI D FINDING, THE ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 6. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. AR REFERR ING TO THE INTENT BEHIND INTRODUCTION OF SECTION 40A(3) STATED THAT THE PAYM ENT HAS BEEN MADE TO A GOVERNMENT COMPANY TOWARDS ELECTRICITY CHARGES AND THAT TOO, UNDER COMPELLING BUSINESS CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE AVVNL WAS N OT READY TO ACCEPT CHEQUE PAYMENTS AFTER THE DUE DATES AND THUS, THERE IS NO VIOLATION OF INTENT. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT AVVNL SHOULD BE CONSI DERED AS GOVERNMENT FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT READ WITH RULE 6DD(B). IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED AS UNDER:- 1. THAT ALL THE ELECTRICITY BILLS NEED TO BE DEPOS ITED IN AVVNL, UDAIRPURWATI OFFICE ONLY AND THE ASSESSEES MINING SITE IS 20 KMS FAR FROM UDAIRPURWATI. APPARENTLY THERE IS NO BANK BRAN CH AT MINING SITE OF THE ASSESSEE. 2. AVVNL, UDAIRPURWATI ACCEPTS THE CHEQUES OF LOCAL CL EARING BANKS I.E. STATE BANK OF INDIA, UDAIRPURWATI ONLY. ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 6 3. THAT THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT HAVE ANY ACCOUNT IN STAT E BANK OF INDIA. ASSESSEES BANK ACCOUNT IS WITH VIJAYA BANK, JHUNJHUNU AND VIJAYA BANK DOES NOT HAVE ANY BRANCH AT UDAIRPURWATI. 4. ALL THE ABOVE PAYMENTS TO AVVNL HAVE BEEN MADE AFTE R THE EXPIRY OF DUE DATE AND AVVNL DOES NOT ACCEPTS CHEQUES AFTE R DUE DATE. 5. AS PER PAYMENT CONDITIONS OF AVVNL, THE PAYMENT OF BILL IS PAYABLE IN CASH ONLY, EXCEPT THE PAYMENT MADE IS TH ROUGH CHEQUE OR DD RECEIVED AT THE OFFICE OF AVVNL PRIOR TO TWO DAYS F ROM THE LAST DATE OF PAYMENT AND CHEQUE OR BANK DRAFT SHALL ALWAYS BE IS SUED IN FAVOUR OF LOCAL BANK, WHO IS MEMBER OF CLEARING HOUSE OF STAT E BANK OF INDIA. 6. A CHART OF DUE DATE AND THE ACTUAL PAYMENT DATE WAS FURNISHED BEFORE THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER AND FROM THAT CHAR T, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE AFTER THE DUE DATE AND IT I S RULE OF AVVNL THAT PAYMENTS THROUGH CHEQUES CAN ONLY BE MADE TWO DAYS PRIOR TO THE LAST DATE OF PAYMENT. THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO POSSI BILITY FOR MAKING THE PAYMENT BY ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE OR ACCOUNT PAYEE DD AFTER DUE DATES. IT IS CLEAR THAT THE PAYMENTS IN CASH WERE MADE AS THE AVVNL WAS NOT ACCEPTING PAYMENTS OTHERWISE THAN CASH AFTER THE LA ST DATE OF DEPOSIT OF BILL. IT WAS ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSE E WAS COMPELLED TO MAKE PAYMENTS IN CASH, OTHERWISE HIS ELECTRICITY CO NNECTION COULD HAVE BEEN DISCONNECTED RESULTING INTO CLOSURE OF MANUFAC TURING ACTIVITIES/BUSINESS. 7. SINCE ALL THE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE TO AVVNL, A GOVERNMENT COMPANY WHERE IDENTITY IS PROVED AND TRANSACTIONS A RE ALSO GENUINE. LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT RAISED ANY DOUBT OVER THE SE ISSUES OF IDENTITY OF PAYEE AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. 8. ASSESSEE IS IN THE BUSINESS OF MINING AND CRUSHING OF STONES AND THE GROSS RECEIPTS ARE AT RS 22.66 CRORE. TOTAL INC OME WAS DECLARED AT RS 77,93,960/-.IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED BEFORE LD. ASSESS ING OFFICER THAT THE ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 7 PAYMENT TO AVVNL COULD NOT BE MADE IN DUE TIME BECA USE ON THE DUE DATE, THERE WAS NO SUFFICIENT CASH BALANCE IN THE B OOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. 7. IT WAS ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED BY THE LD AR THAT T HE PAYMENTS MADE TO AVVNL WERE THE PAYMENTS MADE TO GOVERNMENT, AND THE AVVNL WAS NOT ACCEPTING PAYMENT THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES/DEM AND DRAFTS OF OUTSTATION CLEARING AND WERE ACCEPTING ONLY LOCAL C LEARING CHEQUES THAT TOO OF STATE BANK OF INDIA AND THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT HAVING ANY ACCOUNT IN THE STATE BANK OF INDIA AT UDAIRPURWATI. 8. IN SUPPORT OF ITS AFORESAID CONTENTIONS, RELIANC E WAS PLACED ON THE DECISIONS OF THE COORDINATE BENCHES IN THE CASE OF SUMIT INDUSTRIES (ITA NO.12/JODHPUR/2018) , USHA MAHESHWARI (ITA NO.187&188/JODHPUR/2013) AN D SHRI AYUB ALI,CHURU (ITA NO.1045/JP/2017 DATED 4 TH SEPTEMBER 2018). 9. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE FINDINGS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT AVVNL HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT BY THE GOVT. OF RAJASTHAN AND THEREFORE, IT IS A SEPAR ATE LEGAL ENTITY AND EVEN THOUGH IT IS A GOVERNMENT COMPANY, IT CANNOT BE EQU ATED WITH GOVERNMENT AS PROVIDED IN RULE 6DD AND FOR THE PURPOSES, RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE CO- ORDINATE BENCH DECISION IN CASE OF M/S MODI LEVIGAT ED KAOLIN PVT. LTD., SIKAR VS. ACIT, SIKAR (ITA NO. 195/JP/2016 DATED 15/05/2017) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT CLAUSE (B) OF RULE 6DD CANNOT BE STRETCHED TO THE E XTENT OF BRINGING EVERY GOVERNMENT ENTITY/COMPANY INTO THE FOLD OF EXEMPT C ATEGORY. THEREFORE, HAD THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATION WAS TO EXEMPT THE GOVE RNMENT ELECTRICITY COMPANY, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN MENTIONED IN THE CLAUSE (B) OF RULE 6DD. 10. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE VILLAGE CHAP OLI IS LOCATED ONLY 13 KM AWAY FROM TEHSIL UDAIRPURWATI IN JHUNJHUNU DISTRICT , RAJASTHAN WHERE THE BANKING FACILITIES WAS AVAILABLE AND THE ASSESSEE C OULD HAVE MADE THE CHEQUE ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 8 PAYMENT TO AVVNL OFFICE LOCATED AT UDAIRPURWATI. SH E ACCORDINGLY SUPPORTED THE FINDINGS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH HAVE BE EN CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 11. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE, FOLLOWING CASH PAYM ENTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE TO AVVNL, UDAIPURWATI ARE UNDER CONSIDERATION: S.NO. AMOUNT PAID BILL ISSUE DATE DUE DATE OF BILL PAYMENT BY CHEQUE ACTUAL PAYMENT SOURCE OF PAYMENT 1 RS. 11,19,440/ - 1.05.2014 16.05.2014 6.06.2014 CASH WITHDRAWAL FROM VIJAY BANK DATED 05/06/2014 AMOUNT RS. 14,50,000.00 2 RS. 10,00,100/ - 1.06.2014 16.06.2016 30.06.2014 CASH WITHDRAWAL FROM VIJAY BANK DATED 30/06/2014 AMOUNT RS. 10,00.000.00 3 RS. 7,72,093/ - 1.07.2014 16.07.2014 22.07.2014 CASH WITHDRAWAL FROM VIJAY BANK DATED 22/07/2014 AMOUNT RS. 7,75,100.00 4 RS. 8,43,874/ - 1.08.2014 16.08.2014 30.08.2014 CASH WITHDRAWAL FROM VIJAY BANK DATED 30/08/2014 AMOUNT RS. 4,78,000.00 AND DATED 28/08/2014 AMOUNT RS. 5,00,000.00 5 RS. 15,45,837/ - 1.10.2014 16.10.2014 28.10.2014 CASH WITHDRAWAL FROM VIJAY BANK DATED 28/10/2014 AMOUNT RS. 5,50,000.00 AND DATED 22/10/2014 AMOUNT RS. 3,50,000.00 6 RS. 15,04,601/- 1.11.2014 16.11.2014 28.11.2014 CASH WITHDRAWAL FROM VIJAY BANK DATED 28/11/2014 AMOUNT RS. 12,00,000.00 7 RS. 17,23,336/ - 1.01.2015 16.01.2015 31.01.2015 CASH WITHDRAWAL FROM VIJAY BANK DATED 31/01/2015 AMOUNT RS. 14,50,000.00 12. AS IT IS CLEAR FROM ABOVE, ALL THE PAYMENTS HAV E BEEN MADE AFTER WITHDRAWALS FROM THE ASSESSEES BANK AFTER THE DUE DATE AS PRESCRIBED BY AVVNL. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT AVVNL DOES NT ACCEPT CHEQUES AFTER DUE DATE AND ALSO WITHIN DUE DATE, ACCEPTS ONLY LOC AL CLEARING CHEQUE AND SINCE, IT WAS NOT HAVING A BANK ACCOUNT WITH THE LO CAL BANK I.E, SBI AT UDAIPURWATI, IT WAS REQUIRED TO WITHDRAW CASH FROM HIS BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WITH VIJAYA BANK AT JHUNJHUNU AND OUT OF SUCH WITHDRAWALS, HAS MADE THE PAYMENTS TO AVVNL. THE AFORESAID FACTUAL POSITION HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. AT THE SAME TIM E, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 9 REJECTED THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE REA SON THAT PAYMENT OF BILLS AFTER DUE DATE IS A DEFAULT OF THE ASSESSEE, IT SHO ULD HAVE MADE PAYMENT WITHIN TIME, IT SHOULD OPEN ITS BANK ACCOUNT IN LOCAL AREA AND THE ASSESSEE COULD HAVE USED NET BANKING OR OTHER ELECTRONIC PAYMENT OPTION FOR PAYMENT TO AVVNL. THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSION IN THIS REGARD IS THAT IT HAS BEEN MAKING REGULAR PAYMENTS TO AVVNL WITHIN DUE DATES, HOWEVER FOR THE PAYMENTS UNDER CONSIDERATION, IT WAS NOT HAVING SUFFICIENT BANK BA LANCE AND THUS WAS NOT IN A POSITION TO MAKE THE PAYMENT WITHIN DUE DATE AND AS SOON AS THE FUNDS ARE REALIZED FROM ITS BUSINESS AND CREDITED TO ITS BANK ACCOUNT, IT HAS MADE THE WITHDRAWALS AND MADE THE PAYMENTS AFTER THE DUE DAT ES. WE FIND FORCE IN THE ARGUMENTS OF THE LD AR THAT WHERE IT WAS NOT HAVING SUFFICIENT BANK BALANCE, THEN IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, IT WAS PRACTICALLY NOT POSSIBLE TO MAKE PAYMENTS WITHIN DUE DATE AS SO PRESCRIBED. AT THE SAME TIME , THE NATURE OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY OF ASSESSEE IS SUCH THAT IT REQUIRES CONTI NUES SUPPLY OF ELECTRICITY AND ANY DISRUPTION/DISCONNECTION DUE TO NON-PAYMENT OF ELECTRICITY CHARGES WILL HAVE SIGNIFICANT BUSINESS DISRUPTIONS AND ADVERSE C ONSEQUENCES. THEREFORE, WE FIND THAT THE TEST OF BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY IS CLE ARLY ESTABLISHED IN THE INSTANT CASE WHICH CONTINUES TO BE A RELEVANT FACTOR WHILE EXAMINING THE APPLICABILITY OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) AS HELD BY THE COORDIN ATE BENCH IN CASE OF M/S A DAGA ROYAL ARTS, JAIPUR VS ITO (ITA NO. 1065/JP/2016 DATED 15/05/2018 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD AS UNDER: 18. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSE D THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT WOULD BE RELEVANT TO REFER TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT WHICH READS AS UNDER: (3) WHERE THE ASSESSEE INCURS ANY EXPENDITURE IN RESPECT OF WHICH A PAYMENT OR AGGREGATE OF PAYMENTS MADE TO A PERSON I N A DAY, OTHERWISE THAN BY AN ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE DRAWN ON A BANK OR ACCOUNT PAYEE BANK DRAFT EXCEEDS TWENTY THOUSAND RUPEES, NO DEDUC TION SHALL BE ALLOWED IN RESPECT OF SUCH EXPENDITURE. ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 10 (3A) WHERE AN ALLOWANCE HAS BEEN MADE IN THE ASSESS MENT FOR ANY YEAR IN RESPECT OF ANY LIABILITY INCURRED BY THE ASSESSE E FOR ANY EXPENDITURE AND SUBSEQUENTLY DURING ANY PREVIOUS YEAR (HEREINAF TER REFERRED TO AS SUBSEQUENT YEAR) THE ASSESSEE MAKES PAYMENT IN RESP ECT THEREOF, OTHERWISE THAN BY AN ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE DRAWN ON A BANK OR ACCOUNT PAYEE BANK DRAFT, THE PAYMENT SO MADE SHALL BE DEEM ED TO BE THE PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS OR PROFESSION AND ACC ORDINGLY CHARGEABLE TO INCOME-TAX AS INCOME OF THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR IF THE PAYMENT OR AGGREGATE OF PAYMENTS MADE TO A PERSON IN A DAY, EX CEEDS TWENTY THOUSAND RUPEES: PROVIDED THAT NO DISALLOWANCE SHALL BE MADE AND NO PAYMENT SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE THE PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS OR P ROFESSION UNDER SUB- SECTION (3) AND THIS SUB-SECTION WHERE A PAYMENT OR AGGREGATE OF PAYMENTS MADE TO A PERSON IN A DAY, OTHERWISE THAN BY AN ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE DRAWN ON A BANK OR ACCOUNT PAYEE BANK DRAFT EXCEEDS TWENTY THOUSAND RUPEES, IN SUCH CASES AND UNDER SUC H CIRCUMSTANCES AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED, HAVING REGARD TO THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF BANKING FACILITIES AVAILABLE, CONSIDERATIONS OF BUSINESS EX PEDIENCY AND OTHER RELEVANT FACTORS : PROVIDED FURTHER THAT IN THE CASE OF PAYMENT MADE FOR PLYING, HIRING OR LEASING GOODS CARRIAGES, THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECT IONS (3) AND (3A) SHALL HAVE EFFECT AS IF FOR THE WORDS 'TWENTY THOUSAND RU PEES', THE WORDS 'THIRTY-FIVE THOUSAND RUPEES' HAD BEEN SUBSTITUTED. (4) NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN ANY OTHER LAW FOR THE TIME BEING IN FORCE OR IN ANY CONTRACT, WHERE ANY PAYMEN T IN RESPECT OF ANY EXPENDITURE HAS TO BE MADE BY AN ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQ UE DRAWN ON A BANK OR ACCOUNT PAYEE BANK DRAFT IN ORDER THAT SUCH EXPENDITURE MAY NOT BE DISALLOWED AS A DEDUCTION UNDER SUB-SECTION (3), THEN THE ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 11 PAYMENT MAY BE MADE BY SUCH CHEQUE OR DRAFT; AND WH ERE THE PAYMENT IS SO MADE OR TENDERED, NO PERSON SHALL BE ALLOWED TO RAISE, IN ANY SUIT OR OTHER PROCEEDING, A PLEA BASED ON THE GROUND THA T THE PAYMENT WAS NOT MADE OR TENDERED IN CASH OR IN ANY OTHER MANNER . 19. THE AFORESAID PROVISIONS HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED AND INTERPRETED IN LIGHT OF VARIOUS AUTHORITIES WHICH HAVE BEEN QUOTED AT THE BAR AND RELIED UPON BY THE LD AR AND LD DR IN SUPPORT OF THEIR RES PECTIVE CONTENTIONS. 20. IN CASE OF ATTAR SINGH GURMUKH SINGH V. ITO (SU PRA), THE MATTER WHICH CAME UP FOR CONSIDERATION BEFORE THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT, THE FACTS OF THE CASE WERE THAT ASSESSEE HAD MADE PAYME NT IN CASH EXCEEDING A SUM OF RS. 2,500/- FOR PURCHASE OF CERT AIN STOCK-IN-TRADE. PAYMENTS WERE NOT ALLOWED AS DEDUCTIONS IN THE COMP UTATION OF INCOME UNDER THE HEAD PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS OR PR OFESSIONS AS THE SAME WERE HELD TO BE IN CONTRAVENTION OF SECTION 40 A(3) READ WITH THAT 6DD OF THE INCOME RULES. IN THAT FACTUAL BACKGROUND , THE QUESTION REGARDING VALIDITY OF SECTION 40A(3) AND APPLICABIL ITY OF THE SAID PROVISIONS TO PAYMENT MADE FOR ACQUIRING STOCK-IN-T RADE CAME UP FOR CONSIDERATION BEFORE THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT. 21. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT REFERRING TO THE PROV ISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) AND RULE 6DD AND IN PARTICULAR, RULE 6DD(J), AS EXISTED AT RELEVANT POINT IN TIME, HAS HELD AS UNDER:- 6. AS TO THE VALIDITY OF SECTION 40A(3), IT WAS U RGED THAT IF THE PRICE OF THE PURCHASED MATERIAL IS NOT ALLOWED TO BE ADJU STED AGAINST THE SALE PRICE OF THE MATERIAL SOLD FOR WANT OF PROOF OF PAY MENT BY A CROSSED CHEQUE OR CROSSED BANK DRAFT, THEN THE INCOME-TAX L EVIED WILL NOT BE ON ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 12 THE INCOME BUT IT WILL BE ON AN ASSUMED INCOME. IT IS SAID THAT THE PROVISION AUTHORIZING LEVY TAX ON AN ASSUMED INCOME WOULD BE A RESTRICTION ON THE RIGHT TO CARRY ON THE BUSINESS, BESIDES BEING ARBITRARY. 7. IN OUR OPINION, THERE IS LITTLE MERIT IN THIS CO NTENTION. SECTION 40A(3) MUST NOT BE READ IN ISOLATION OR TO THE EXCL USION OF RULE 6DD. THE SECTION MUST BE READ ALONG WITH THE RULE. IF READ T OGETHER, IT WILL BE CLEAR THAT THE PROVISIONS ARE NOT INTENDED TO RESTRICT TH E BUSINESS ACTIVITIES. THERE IS NO RESTRICTION ON THE ASSESSEE IN HIS TRAD ING ACTIVITIES. SECTION 40A(3) ONLY EMPOWERS THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DISAL LOW THE DEDUCTION CLAIMED AS EXPENDITURE IN RESPECT OF WHICH PAYMENT IS NOT MADE BY CROSSED CHEQUE OR CROSSED BANK DRAFT. THE PAYMENT B Y CROSSED CHEQUE OR CROSSED BANK DRAFT IS INSISTED ON TO ENABLE THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER THE PAYMENT WAS GENUINE OR WHETHE R IT WAS OUT OF THE INCOME FROM DISCLOSED SOURCES. THE TERMS OF SECTION 40A(3) ARE NOT ABSOLUTE. CONSIDERATION OF BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY AND OTHER RELEVANT FACTORS ARE NOT EXCLUDED. THE GENUINE AND BONA FIDE TRANSACTIONS ARE NOT TAKEN OUT OF THE SWEEP OF THE SECTION. IT IS OPEN T O THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICE R THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH THE PAYMENT IN THE MANNER PRESCRIBED IN SECTION 40A(3) WAS NOT PRACTICABLE OR WOULD HAVE CAUSED GENUINE DI FFICULTY TO THE PAYEE. IT IS ALSO OPEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO IDENTIFY THE PERSON WHO HAS RECEIVED THE CASH PAYMENT. RULE 6DD PROVIDES THAT A N ASSESSEE CAN BE EXEMPTED FROM THE REQUIREMENT OF PAYMENT BY A CROSS ED CHEQUE OR CROSSED BANK DRAFT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES SPECIFIED U NDER THE RULE. IT WILL BE CLEAR FROM THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) AND RULE 6DD THAT THEY ARE INTENDED TO REGULATE THE BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS AND TO PREVENT THE USE OF UNACCOUNTED MONEY OR REDUCE THE CHANCES TO USE BLAC K-MONEY FOR BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS. MUDIAM OIL CO. V. ITO [197 3] 92 ITR 519 (AP). ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 13 IF THE PAYMENT IS MADE BY A CROSSED CHEQUE ON A BAN K OR A CROSSED BANK DRAFT, THEN IT WILL BE EASIER TO ASCERTAIN, WH EN DEDUCTION IS CLAIMED, WHETHER THE PAYMENT WAS GENUINE AND WHETHER IT WAS OUT OF THE INCOME FROM DISCLOSED SOURCES. IN INTERPRETING A TAXING ST ATUTE THE COURT CANNOT BE OBLIVIOUS OF THE PROLIFERATION OF BLACK-MONEY WH ICH IS UNDER CIRCULATION IN OUR COUNTRY. ANY RESTRAINT INTENDED TO CURB THE CHANCES AND OPPORTUNITIES TO USE OR CREATE BLACK-MONEY SHOULD N OT BE REGARDED AS CURTAILING THE FREEDOM OF TRADE OR BUSINESS. 22. FURTHER, THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT UPHELD THE APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 40A(3) TO PAYMENT MADE FOR ACQUIRING STOCK- IN-TRADE AND RAW MATERIALS AND ALSO AFFIRMED THE DECISION OF HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN CASE OF FAKRI AUTOMOBILES V. CIT [1986] 160 ITR 504 (RAJ) TO THE EFFECT THAT THE PAYMENTS MADE FOR PURCHASING STOCK- IN-TRADE OR RAW MATERIAL SHOULD ALSO BE REGARDED AS EXPENDITURE FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT. 23. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HAS THEREFORE UPHELD THE CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT AND HAS HELD THAT THE PROVISIONS ARE NOT INTENDED TO RESTRICT THE BUSINESS ACTIVITIES AN D RESTRAINT SO PROVIDED ARE ONLY INTENDED TO CURB THE CHANCES AND OPPORTUNI TIES TO USE OR CREATE BLACK MONEY AND THE SAME SHOULD NOT BE REGARDED AS CURTAILING THE FREEDOM OF TRADE OR BUSINESS. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HAS THUS LAID GREAT EMPHASIS ON THE INTENTION BEHIND INTRODUCTION OF THESE PROVISIONS AND IT WOULD THEREFORE BE RELEVANT TO EXAMINE WHETH ER IN THE PRESENT CASE, THERE IS ANY VIOLATION OF SUCH INTENTION AND IF ULTIMATELY, IT IS DETERMINED THAT SUCH INTENTION HAS BEEN VIOLATED, T HEN CERTAINLY, THE ASSESSEE DESERVES THE DISALLOWANCE OF THE EXPENDITU RE SO CLAIMED. ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 14 24. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT REFERRING TO THE PRO VISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) AS EXISTED AT RELEVANT POINT IN TIME WHICH T ALKS ABOUT CONSIDERATIONS OF BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY AND OTHER REL EVANT FACTORS AND RULE 6DD(J) WHICH PROVIDES FOR THE EXCEPTIONAL OR U NAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE FACT THAT THE PAYMENT IN THE MANNER AFORESAID WAS NOT PRACTICAL OR WOULD HAVE CAUSED GENUINE DIFF ICULTY TO THE PAYEE AND FURNISHING THE NECESSARY EVIDENCE TO THE SATISF ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS TO THE GENUINENESS OF THE PAYM ENTS AND THE IDENTITY OF THE PAYEE HAS HELD THAT: THE TERMS OF SECTION 40A(3) ARE NOT ABSOLUTE. CONS IDERATION OF BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY AND OTHER RELEVANT FACTORS ARE NOT EXCLU DED. THE GENUINE AND BONA FIDE TRANSACTIONS ARE NOT TAKEN OUT OF THE SWE EP OF THE SECTION. IT IS OPEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH THE PAYMENT I N THE MANNER PRESCRIBED IN SECTION 40A(3) WAS NOT PRACTICABLE OR WOULD HAVE CAUSED GENUINE DIFFICULTY TO THE PAYEE. IT IS ALSO OPEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO IDENTIFY THE PERSON WHO HAS RECEIVED THE CASH PAYMENT. RULE 6DD PROVIDES THAT AN ASSESSEE CAN BE EXEMPTED FROM THE REQUIREMENT OF PAYMENT BY A CROSSED CHEQUE OR CROSSED BANK DRAFT IN THE CIRCUMS TANCES SPECIFIED UNDER THE RULE. 25. HERE, IT IS RELEVANT TO NOTE THAT THERE HAS BE EN NO CHANGE IN THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) IN SO FAR AS CONSIDERA TIONS OF BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY AND OTHER RELEVANT FACTORS ARE CONCERNED , AS EXISTED AT RELEVANT POINT IN TIME AND AS CONSIDERED BY THE HON BLE SUPREME COURT AND THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) AS EXIST NOW A ND RELEVANT FOR THE IMPUNGED ASSESSMENT YEAR I.E. AY 2013-14. HOWEVER, RULE 6DD(J) HAS BEEN AMENDED AND BY NOTIFICATION DATED 10.10.2008, IT NOW PROVIDES FOR ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 15 AN EXCEPTION ONLY IN A SCENARIO WHERE THE PAYMENT W AS REQUIRED TO BE MADE ON A DAY ON WHICH BANKS WERE CLOSED EITHER ON ACCOUNT OF HOLIDAY OR STRIKE. A QUESTION WHICH ARISES FOR CONSIDERATIO N IS WHETHER THE LEGAL PROPOSITION SO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COU RT REGARDING CONSIDERATION OF BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY AND OTHER RELE VANT FACTORS HAS BEEN DILUTED BY WAY OF DELEGATED LEGISLATION IN FORM OF INCOME TAX RULES WHEN THE PARENT LEGISLATION IN FORM OF SECTION 40A( 3) TO WHICH SUCH DELEGATED LEGISLATION IS SUBSERVIENT HAS BEEN RETAI NED IN ITS ENTIRETY. ALTERNATIVELY, CAN IT BE SAID THAT WHAT HAS BEEN PR ESCRIBED AS EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES IN RULE 6DD AS AMENDED ARE EXHAUSTIVE ENOUGH AND WHICH VISUALIZES ALL KINDS AND NATURE OF BUSINESS E XPEDIENCY IN ALL POSSIBLE SITUATIONS. 26. IF WE LOOK AT THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF SECTIO N 40A(3) AND RULE 6DD, WE FIND THAT INITIALLY, SECTION 40A(3) PROVIDE S FOR DISALLOWANCE OF 100% OF THE EXPENDITURE UNLESS THE MATTER FALLS UND ER EXCEPTION AS PROVIDED IN RULE 6DD(J) LATER ON, SECTION 40A(3) H AS BEEN AMENDED TO PROVIDE FOR DISALLOWANCE OF 20% OF THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED IN CASH AND RULE 6DD(J) WAS OMITTED. THEREAFTER, BY VIRTUE OF A NOTHER AMENDMENT, DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 40A(3) WAS INCREASED FRO M 20% TO 100%, HOWEVER, RULE 6DD(J) WAS NOT REINTRODUCED IN ORIGIN AL FORM TO PROVIDE FOR EXCEPTIONAL AND UNAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCES RATHE R IT WAS RESTRICTED TO PAYMENT BY WAY OF SALARY TO EMPLOYEES AND THEREAFTE R, BY VIRTUE OF LASTEST AMENDMENT IN YEAR 2008 TO PAYMENTS MADE ON A DAY ON WHICH THE BANKS WERE CLOSED ON ACCOUNT OF HOLIDAY OR STRI KE. 27. WE DONOT BELIEVE THAT BY VIRTUE OF THESE AMENDM ENTS, THE LEGAL PROPOSITION SO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COU RT REGARDING CONSIDERATION OF BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY AND OTHER RELE VANT FACTORS HAS BEEN ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 16 DILUTED IN ANY WAY. AT THE SAME TIME, WE ALSO BELI EVE THAT RULE 6DD AS AMENDED ARE NOT EXHAUSTIVE ENOUGH AND WHICH VISUALI ZES ALL KINDS AND NATURE OF BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY IN ALL POSSIBLE SITUA TIONS AND IT IS FOR THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY TO EXAMINE AND PROVIDE FOR A MECHANISM AS ORIGINALLY ENVISAGED WHICH PROVIDES FOR EXCEPTIONAL OR UNAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCES TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHEREBY GENUINE BUSINESS EXPENDITURE SHOULD NOT SUFFER DISA LLOWANCE. 28. FURTHER, THE COURTS HAVE HELD FROM TIME TO TIME THAT THE RULES MUST BE INTERPRETED IN A MANNER SO AS TO ADVANCE AN D NOT TO FRUSTRATE THE OBJECT OF THE LEGISLATURE. THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATURE IS MANIFESTLY CLEAR AND WHICH IS TO CURB THE CHANCES AND OPPORTUN ITIES TO USE OR CREATE BLACK MONEY AND TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER THE PAYMENT WA S GENUINE OR WHETHER IT WAS OUT OF THE INCOME FROM DISCLOSED SOU RCES. AND SECTION 40A(3) CONTINUES TO PROVIDE THAT NO DISALLOWANCE SH ALL BE MADE IN SUCH CASES AND UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES AS MAY BE PRESCR IBED HAVING REGARD TO THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF THE BANKING FACILITIES AVAILABLE, CONSIDERATION OF BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY AND OTHER RELEVANT FACTORS. IN OUR VIEW, GIVEN THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO CHANGE IN THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) IN SO FAR AS CONSIDERATION OF BUSINESS EXPED IENCY AND OTHER RELEVANT FACTORS ARE CONCERNED, THE SAME CONT INUES TO BE RELEVANT FACTORS WHICH NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED AND T AKEN INTO ACCOUNT WHILE DETERMINING THE EXCEPTIONS TO THE DIS ALLOWANCE AS CONTEMPLATED UNDER SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT SO LONG AS THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATURE IS NOT VIOLATED. WE FIND THAT OUR SAID VIEW FIND RESONANCE IN DECISIONS OF VARIOUS AUTHORI TIES, WHICH WE HAVE DISCUSSED BELOW AND THUS SEEMS FORTIFIED BY THE SAI D DECISIONS. ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 17 29. WE REFER TO THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN CASE OF SMT. HARSHILA CHORDIA VS. ITO (SUPRA), WHERE THE FACTS OF CASE WERE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE CERTAIN CASH P AYMENTS TOWARDS PURCHASE OF SCOOTER/MOPEDS WHICH EXCEEDED RS. 10,00 0/- IN EACH CASE TO THE PRINCIPAL AGENT INSTEAD OF MAKING PAYMENT TH ROUGH THE CROSS CHEQUES OR BANK DRAFT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER INVOKE D THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) AND HELD THAT THEY WERE NO EXCEPTION AL CIRCUMSTANCES FALLING UNDER RULE 6DD WHICH COULD AVOID CONSEQUENC ES OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT. THE LD. CIT(A) HELD T HAT SUCH EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES DID EXIST. HOWEVER, THE FINDINGS OF T HE LD. CIT(A) WERE REVERSED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND THE MATTER CAME UP FOR CONSIDERATION BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT. 30. THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OBSERVED THAT THE PRINCI PAL REASON WHICH WEIGHED WITH THE TRIBUNAL IN DISCARDING THE EXPLANA TION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FALL IN ANY OF THE CLAUSES ENUMERATED IN THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE CB DT ABOUT THE EXPLANATORY NOTE APPENDED TO CLAUSE (J) WAS TO OPER ATE AS IT WAS EXISTING AT THE RELEVANT TIME AND ENUMERATED CIRCUMSTANCES I N THE CIRCULAR WAS EXHAUSTIVE OF EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES. THE HONBL E HIGH COURT OBSERVED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS ERRONEOUSLY ASSUMED THAT ENUMERATION OF INSTANCES IN THE CIRCULAR IN WHICH THE PROVISIONS O F CLAUSE (J) UNDER RULE 6DD WOULD OPERATE TO BE EXHAUSTIVE OF SUCH CIRCUMST ANCES AND HAD NOT BEEN PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD ITS IMPLICATION. IT WAS F URTHER OBSERVED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT THAT PRIMARY OBJECT OF ENACTING SECTION 40A(3) IN ITS ORIGINAL INCARNATION WAS TWO-FOLD, FIRSTLY, PUTTING A CHECK ON TRADING TRANSACTIONS WITH A MIND TO EVADE THE LIABILITY TO TAX ON INCOME EARNED OUT SUCH TRANSACTION AND, SECONDLY, TO INCULCATE TH E BANKING HABITS AMONGST THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY. THE CONSEQUENCE WHI CH WAS PROVIDED ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 18 WAS TO DISALLOW OF DEDUCTION OF SUCH PAYMENTS/EXPEN SES WHICH WERE NOT THROUGH BANK EITHER BY CROSSED CHEQUES OR BY DEMAND DRAFT OR BY PAY ORDER. IT WAS FURTHER HELD BY THE HONBLE HIGH COUR T THAT: APPARENTLY, THIS PROVISION WAS DIRECTLY RELATED TO CURB THE EVASION OF TAX AND INCULCATING THE BANKING HABITS. THEREFORE, THE CONSEQUENCES, WHICH WERE TO BEFALL ON ACCOUNT OF NON-OBSERVATION OF SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 40A MUST HAVE NEXUS TO THE FAILURE OF SUCH OBJECT. THEREFORE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS AND IT BEING FREE F ROM VICE OF ANY DEVICE OF EVASION OF TAX IS RELEVANT CONSIDERATION WHICH H AS BEEN OVERLOOKED BY THE TRIBUNAL. 31. IT WAS ACCORDINGLY HELD BY THE HONBLE HIGH COU RT THAT IT IS THE RELEVANT CONSIDERATION FOR THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT THAT BEFORE INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) IN LIGHT OF RULE 6DD AS CLARIFIED BY CIRCULAR OF THE CBDT THAT WHETH ER THE FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN ADHERING TO REQUIREMENT OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) HAS ANY SUCH NEXUS WHICH DEFEATS THE OBJECT OF PROVISION SO AS TO INVITE SUCH A CONSEQUENCE. THIS IS PARTICULARLY SO, BECAUSE THE CONSEQUENCE PROVIDED U/S 40A(3) FOR FAILURE TO MAKE PAYMENTS THROUGH BANK IS NOT ABSOLUTE IN TERMS NOR AUTOMATIC BUT EXC EPTIONS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED AND LEVERAGE HAS BEEN LEFT FOR LITTLE FLEX ING BY MAKING A GENERAL PROVISION IN THE FORM OF CLAUSE (J) IN RULE 6DD. TH EREAFTER, THE HONBLE HIGH COURT REFERS TO THE CLAUSE 6DD(J) AND THE CIRC ULAR DATED 31 ST MAY, 1977 ISSUED BY THE BOARD IN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT SHA LL CONSTITUTE EXCEPTIONAL AND UNAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCES WITHIN TH E MEANING OF SECTION CLAUSE (J). THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OBSERVED THAT TH E CIRCULAR IN PARAGRAPH 5 GIVES A CLEAR INDICATION THAT RULE 6DD( J) HAS TO BE LIBERALLY CONSTRUED AND ORDINARILY WHERE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION AND ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 19 THE PAYMENT AND THE IDENTITY OF THE RECEIVER IS EST ABLISHED, THE REQUIREMENT OF RULE 6DD(J) MUST BE DEEMED TO HAVE B EEN SATISFIED. THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OBSERVED THAT APPARENTLY SECTION 40A(3) WAS INTENDED TO PENALIZE THE TAX EVADER AND NOT THE HON EST TRANSACTIONS AND THAT IS WHY AFTER FRAMING OF RULE 6DD(J), THE BOARD STEPPED IN BY ISSUING THE AFORESAID CIRCULAR AND THIS CLARIFICATION, IN O UR OPINION, IS IN CONFORMITY WITH THE PRINCIPLE ENUNCIATED BY THE SUPREME COURT IN CTO VS. SWASTIK ROADWAYS REPORTED IN [2004] 2 RC 539; [2004] 3 SCC 640. 32. THE LEGAL PROPOSITION THAT ARISES FROM THE ABOV E DECISION OF THE HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IS THAT THE CONSEQUENC ES, WHICH WERE TO BEFALL ON ACCOUNT OF NON-OBSERVATION OF SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 40A MUST HAVE NEXUS TO THE FAILURE OF SUCH OBJECT. THER EFORE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS AND IT BEING FREE FROM VICE OF ANY DEVICE OF EVASION OF TAX IS RELEVANT CONSIDERATION AND WHICH SHOULD BE E XAMINED BEFORE INVOKING THE RIGOURS OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT. 13. WE FIND THAT SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE COORDINATE BENCH IN CASE OF AYUB ALI (SUPRA) WHERE IT WAS HELD AS UNDER: 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE HAS ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH A GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL IN BIKANER WHEREBY IT OPERATES THE MRI AND CT SCAN MACHINES. THE NATURE OF SUCH ACTIVITIES THERE FORE DEMAND A CONTINUOUS SUPPLY OF ELECTRICITY AND THE ASSESSEE C ANNOT RISK THE LIFE OF THE PATIENTS ESPECIALLY THOSE ADMITTED IN EMERGENCY CASES BY NOT OPERATING THESE MACHINES FOR WANT OF ELECTRICITY. THEREFORE, WE FIND FORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LD AR THAT THERE WAS BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY OF MAKING CASH PAYMENTS SO THAT THERE IS NO DISRUPT ION IN SUPPLY OF ELECTRICITY REQUIRED TO OPERATE THE MRI AND CT SCAN MACHINES. FURTHER, ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 20 WE NOTE THAT IT IS NOT IN ALL CASES THAT THE PAYMEN TS HAVE BEEN MADE IN CASH, RATHER THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE CHEQUE PAYMENTS AS WELL DURING THE YEAR. THEREFORE, IT IS IN ONLY THOSE CASES WHERE TH E CHEQUE PAYMENTS COULDNT BE ARRANGED NEARING THE DUE DATE OF PAYMEN T THAT THE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE IN CASH. IN CASE OF ACIT VS. SH. RA HUL PANCHOLI (ITA NO. 949/JP/2013 ORDER DATED 30.09.2015), THE COORDI NATE BENCH HAS DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE UNDER SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCE S AND HELD AS UNDER: WE FIND FROM THE RECORDS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PAI D IN CASH ELECTRICITY BILL OF RS. 80,092/- FOR THE MONTH OF NOV. 2008 TO RAJASTHAN STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD UNDER THE BONA FIDE BELIEF THAT T HE PAYMENT IS MADE TO THE GOVERNMENT BECAUSE OF THE BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY A ND TO AVOID ELECTRICITY CONNECTION. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS TAKEN IN TO CONSIDERATION THE DECISION OF HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF R.C. GOYAL VS. CIT (SUPRA) WHEREIN IT IS HELD THAT CASH PAYMENTS MADE IN VIEW OF THE BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY IS ALLOWABLE AS PER SECTION 40A (3) OF THE ACT. THUS WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD . CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE WHICH IS SUSTAINED. 7. A SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN IN CASE OF SMT. AR UNA RANI VS. ITO (ITA NO. 613/JP15 ORDER DATED 14.02.2017), WHEREIN THE COORDINATE BENCH VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 02.02.2017 HAS HELD AS U NDER:- 5. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE FACTS IN THE LIGHT OF TH E ABOVE DECISION, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE NATURE OF BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE I S SUCH THAT ASSESSEE IS REQUIRED CONTINUOUS SUPPLY OF ELECTRICITY FOR WHICH ASSESSEE SHALL HAVE TO MAKE PAYMENT TO JODHPUR VIDYUT VITARAN NIGAM LTD. F OR SMOOTH FUNCTIONING OF THE BUSINESS ACTIVITY OF THE ASSESSE E. IN CASE NO PAYMENT IS MADE IN CASH TO THE ABOVE NIGAM, THEN THE ELECTR ICITY WOULD HAVE BEEN DISCONTINUED. THEREFORE, HAVING REGARD TO THE NATUR E OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY OF THE ASSESSEE AND THAT ASSESSEE DID NOT HAVE BANK ING FACILITY WHERE ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 21 PAYMENT OF ELECTRICITY BILL IS TO BE MADE AND CONSI DERING THE BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY AND OTHER FACTORS, I AM OF THE VIEW THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WOULD CLEARLY FALL IN EXCEPTION TO RULE AND NO DISA LLOWANCE SHOULD BE MADE UNDER SECTION 40A(3) OF INCOME TAX ACT. THE LE ARNED ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HAS, THEREFORE, RIGHTLY FOLLOWED THE DECISIO N OF THE COORDINATE BENCH ON IDENTICAL ISSUE IN THE CASE OF SHRI RAHUL PANCHOLI (SUPRA) IN WHICH ON IDENTICAL FACTS AND ISSUE, THE DEPARTMENTA L APPEAL WAS DISMISSED. INTERESTINGLY, THE LEARNED JUDICIAL MEMB ER WHO HAS DISMISSED APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE SAME SET OF FACTS, WA S THE PARTY TO THE ORDER IN THE CASE OF SHRI RAHUL PANCHOLI (SUPRA). T HE LEARNED ACCOUNTANT MEMBER WAS, THEREFORE, RIGHT IN HIS APPROACH IN ALL OWING THE APPEAL O THE ASSESSEE BY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE COORDINA TE BENCH RATHER OF THE SAME BENCH. THE LEARNED JUDICIAL MEMBER DID NOT DIS CUSS IN DETAIL AS TO WHY HE HAS NOT FOLLOWED THE ORDER IN THE CASE OF SH RI RAHUL PANCHOLI (SUPRA) TO WHICH HE HIMSELF IS A SIGNATORY. THE LEA RNED JUDICIAL MEMBER DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE SOLE RE ASON THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS TO MAKE THE PAYMENT OF ELECTRICITY BIL L REGULARLY, IT SHOULD HAVE MADE SUCH ARRANGEMENT WHICH IS IN ACCORDANCE W ITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. I MAY RESP ECTFULLY NOTE THAT TRIBUNAL IS CREATED BY LAW AND HAVE TO FOLLOW THE L AW PASSED BY LEGISLATOR. IF SUCH VIEW IS CONSIDERED, IT WOULD MA KE PROVISO TO SECTION 40A(3) REDUNDANT. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, GIVEN AN UNDERTAKING DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THAT ASSES SEE, IN FUTURE HAS MADE ALTERNATE ARRANGEMENT TO MAKE PAYMENT FOR ELEC TRICITY BILL AS PER PROVISIONS OF LAW SO THAT THERE IS NO VIOLATION OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) OF INCOME TAX ACT. 6. CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUM STANCES IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, I AGREE WITH THE VIEW OF THE LEARNED ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IN ALLOWING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE HOLDI NG THAT NO ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 22 DISALLOWANCE SHOULD BE MADE UNDER SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT, IN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. I, THEREFORE, AGREE WITH THE VIEW OF LEARNED ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. LET THE FILE BE PLACED B EFORE THE REGULAR DIVISION BENCH FOR PASSING A CONSEQUENTIAL ORDER. 8. IN THE ENTIRETY OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE AND RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE LEGAL PROPOSITION LAID DOWN BY THE VA RIOUS COURTS AND COORDINATE BENCHES REFERRED SUPRA, WE ARE OF THE VI EW THAT THERE IS NO DISPUTE REGARDING THE IDENTITY OF STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY, THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION IN TERMS OF ELEC TRICITY BILLS FOR CONSUMPTION OF ELECTRICITY BY THE ASSESSEE, AND THE TEST OF BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY HAS ALSO BEEN MET IN THE INSTANT CASE. F URTHER, AS HELD BY THE HON'BLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN CASE OF SMT. HARSHI LA CHORDIA (SUPRA), THE CONSEQUENCES, WHICH WERE TO BEFALL ON ACCOUNT O F NON-OBSERVATION OF SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 40A MUST HAVE NEXUS TO T HE FAILURE OF SUCH OBJECT. THEREFORE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIO NS AND IT BEING FREE FROM VICE OF ANY DEVICE OF EVASION OF TAX IS RELEVA NT CONSIDERATION. THE INTENT AND THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH SECTION 40A(3) HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON THE STATUTE BOOKS HAS BEEN CLEARLY SATISFIED IN THE INS TANT CASE. THEREFORE, BEING A CASE OF GENUINE BUSINESS TRANSACTION AND TE ST OF BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY BEEN SATISFIED, NO DISALLOWANCE IS CALLE D FOR BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT. IN THE RES ULT, WE HEREBY DIRECT THE DELETION OF DISALLOWANCE SO SUSTAINED BY THE LD CIT(A) AND THE GROUND OF APPEAL IS HEREBY ALLOWED. 14. IN THE INSTANT CASE AS WELL, THERE IS NO DISPUT E REGARDING THE IDENTITY OF STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY (AVVNL), THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION IN TERMS OF ELECTRICITY BILLS FOR CONSU MPTION OF ELECTRICITY BY THE ASSESSEE, SOURCE OF CASH BEING THE WITHDRAWALS FROM ASSESSEES OWN BANK ITA NO. 235/JP/2019 SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU VS. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU 23 ACCOUNT AND THE TEST OF BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY HAS ALS O BEEN MET AS WE HAVE NOTED ABOVE. FURTHER, AS HELD BY THE HON'BLE RAJAS THAN HIGH COURT IN CASE OF SMT. HARSHILA CHORDIA (SUPRA), THE CONSEQUENCES, WH ICH WERE TO BEFALL ON ACCOUNT OF NON- OBSERVATION OF SUB-SECTION (3) OF S ECTION 40A MUST HAVE NEXUS TO THE FAILURE OF SUCH OBJECT. THEREFORE THE GENUIN ENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS AND IT BEING FREE FROM VICE OF ANY DEVICE OF EVASION OF TAX IS RELEVANT CONSIDERATION. THE INTENT AND THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH SECTION 40A(3) HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON THE STATUTE BOOKS HAS NOT BEEN VIOLATED IN THE INSTANT CASE. THEREFORE, BEING A CASE OF GENUINE BUSINESS TRANSACTION AND TEST OF BUSINES S EXPEDIENCY BEEN SATISFIED, NO DISALLOWANCE IS CALLED FOR BY INVOKING THE PROVI SIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT. IN THE RESULT, WE HEREBY DIRECT THE DELETION O F DISALLOWANCE SO SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT (A). IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED IN LIGHT OF AFORESAID DIRECTIONS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28/01/2020. SD/- SD/- FOT; IKY JKO FOE FLAG ;KNO (VIJAY PAL RAO) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 28/01/2020 * GANESH KR. VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SHRI BALAJI MINERALS, JHUNJHUNU 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- ACIT, CIRCLE- JHUNJHUNU 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR. 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {ITA NO. 235/JP/2019} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR