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 in upholding the order of the C.I.T.(Appeals) who held that disallowance under Section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act is not called for, for cash remittances 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 confirmed the order of the C.I.T.(Appeals) following decision of the Supreme Court wherein Supreme Court has held that the purpose of Section 40A(3) is to discourage generation of black money. When assessee had made cash remittances to the Bank account of the suppliers, the amount gets accounted and therefore, the violation is only technical. 2 We, therefore, do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. Consequently the appeal is dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge V.K.MOHANAN Judge pms