38.6c New Delhi, India, Tuesday, May 05, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Executive

Government Says B2B Firms Free from Using Only BHIM And Rupay for Transactions

By Ghazal Bhootra      24 May, 2020 12:51 PM      0 Comments
BHIM And Rupay

The finance ministry decided to free the companies who had a turnover of more than Rs 50 crore and were engaged in only Business to Business (B2B) dealings from the condition set that they could only accept transactions of payments by electronic modes like BHIM-UPI and RuPay on 20th May 2020.

"It is clarified that the provisions of Section 269 S U of the Act shall not be applicable to a specified person having only B2B transactions (i.e. no transaction with retail customer/consumer) if at least 95 percent of the aggregate of all amounts received during the previous year, including the amount received for sales, turnover or gross receipts, are by any mode other than cash," the Central Board of Direct Taxes said in a notification on 20th May 2020.

To increase and expand the number of digital transactions and work towards the goal of a cashless economy, the government released a new condition or proviso, Section 269 S U, in the Finance Act, 2019, mandating an individual operating a business and possessing turnover/sales/gross receipts from the activity of over Rs 50 crore in the instantly preceding previous 12 months to necessarily supply provisions for receiving payments through electronic modes as mandated by the government of India.

In the due course, in December 2019, Unified Payments Interface (UPI) (BHIM-UPI); debit cards facilitated by RuPay; and Unified Payments Interface Quick Response Code (UPI QR Code) were set as the prescribed electronic modes of cashless payments by the Finance Ministry.

The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) on 21st May 2020 stated it has been presented with delineations that have brought to its notice that the condition of requiring facility for payments through the given electronic platforms is normally appropriate in Business to consumer or B2C businesses, which does transactions with retail or the final customers directly.

In addition to this, because the given electronic platforms like RuPay and UPI have a cap on the maximum payment limit per exchange of money or on the number of transactions that can be done on a day, the platforms are not as relevant to the B2B (business-to-business) industry. They normally accept a huge amount of payments through various other electronic platforms through which payment can be done like National Electronic Funds Transfer (NEFT) or Real-Time Gross Settlement (RTGS).

Requiring such B2B businesses to allow the facility for accepting funds only through mandated electronic platforms would be the cause of administrative inconvenience and give some additional costs to the industry, the CBDT opined.

Nangia Andersen Consulting Director Shailesh Kumar said that because non-installation and use of such fund transfer platforms would result in a prominent fine of Rs 5,000 every day, several businesses in the industry were suspicious and were required to install such payment platforms mandatorily, though given the fact that such facilities (generally used by retail customers mostly) were not supposed to be used for B2B businesses, bearing in mind the nature of the business or the customer base.

"This is another instance that shows the government is responsive to needs and concerns of taxpayers as well as flexible to amend rules to remove genuine hardships of taxpayers," Kumar said.

 



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

prior-notice-mandatory-before-property-demolition-section-405-power-not-absolute-andhra-pradesh-hc
Trending Judiciary
Prior Notice Mandatory Before Property Demolition, Section 405 Power Not Absolute: Andhra Pradesh HC [Read Order]

Andhra Pradesh High Court rules demolition without notice illegal; Section 405 is enabling, not absolute, and must follow natural justice.

04 May, 2026 04:11 PM
sc-dismisses-tmc-plea-on-exclusion-of-state-officials-as-counting-supervisors-records-eci-assurance
Trending Judiciary
SC Dismisses TMC Plea on Exclusion of State Officials as Counting Supervisors, Records ECI Assurance

Supreme Court declines TMC plea on counting supervisors, records ECI assurance to follow its circular in West Bengal Assembly elections.

04 May, 2026 05:07 PM

TOP STORIES

private-neighbourhood-schools-cannot-refuse-admission-to-students-allotted-by-state-under-rte-act-on-ground-of-eligibility-dispute-sc
Trending Judiciary
Private Neighbourhood Schools Cannot Refuse Admission to Students Allotted by State Under RTE Act on Ground of Eligibility Dispute: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules private schools must admit RTE-allotted students without delay; eligibility disputes cannot be grounds to deny admission under Article 21A.

29 April, 2026 11:55 AM
meghalaya-murder-case-shillong-court-grants-bail-to-accused-wife-over-failure-to-communicate-grounds-of-arrest
Trending Judiciary
Meghalaya Murder Case: Shillong Court Grants Bail to Accused Wife Over Failure to Communicate Grounds of Arrest

Shillong court grants bail to Sonam Raghuvanshi in Meghalaya murder case, citing failure to communicate arrest grounds and violation of Article 22(1).

29 April, 2026 12:55 PM
court-sentences-bjp-mla-nitesh-rane-to-one-months-imprisonment-for-humiliating-engineer-by-making-him-walk-through-muddy-water-in-public
Trending Judiciary
Court Sentences BJP MLA Nitesh Rane to One Month’s Imprisonment for Humiliating Engineer by Making Him Walk Through Muddy Water in Public [Read Judgment]

Sindhudurg court sentences Nitesh Rane to 1 month jail under IPC Sec 504 for forcing engineer to walk through muddy water; others acquitted.

29 April, 2026 01:53 PM
bombay-hc-adjourns-9-year-defamation-suit-to-2046-calls-it-an-ego-fight-between-senior-citizens
Trending Judiciary
Bombay HC Adjourns 9-Year Defamation Suit to 2046, Calls It an “Ego Fight” Between Senior Citizens [Read Order]

Bombay High Court adjourns 9-year defamation suit to 2046, calling it an “ego fight” between senior citizens and declining priority hearing.

29 April, 2026 02:02 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email