Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (1) TMI 1245 - AT - Income TaxDeduction towards electric power - whether the same is incurred in the course of business - Held that:- As the assessee has already been allowed depreciation on the amount of electric power capitalized and no case for allowing the same as revenue expenditure could be made before us, and accordingly, the ground of the assessee is dismissed. - Decided against assessee Disallowance 50% traveling expenses - Held that:- Disallowance was made out of foreign travelling expenses, but the assessee could not file complete details such as, person who has travelled, his designation and purpose of visit etc. The assessee has only filed the bills in support of the tickets purchased for foreign travelling. In these facts, we see no reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) - Decided against assessee Disallowance towards interest paid to ABN Ambro Bank Ltd - Held that:- No evidence in support of the claim of the assessee could be filed by the assessee before us.- Decided against assessee Disallowance of garden expenses - Held that:- We find that the garden expenses were incurred by the assessee for the business purpose and copies of bills were also produced before the AO and the CIT(A), and therefore, there is no case for disallowance of 20% of the total garden expenses claimed by the assessee. - Decided against revenue Disallowance of consultancy charges - Held that:- . We find that the CIT(A) has given a finding that the amount of ₹ 2,92,815/- is not incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business. The assessee could not establish that the promotional charges were paid for the business run by the assessee-company.The expenses incurred even though genuine could not be allowed till it is proved that the same was incurred for the business purpose only - Decided against assessee Addition on estimation of profit - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- We find that the assessee has declared sales of ₹ 50.57 lakhs during the year as against ₹ 1023.40 lakhs in the immediately preceding assessment year. The assessee has declared loss in the current year, as against GP rate of 9.05% in the immediately preceding assessment year. No cogent defect in the account books of the assessee could be pointed out by the department except that the assessee could not maintain day-to-day consumption register of the items of raw-material, which are stated to be one thousand in number. The fact that the assessee has to close down its business after sometime, could not be controverted by the Revenue. We find that the CIT(A) has passed well reasoned order on this issue and held that in the books of the accounts of the assessee cannot be rejected and has deleted the addition. There being no mistake in the order of the CIT(A), the same is confirmed - Decided against revenue Penalty under section 271(1)(c) - certain disallowances - Held that:- As all the material facts necessary for the assessment of the case of the assessee were filed along with return of income. The assessee has filed explanation in this regard, which seems to be bona fide. It seems that this is a case of honest difference of opinion between the assessee and the Revenue with regard to allowability of certain expenses claimed by the assessee. Merely because certain expenses were capitalized and/or certain disallowances were made, it cannot be said that the assessee is guilty of concealment of income or filing of inaccurate particulars of income. The CIT(A) has deleted the penalty by following the decision in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd., (2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT ). There being no mistake in the order of the CIT(A) in deleting the penalty in this case, we confirm his order and the ground of the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.- Decided against revenue
|