Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (4) TMI 1571 - ITAT PUNEDisallowing services charges payments - CIT(A) restricted addition to the extent of 30% - assessee seeks to delete the entire service charges disallowance whereas the Revenue's endeavour is to restore the assessment findings rejecting this entire claim - HELD THAT:- We find no merit in the Revenue's instant argument as it is clear from a perusal of the assessment findings that the assessing authority had itself admitted the relevant factual position herein to be similar as in AY 1999-2000 [2022 (4) TMI 1073 - ITAT PUNE] wherein the taxpayer has already succeeded. We therefore adopt judicial consistency to accept assessee's impugned service charge claim in entirety and allow its corresponding ground. Disallowing travelling expenditure - HELD THAT:- We make it clear first of all that the CIT(A) himself held in his detailed discussion that the assessee had been including these travelling charges as part and parcel of service charges only till AY 1999-2000 which have been separately accounted in the impugned assessment year onwards. We reiterate that the assessee's service agreement issues have already been decided against the department all along as well in the preceding paragraphs. That being the case, we find no substance in the Revenue's vehement arguments supporting the impugned disallowance in principle since the very claim stands accepted all along in principle. Quantification of the impugned travelling expenses disallowance - Although the assessee had to indeed perform its reimbursement obligation regarding travelling expenditure to payee group, we hardly see any reason for the latter entity's employees right to claim the same regarding their family members as well. This is coupled with the fact that there is no complete reconciliation between the corresponding travelling expenses vis-à-vis the assessee's business requirement involving the group company employees' travel to sufficiently discharge its onus of having incurring this expenditure wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business. Faced with this situation, we find that a lump sum travel expenditure disallowance of 10% on estimation basis would be just and proper. Ordered accordingly. The assessee succeeds in the remaining 90% travelling expenditure component. Necessary computation shall follow as per law. Depreciation disallowance on coolers - not only the learned lower authorities had accepted the assessee's identical depreciation claim pertaining to cooler provides to the bottlers/vendors by allowing the same in preceding years throughout but also the learned counsel sought to invite our attention that the accepted written down value thereon as on 01.04.1999 held as eligible for depreciation. And that the dispute therein is only for the coolers which have been added in the asset schedule of the relevant previous year. We thus observe that there is hardly any justification on the part of the learned lower authorities to adopt a different approach in the impugned assessment year's depreciation claim only for the newly added coolers installed at bottlers/vendors premises. Decided in favour of assessee.
|