Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 1428 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance of 20% of the expenditure on account of business promotion expenses and office expenses for want of supporting evidence and full details - CIT-A restricted the disallowance to 10% - Held that:- There is no denial of the fact that the assessee has failed to produce complete details and evidence to substantiate the claim of expenditure as some of the vouchers were self made. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, when the assessee has not substantiated the claim with supporting evidence, we find that the disallowance restricted by the CIT(A) to 10% is just and proper and does not require any interference. Accordingly we reject the ground No. 1 of the assessee’s appeal. Disallowance on account of travelling expenses - self made vouchers for petty expenses - Held that:- We find that the AO has made an ad hoc disallowance for want of complete details of bills and vouchers and some of the vouchers were self made. AO accepted the fact that the self made vouchers were produced by the assessee in respect of the petty expenses and therefore, the major expenditure was supported by the assessee with proper vouchers. Accordingly, in absence of any specific defect in the claim of the assessee except the self made vouchers for petty expenses, the ad hoc disallowance made by the Assessing Officer is not justified. Assessing Officer has not conducted any proper enquiry or has given a finding that the claim of the assessee is excessive or bogus. - Decided in favour of assessee. Disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) in respect of the interest paid to various Non-banking Financial Companies (NBFCs) - non deduction of tds - Held that:- Though the substitution in section 40 has been made effective with effective from 1.4.2015, in our view the benefit of the amendment should be given to the assessee either by directing the AO to confirm from the contractors as to whether the said parties have deposited the tax or not and further or restrict the addition to 30%. We are of the view the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act would be effective retrospective as it was undisputedly inserted to removable the hardship faced by the assesses. Hence, we set aside this issue to the record of the Assessing Officer for limited purpose to verify the fact that the interest income received by these NBFCs have been included in the return of income and offered to tax and then decide this issue in light of above observation. - decided in favour of assessee.
|