Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2020 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (10) TMI 368 - HC - Income TaxAdhoc disallowance of the expenditure - Whether expenses were wholly and exclusively incurred for the business of the appellant? - reasonability of the expense - HELD THAT:- Tribunal has notice that Assessing Officer has found that details of expenditure incurred by the assessee are not directly relatable to each heads. AO has bifurcated the expenditure claimed by the assessee under various heads and then pointed out why expenses meant for a particular head has been debited under a different head viz., other marketing expenses. However, the assessee failed to give any reply to this aspect. CIT (Appeals) has re appreciated the evidence and has observed that quantification of disallowance is on the higher side and therefore, the disallowance has been made on adhoc basis and has been restricted to ₹ 25 Lakhs. Similarly, the Tribunal has found that the assessee has not maintained log book of the vehicles exhibiting their exclusive usage therefore, it has held that CIT (Appeals) has rightly arrived at the conclusion that possibility of user other than business purposes cannot be ruled out and therefore, 10% of the disallowance out of the total expenses has been upheld. Tribunal has held that the assessee has not been able to substantiate the claim incurred for expenditure towards business by producing vouchers. Therefore, the Tribunal has upheld the order passed by the CIT (Appeals). Assessee was unable to point out any perversity in the findings of fact, which has been recorded by the AO, CIT (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal. It is pertinent to mention her that even in the substantial questions of law no perversity has been averred. The scope of interference by this court in exercise of power under Section 260A of the Act is well settled. - No substantial question of law.
|