2023 (5) TMI 219 - AT - Income Tax

Revision u/s 263 by CIT - claim of rent expenses - HELD THAT - We find the assessee explained that it has multiple offices and warehouses in multiple cities and all these offices and warehouses were obtained on rental from third parties on which assessee had deducted TDS u/s. 194I - As noted that the assessee furnished copies of rental contracts in soft copy format - it is also contended all these rental agreements were produced for verification during the course of scrutiny proceedings and the AO made verification but due to multiple number of contracts the AO did not refer the same in the record. It is pertinent to note that the AO verified the deduction of TDS on rental expenses and found nothing adverse to the details submitted in the soft copy format in Annexure-4 and also in respect of TDS of all quarters. Having entire details regarding the rent expenses vide Annexure-4 the Pr. CIT did not venture to examine the same but however simply directed the AO to conduct inquiries in our opinion is not justified as when the details are submitted in response to the show cause notice u/s. 263 - it is incumbent upon the Pr. CIT to examine such details and give specific direction. The order of Pr. CIT in revising the order of AO in respect of allowance of deduction under rent expenses is not maintainable for the reason the order of AO cannot be held to be erroneous thus it is not prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. Freight outward expenses - We note that a provision is made by an assessee as obligation to pay as a result of past event. To meet the said expenditure the assessee can make provision to settle the obligation basing on a reasonable estimation of amount to meet that payment of obligation. In the present case, we find no details of payment were furnished before us. Therefore we find force in the arguments of DR in supporting the order of Pr. CIT in restoring the said issue to the file of AO for his fresh verification. No infirmity in the order of Pr. CIT in revising the original assessment order as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue to the extent of freight outward expenses - Accordingly the order of Pr. CIT is upheld in this aspect. Appeal of assessee is partly allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Justification of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr. CIT) in setting aside the assessment order regarding Rent expenses.
2. Justification of Pr. CIT in setting aside the assessment order regarding Freight expenses.

Summary:

Issue 1: Rent Expenses
The primary issue was whether the Pr. CIT was justified in setting aside the assessment order dated 06-12-2017 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act concerning the claim of rent expenses amounting to Rs. 3,38,93,133/-. The assessee argued that the Pr. CIT did not give specific directions to the AO regarding this issue. The AO had already conducted detailed inquiries and accepted the rent expenses claim after verifying the necessary details, including lease agreements and TDS deductions. The Tribunal noted that the Pr. CIT failed to conduct any inquiries or provide specific directions, merely restoring the matter to the AO. It was established that the AO had properly verified the rent expenses and allowed the deduction. Therefore, the Tribunal held that the Pr. CIT's order was not maintainable as it was not based on any erroneous or prejudicial findings to the interest of Revenue.

Issue 2: Freight Expenses
The second issue was regarding the freight outward expenses amounting to Rs. 26,35,415/-. The AO had requested details of these expenses during the original assessment, and the assessee provided the necessary breakup. However, the Pr. CIT argued that the AO did not verify the actual payment of these expenses, only the provision for them. The Tribunal noted that no details of actual payments were provided by the assessee even during the revision proceedings. As a result, the Tribunal found merit in the Pr. CIT's argument that the provision for freight expenses required further verification. Therefore, the Pr. CIT's order to restore this issue to the AO for fresh verification was upheld.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal set aside the Pr. CIT's order concerning rent expenses but upheld the order regarding freight expenses. Thus, the appeal of the assessee was partly allowed.