Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2008 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (6) TMI 250 - AT - Income TaxTrading addition - Deduction u/s. 80HHC - Disallowance towards office expenses and car expenses. Trading addition - Estimation of income - Bogus Purchase - claimed to have made purchases of goods from different parties - CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO by applying GP rate - HELD THAT:- We are of the view that the AO was not justified in doubting the genuineness of the claimed purchases made by the assessee from the said four suppliers merely on the basis that on subsequent occasion the parties were not found on the given addresses or in some other cases some connected person to the supplier had stated that they were only issuing bills without supplying the goods or that the money paid by the assessee against the purchases was withdrawn by those parties. Undisputedly, after completion of transaction a purchaser cannot have any control over the suppliers and suppliers are always at liberty to use the money paid to them against the goods sold by them - We are thus of the view that in absence of any positive evidence that the goods were not purchased from the four parties but from some named person or that the money paid by the assessee against the goods was ultimately returned to the assessee by the suppliers, there was no occasion before the AO to deny the claimed purchases especially when the genuineness of the export of those goods by the assessee has been accepted by the AO. The learned CIT(A) has thus rightly deleted the addition made by the AO by applying GP rate after disbelieving the genuineness of the claimed purchases made from the four parties. The first appellate order in this regard is thus upheld. The ground No. 1 is accordingly rejected. Deduction u/s. 80HHC - received delayed payment - HELD THAT:- We are of the view that there was no occasion before the learned CIT(A) to entertain those claims of deduction u/s. 80HHC which were ultimately withdrawn by the assessee before the AO and the learned CIT(A) was to restrict to the extent of remittance received within time or extended time and in the alternative to be computed on the basis of business income - We, find that the learned CIT(A) in conclusion of the issue raised before him regarding disallowance of deduction u/s 80HHC has directed the AO only to recompute the deduction u/s. 80HHC on the basis of business income finally determined in view of his decision in respect of ground Nos. 1 to 4. In the ground Nos. 1 to 4 before him the issues raised were regarding trading addition, disallowance made out of office expenses, telephone expenses and car expenses - We thus do not find substance in the issue raised in ground No. 2 of the appeal as not arising out of the first appeal in question. The ground No. 2 is thus rejected - appeal is dismissed. Disallowance towards office expenses and car expenses - HELD THAT:- On perusal of orders of the lower authorities, we find that the AO had made above disallowances on account of personal user of telephone and car and office facilities in absence of maintenance of proper record @ 10 per cent out of office expenses, 20 per cent out of car expenses and depreciation thereon and 20 per cent out of telephone expenses - We, however, considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case especially nature of the business i.e. export are of the view that disallowance of 10 per cent out of the claimed expenses on office, car and telephone will meet the end of justice. We order accordingly. The cross-objection is partly allowed. In result appeal is dismissed and Cross objection is partly allowed.
|