1983 (12) TMI 126

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 27th Oct., 1980 under s. 143(3) of the IT Act for the asst. yr. 1978-79 was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue and directing the ITO to modify the same in the light of the direction given by the Commissioner in the said order. 2. The facts briefly stated are that the only source of income by the assessee as disclosed in the return filed on 28th Aug., 1980 was the commission .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sioner, therefore, hold that the expenditure allowed by the ITO in excess of Rs. 10,000 was wrongly allowed. In respect of such excessive allowance by the ITO, the Commissioner held this order to be erroneous the prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. He directed the ITO to modify his order accordingly and raise the additional demand. 3. The assessee is aggrieved against the above order of t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... order of the CIT. 4. We are in agreement with the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the Board Circular referred to above is only a guide line for the ITOs. If any expenditure is incurred over and above Rs. 10,000 the same has to be considered as allowable deduction. The CIT has not recorded any finding that the expenditure claimed by the assessee was no warranted on the facts of the case. He was .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X