9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (2) TMI 231X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oviding multiple functions of car driving and security for the director of the company, the assessee has also challenged the confirmation of disallowing a sum of Re.1 lakh u/s 40(a)(ia) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. As regards disallowance of Rs.1,10,302/- out of foreign traveling expenses of its executive/employees, the Assessing Officer disallowed the said amount on the ground that various visits to Bangladesh were not directly or distinctly related to the business of the assessee company. 3. In first appeal, assessee submitted that complete details of the expenses along with names of the employees who had visited Bangladesh and also the purpose of visit was submitted to the Assessing Officer. The assessee company had been retained by M/s W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eal and while reiterating the submissions as made before lower authorities, it was pleaded for deletion of disallowance made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A), whereas Ld.DR. submitted that no relevant documents could be submitted either before the Assessing Officer or before the CIT(A) or even before this Bench to justify or establish the business connection with regard to foreign travel expenditure of employees to Bangladesh, but assessee has failed to do so. Therefore, the order of the Assessing Officer as well as of CIT(A) is justified in making/confirming the disallowance which action should be further confirmed. 5. We have heard both the sides and considered the material on record and find that assessee has not bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not charge any remuneration and pleaded for its deletion. 8. Ld.CIT(A) while considering but not accepting the plea of the assessee had concluded to confirm the impugned disallowance made by the Assessing Officer as per para 6.1 of his order, which is reproduced as under: "I have carefully considered the assessment order as well as the written submission of the appellant. The details of payment is given in the assessment order and the Assessing Officer has also noted in the assessment order, payment has been made to other drivers too in addition to the three drivers already paid for. I agree with the Assessing Officer that the deployment of three drivers in addition to other driver clearly indicate that these drivers cannot be used for a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or providing so called security to the director as well as performing the driving functions of the car cannot be said to be for business purposes of the assessee. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has rightly treated the said expenditure as personal expenses of the director which is not allowable and the CIT(A) is found to have justifiably confirmed such disallowance made by the Assessing Officer whose action being legally correct is confirmed and this ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed being de void of any merit. 11. As regard the disallowance of Re.1 lakh u/s 40(a)(ia) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the assessee took up the matter in appeal and it was submitted that assessee company had provided a sum of Re.1 lakh on account of technic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
