TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 52X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the amount has actually been written off in this year as admitted by the assessee and not rebutted by Revenue no justification in making the impugned dis allowance of claim - in favour of assessee. - ITA No.1669/Del./2010 - - - Dated:- 23-3-2012 - UBS Bedi, B C Meena, JJ. For Appellant: Shri K Sampath, Adv. For Respondent: Ms Y Kakkar, DR ORDER Per: U B S Bedi: This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)- XXV, dated 12.10.2010, relevant to assessment year 2001-02, whereby besides confirmation of foreign travel expenses in the sum of Rs.8,44,951/-, assessee has also challenged confirmation of not allowing the claim of bad debt in the sum of Rs.4,04,498/- 2. Facts indicate assessm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o Rs.4,04,493/- claimed as bad debt in the case of Bata India Ltd., the Assessing Officer observed while making the impugned addition consequent upon ITAT s direction as under: "The assessee has neither produced any sale bill through which sale was made to Bata India Ltd. nor copy of account from Bata India Ltd. has been filed. The assessee has claimed that the sum of Rs.4,04,498/- was a debt due to the assessee from Bata India Ltd. This was claimed bad debt and deduction on this count was claimed. The assessee has not produced any evidence to prove that this was an amount standing as bad debt in the books of the assessee. No evidence with regard to the issue of cheques has been filed before the Assessing Officer. Even if the reply of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee in places/sites by these persons and hence expenses on foreign travel were allowable. It was also submitted that affidavits of all these persons were attempted to be filed before the Assessing Officer in de novo proceedings on 31.12.2008, but assessee was told that assessment order has already been passed on the same day. So, the assessee filed these affidavits before CIT(A), who did not mention about these affidavits. Therefore, assessee has been denied opportunity to lead evidence. So, orders of Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) are not in conformity with law which should be set aside and be directed to delete the impugned addition. At this juncture, when assessee s counsel was asked that since affidavits of various persons w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 170 (Cal.) , it was pleaded for confirmation of the impugned addition as made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A). 7. Having heard both the sides, considering the material on record as well as precedents relied upon, we find that so far as copies of affidavits are concerned, we find that same can t be considered as no valid reason has been given as to why these were not filed before lower authorities and there is no application having been filed before Ld.CIT(A) or before this bench for admission of such material, hence it is ignored. Otherwise also, the assessee in this case has miserable failed to establish that foreign travel expenses, as claimed, have actually been incurred for business purposes or were even inciden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not business expenditure and even CIT(A) in second round it has been clearly held that no business nexus has been proved and while referring to paras.4.2, 4.3, 4.4 of CIT(A) order and relying upon the decision reported in 294 I.T.R. 91 (Ker.) and tribunal decision in the case of ACIT vs. M/s IDS Systems Pvt. Ltd., , dated 8.4.2011 in I.T.A. No.2251/Mum/2010 and M/s Avias Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO, , dated 23.12.2010 and JCIT(OSD) vs. M/s Videocon Industries Ltd., dated 20.05.2011, it was pleaded for confirmation of the impugned addition. 10. We have heard both the sides, considered the material on record as well as precedents relied upon and find that in view of latest decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
