9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (7) TMI 101X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orship of Polo tournament. 3 (a) The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) erred on facts in upholding the disallowance of Rs.39,328 towards commission paid to M/S Eden Park on the ground that no a committed client and said expenses cannot be held to be for business purposes when this issue relating to committed client and business purpose has neither arisen from the assessment order nor raised by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) during the appellate proceedings. 3. (b) The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) erred in observing and finding of followings facts while confirming the disallowance of Rs.39,328 towards commission paid to M/S Eden Park. "AR stated that assessee has committed client in MIS Eden Park Hotel and as such no commission needed to be paid" when these facts were neither filed by the Appellant nor observed by the Assessing Officer in his assessment order 4. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) erred in upholding of disallowance of Rs.3,00,000 out of the legal and professional charges paid to Sh S.L. Maneshinde, Advocate when the same had been incurred wholly and necessaril ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... end behind this rule is not to have abuse of procedure by a casual attitude during assessment when evidence is sought by AO and is not produced by the assessee. No explanation has been given why the assessee was unable to produce documentary evidence sought by the AO for a year long proceedings, hence the request of the assessee for admission additional evidence is rejected. It is also pertinent to mention that the assessee's business did not require any advertising as it has committed cliental of sister concerns which is limited in number. It is also pertinent that 4 other teams played in the tournament apart from the team by the name of Sona Polo. These include Aravali Polo, India Army & President's body guards. It is also pertinent to mention that many companies are claimed to be associated with said sport event and these include industries Mercedes Benz, Yes Bank and L' Officiel Magazine, Olive Bar & Kitchen , Savera Association, The Latika Roy Foundation, Youth Reach and Umeed Khanna Foundation as such claim by the assessee that Smaiara Polo Cup 2005 helped at in the business of Sona Management Services is neither substantiate nor established during the course of assessment a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... expenditure is completely unjustified. There is no product which the company requires to be advertised. There was no direct or indirect benefit which the assessee could have gained from this expenditure which can meet the requirement of law for allowability as expenditure. These expenditure were personal expenditure to fulfill the personal wishes of Smt. Rani Kapoor or other family members. There is no direct or indirect benefit to assessee company by sponsoring this tournament. 7. We have heard both the sides on the issue. The assessee has filed some details before the CIT (A) as additional evidence but CIT (A) holds that assessee had been provided sufficient opportunity at the time of assessment proceedings itself. CIT (A) found that assessee failed to meet the requirement of Rule 46A. CIT (A) did not admit these additional evidences. Assessing Officer had categorically mentioned in his order that assessee was specifically asked to furnish the evidences with reference to benefits derived by assessee company for incurring these expenditure on three hearings prior to finalization of assessment. No such details were filed before Assessing Officer. Therefore, in our considered view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her substantial cause including the enhancement of the assessment or penalty (whether on his own motion or on the request of the [Assessing Officer]) under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 251 or the imposition of penalty under section 271.]" In our considered view, none of these exceptions are available to the assessee. Assessing Officer had not refused to admit evidence rather he had called further evidence. Assessee had also failed to make out a case that there was sufficient cause which prevented it to file it when it was called. Assessee had also not made out a case that it was prevented by sufficient cause to file it before Assessing Officer. Assessee was provided sufficient opportunity to adduce evidence. In view of these facts, we hold that CIT (A) was justified not to admit additional evidences filed before her. Further, on the issue of merits of addition also, we find that there was no business requirement or benefit to the assessee by incurring these expenditure. Majority of the clients of the assessee were sister concerns under the same family management, therefore, there was no business benefits to the assessee by making such expenditure on advertisement. Furt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess purposes. The assessee has completely failed to establish or to produce any evidence which can prove the fact that this expenditure was incurred wholly and exclusively for the business purpose of the assessee company. No details of services provided to assessee company are filed before us as well before authorities below. Assessee had also failed to contradict the fact that these expenses were incurred for personal litigation of family member of Rani Kapoor holding 75% shares of assessee company. Considering these facts in view, we find no fault in the order of the CIT (A) and we sustain the same. Accordingly, ground no.4 is dismissed. 13. Ground No.5 is related to the disallowances from the traveling expenses. Rs.8,94,512/- which were confirmed by the CIT (A) on the basis that assessee has failed to establish the purpose of such meetings with the prospective clients. They have not been identified. Nor any confirmation from them has been filed. The assessee has failed to bring anything on record which could establish that the traveling expenses were for the business purpose of the assessee. The assessee's contention is that the travels were for exploring business and for this, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
