9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 704X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8,19,700/- applying the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act. 3. The AO noted that the assessee had claimed an amount of Rs. 8,19,700/- as payments/benefits to staff in the income and expenditure account. He further noted that the same were incurred in cash and the assessee had maintained self-made vouchers. He further noted that on some instances, signature of the recipient was not there on such vouchers. With these observations, and on ground of non-verifiable nature of such expenses, the AO disallowed 1/5th of such claim i.e. at Rs. 1,63,940/-. On appeal, the CIT(A) held that assessee had not clarified about the manner of making such payment towards salary & wages and for staff welfare, during the assessment proceedings. Under these ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ayment through cheques. Since no bills and vouchers in support of the said expenses were produced, the AO disallowed the entire claim made at Rs. 3,38,918/-. On appeal, the CIT(A) deleted the payments made to different nursing homes through cheques by the assessee of Rs. 86,080/- and confirmed the disallowance to the extent of Rs. 2,52,838/-. 8. Ground No. 5 is directed against the action of the CIT(A) in confirming the disallowance to an extent of 1/6th as against 1/5th made by the AO in respect of the expenditure claimed of Rs. 7,71,009/- on account of repairs and maintenance, building maintenance & vehicle maintenance. 9. The AO noted that while referring to different amounts claimed under repairs and maintenance, building maintenance, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penditure could have been used for personal use, the CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO. 14. Ground No. 8 is directed against the action of the CIT(A) in upholding the addition of Rs. 50,769/- made by the AO on the ground that the depreciation in respect of the Hospital building was not allowable in view of the provisions of section 38(2) of the Act. 15. The AO noted that the assessee was residing in the third floor of the hospital building and since the same had not been used for the purpose of business, he disallowed a sum of Rs. 50,769/- pertaining to depreciation on the same out of the total depreciation claimed in respect of that building, u/s 38(2) of the Act. On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the said action of the AO. 16. Ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ported the orders of the authorities below. 21. We have heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the record as well as the orders of the authorities below. It is observed that the main reason for making the respective disallowances by the AO is that the assessee has not substantiated her claims by way proper evidences, such as bills/vouchers in respect of the claims. The main grievance of the AO is that for most of the claims, the assessee filed self-made vouchers, which are not unverifiable in nature. In the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, to meet the ends of justice, one more opportunity may be given to the assessee to substantiate her claims before the AO by way of filing proper documentary evidences. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
