9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 597X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... firm namely M/s. Ashwin & Co., as under:- A. Business Promotion Expenses Rs. 7,927 B. Telephone Expenses Rs. 5,706 C. Motor Car Expenses Rs. 2,878 D. Staff Welfare Expenses Rs. 1,358 E. Maintenance Rs. 12,056 F. Conveyance & Office Expenses Rs. 1,634 2. Under the facts and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition u/s 41(1) of sundry creditors of Rs. 2,00,000. 3. the facts and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of expenses from the other proprietary firm namely M/s. Art Craft International as under:- A. Telephone Expenses Rs. 7,582 B. Motor Car Expenses Rs. 16,049 C. Staff Welfare Expenses Rs. 7,403 D. Conveyance & Office Expenses Rs. 3,289 E. Foreign Traveling Expenses Rs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of disallowance of expenses. Therefore, after hearing both the parties, ground no.1 of the assessee is dismissed. 5. Apropos ground no.2, this issue is discussed by the Assessing Officer in Para-12 of his order. The Assessing Officer noticed that one credit in the name of H.R. Industries, in sundry credit, there was a balance of Rs. 2,00,000. He required the assessee to explain the same. It was submitted by the assessee that no purchases and sales were made during the year under consideration and the said amount was taken by the assessee as an advance for sale in the year 2003. The Assessing Officer did not accept such explanation of the assessee and added the amount of Rs. 2,00,000 to the total income of the assessee. 6. In appeal, the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his issue and their contentions have carefully been considered. The matter is very small. The assessee has filed a copy of account of the said party, according to which, the payments have already been made to the said party. The payments have been shown to be debited to the bank account of the assessee and copies of bank accounts are also filed. The matter being small, we do not see any justification in restoring the issue to the file of Assessing Officer. Taking into account the additional evidence filed by the assessee, we delete the addition and allow the ground raised by the assessee. 10. Apropos ground no.3, it is the submissions of the learned Counsel for the assessee that it was a continuous business and disallowance is made by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t this issue is now covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of a co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal in Prem Associates Advertising & Marketing v/s JCIT, being ITA no.6547/Mum./2009, order dated 17th September 2010, wherein it has been held that the derivative transactions entered into by the assessee at the recognised stock exchange even prior to the date of notification in the relevant previous year are to be treated as covered by the exclusion clause set out under section 43(5)(d) of the Act. The copy of the said order is filed before us and a copy of same is given the learned Departmental Representative. The relevant observations are contained in Para-7, which are reproduced for the sake of convenience. "7. We find that i t is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
