2013 (12) TMI 894

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... prior period expenses of Rs. 4,04,202 and disallowance of stitching charges of Rs.10,09,568/-. 2. It is seen from the assessment order that the assessee in the tax audit report has disclosed prior period expenses under various heads such as testing charges, commission on sales courier charges, security charges and professional fees. In response to the show cause notice, no proper justification was filed before the Assessing Officer and hence, addition was made in the assessment order. This addition also stood confirmed from the stage of learned Commissioner (Appeals). On this background, the Assessing Officer has levied penalty on this disallowance. Similarly, with regard to the claim of stitching charges, the Assessing Officer in the asse .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... respect to 12 parties that they did not respond due to fear of income tax authorities. However, these payments are duly supported by the bills, copies of bank account showing cheque payments and form No. 16A showing deduction of TDS on such payments and Permanent Account Number of the parties, etc. The appeal was not filed before the Tribunal as there was no ultimate tax affect on any of the disallowance. The learned Commissioner (Appeals), after appreciating these facts, has deleted the penalty. 4. Before us, the learned Departmental Representative relying on the penalty order submitted that, just because the assessee has claimed prior period expenses, it does not make such expenses allowable in this year unless there is some proper evide .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ofar as the claim of prior period expenses, it is evident from the details given in the audit report in Form no.3CD, that all the particulars along with the voucher numbers of these expenses were given which pertain to the financial year 2003-04 i.e., the assessment year 2004-05, however, the bills were received after 1st April 2004. Thus, on this basis the assessee had made a claim of prior period expenses in the return of income. No material has been brought on record that these details are not correct or the expenses do not pertain to the relevant financial year. In such a situation, it cannot be held that the assessee has furnished any inaccurate particulars of income and, therefore, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly delete .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X