TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1259X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owing the expenditure for non-business purposes or unsupported by the evidences – it would be adequate if the total disallowance sustained by the learned CIT(A) towards these expenses is restricted to 50% - thus, The disallowance being restricted to 50% of the disallowance in respect of all the expenditure – Decided partly in favour of Assessee. - ITA No.2474/Mum/2011 - - - Dated:- 11-4-2012 - Shri T. R. Sood, AM And Shri Vijay Pal Rao, JM,JJ. For the Petitioner : Smt. Usha Dalal For the Respondent : Sh. D. S. suynder Singh ORDER Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM This appeal by the assessee is against the order dated 5.1.2011 of the CIT(A) for the AY 2007-08. 2 The assessee has raised the following effective grounds in this a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lly. We agree with the submission of the learned senior Advocate that after the lapse of almost 12 years no useful purpose would be served if the matter is restored back to the file of the A.O, to make fresh enquiries whether the clients of the assessee were aware that they were required to reimburse the illegal expenses. In fact it is clear that after assessee filed its reply neither the assessee nor the A.O. made any effort to prove that such expenditure was illegal and was being reimbursed by such clients/principals. Therefore, in the interest of justice we would like to decide the issue finally. 8. In the case of A.P.L. (India) P. Ltd. vs. DCIT 96 ITD 227 (Mum) it was held as under: - I. Section 37(1) of the income-tax Act, 1961, B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt and accepted by the learned senior Advocate on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, we set aside the order of the learned C1T(A) and direct the A.O. to disallow 25% of Rs.18,46,151/- and Rs.13,84,432/- for A.Y. 1997-98 and 1998- 99 respectively being alleged illegal expenses. In the present case also Ld. Sr. Advocate agreed that he will have no objection if sundry expenses are disallowed to the extent of 25% of the expenses. Therefore, in view of the concession made by the Ld. Sr. Advocate as well as the order of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. N. Jamnadas Co. vs. ACIT supra], we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AD to make the disallowance of 25% of the sundry expenses. 5 Accordingly, following the earlier or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded in para-3 of its order as under :- 3. Since it is a question of making estimate for disallowing the expenditure for non-business purposes or unsupported by the evidences, in our considered opinion, the ends of justice will meet adequately in these peculiar circumstances if the total disallowance sustained by the learned CIT(A)towards these expenses at Rs.3.74 lakhs is reduced by 50% to Rs. I .81akhs. We hold accordingly . In the absence of any distinguishing features brought on record by the parties, we respectfully following the order of the Tribunal supra and keeping in view the rule of consistency, hold that it will meet the ends of justice if the total disallowance sustained by the Id. CIT(A) towards these expenses at Rs,7,57,390 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
