9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 723X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay please be deleted. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has without understanding the facts of the case and in law has erred in confirming adhoc expenses of 1,98,879/-. The said disallowance is adhoc and without any reasons and without understanding the business of the appellant. The said adhoc disallowance may please be deleted. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has without understanding the facts of the case and in law has erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 3,69,992/- on account of Import Promotion Expenses. The said disallowance may please be deleted. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has without understanding the facts of the case and in law has erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 49,701/- on account of Depreciation. The said disallowance may please be deleted. 6. The assessee craves leave to add, alter, amend, modify or drop the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing". 2. Ground no. 1 pertains to disallowance of Rs. 5,08,595/- by invoking section 35D. 3. The facts are that the assessee, an individual and proprietor of M/s Reemal Investrad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are as per the provisions of Section 35D of the Income-tax Act which allows for deferment (Amortisation) of expenses and claiming the same equally for five years. f) Your honor the said disallowance u/ s. 35D is erroneous as the said section prescribes the expenditure which can be amortised under the said section and the expenditure incurred by the assessee namely repairs and maintenance and business promotion are not covered by clause (2' of the said Section. g) Your honor, it is an undisputable fact that the said premises are rented. Also the fact that the assessee has incurred the expenditure is accepted by the Officer. Your honor shall appreciate that Section 3 o (a)(ii) allows the expenditure incurred by the Assessee for the current repairs of the said premises". 6. The CIT(A), after considering the arguments of the assessee, held, "I have carefully gone through the assessment order and the submissions made on behalf of the appellant. In my considered view, the A.O. is quite justified in amortizing the expenses under s. 35(D) of the I.T. Act given the enduring nature of the repairs and maintenance expenses. The case laws cited by the appellant were found to be disting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 1,39,765/-, at 1/4th disallowance of above expenses. 17. The AR, therefore, submitted that no disallowance is called for. 18. The DR on the other hand supported the order of the revenue authorities. 19. We have heard the arguments and the facts as also noted by the CIT(A), that the assessee had opened a shop at Noida, while the assessee resides at Mumbai. It is obvious that involvement of personal nature of expense cannot be there. It is also obvious that the impugned expenses are routine business expenses, which has not been denied by either of the revenue authorities. In such a circumstance, the impugned expenses deserve to be allowed as we cannot find even a hint of personal usage in any of the expenses, noted by the revenue authorities. 20. We, therefore, set aside the order of the revenue authorities on the ad-hoc disallowance of Rs. 1,86,352/- and direct the AO to allow the expense as claimed. 21. Ground no. 2 is therefore, allowed. 22. Ground no. 3 pertain to ad-hoc disallowance of Rs. 1,98,979/-. 23. In the course of assessment proceedings, the AO noticed marked increase in expenses, compared to the preceding year. The following expenses were identified: Sr. No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant is an importer of musical instrument and has no export turnover. Hence, it is normal to have import promotion expenses. The said expenses are incurred for the purpose of traveling out of India in connection with business of import and purchase of foreign currency for such travel. It was requested that the expenses should be allowed". 33. The CIT(A), after considering the submissions, held, "I have carefully gone through the assessment order and the submissions made on behalf of the appellant. It is seen from the comparative table of expenses incorporated by the A.O. in the assessment order that in the previous year no expenses were claimed under the head import promotion expenses. Further, the onus is on the appellant to justify and prove that the expenses were incurred for the purposes of the business of the appellant being import promotion expenses. From the records, it appears that this onus has not been discharged by the appellant. It is for the appellant to explain as to what items were imported for which foreign travel was necessitated. Further, who were the parties which were contacted and why such expenses were not needed in the previous year. I find from the record ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
