TMI Blog2002 (4) TMI 951X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. The first ground of appeal is directed against the deletion by the CIT(A) of the amount of ₹ 1,57,931 made under the head general stores consumption. According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee failed to produce bills and vouchers of general stores consumption claimed at ₹ 15,79,319 and hence, he disallowed 10% of the total expenditure. The CIT(A) has observed that the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer is not based on proper findings. The Assessing Officer could not bring on record a single instance of an expenditure which was not supported by the Bills or Vouchers. Hence, he deleted the disallowance of ₹ 1,57,931. 4. We find that the revenue could not bring any material on record to rebut the findin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deletion by the CIT(A) of addition of ₹ 44,671 made on account of vehicle maintenance and rent expenses. According to the Assessing Officer the assessee claimed ₹ 4,46,716 on account of vehicle maintenance and rent expenses. In absence of proper bills and vouchers, he disallowed 10% of the total expenditure being personal use of directors. The CIT(A) has observed that the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer is not based on proper findings. Keeping in view the location of the garden of the assessee company and the fact that the Assessing Officer could not bring on record a single instance of an expenditure which was not supported by proper Bills or Vouchers, he deleted the disallowance of ₹ 44,671. 8. We obser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessing Officer has not intimated the result of local enquiry made from which it was concluded that the creditors were not traceable at the given address before drawing adverse inference from the same. Further, observing all the six creditors are company assessee, regularly assessed to tax, loans were advanced by account payee cheques, tax was deducted at source on interest paid by the assessee in respect of the above loans, interest was paid in subsequent year by account payee cheques and relying on the decision of Guwahati High Court in the case of Jalan Timber v. CIT [1997] 223 ITR 11 held that assessee should not have been subjected to such addition. Hence, he deleted the addition of ₹ 17,50,000 and consequentially also deleted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Assessing Officer suffers with a legal infirmity which is not curable. The CIT(A), therefore, was not justified in restoring the matter to the Assessing Officer for giving him opportunity to regularise his mistake which is not permissible as the same was against the principle of natural justice. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) and that of Assessing Officer are cancelled as the order of the Assessing Officer was ab initio void . In the circumstances, respectfully following the above order of the Tribunal, in our considered opinion, the deletion of the addition of ₹ 17,50,000 by the CIT(A) does not require any interference. Consequently, the deletion of interest of ₹ 1,32,765 by the CIT(A) is also upheld. 11. Our above vie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
