TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 241X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ithout any assistance from the Assessing Officer. Since the CIT(A) himself called for the records and examined the same, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that there is no violation of Rule 46A as alleged by the ld. DR. Accordingly, this Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A). Accordingly, the same is confirmed. - Decided against revenue Disallowance of travelling expenses - AO disallowed a sum of 1 lakh on the ground that the expenditure incurred by the assessee towards foreign travel cannot be for earning the professional income admitted by the assessee due to his old age - Held that:- The fact that the assessee is a neuro-physician is not in dispute. Being a practicing neuro-physician, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame is confirmed.- Decided against revenue - I.T.A. No. 194/Mds/2016, C. O. No. 44/Mds/2016 - - - Dated:- 13-4-2016 - Shri N. R. S. Ganesan, Judicial Member And Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member For the Department : Ms. H. Kabila, JCIT For the Assessee : Shri G. Seetharaman, CA ORDER Per N. R. S. Ganesan, Judicial Member The appeal of the Revenue and the cross objection of the assessee are directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-4, Chennai, dated 20.11.2015 for assessment year 2011-12. 2. Ms. H. Kabila, ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer to the extent of 54,96,105/- after admitting additional evide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtunity to the Assessing Officer. According to the ld. Representative, the assessee has not filed any additional evidence/material before the CIT(A), therefore, there is no violation of Rule 46A. 4. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and also perused the material available on record. The Assessing Officer made addition of 54,78,656/- being the difference in the FD amount as unexplained income from other sources. The CIT(A) in the course of appellate proceedings, called for information u/s 133(6) of the Act from the bank and found that the difference worked out by the Assessing Officer in the FD was reconciled. Therefore, he deleted the addition of 54,96,106/-. The question arises for consideration is that when the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es of 3,87,797/-. The Assessing Officer found that the assessee was an aged person, therefore, the expenditure incurred towards foreign travel was not for earning the professional income admitted by the assessee. According to the ld. Representative, the assessee has visited certain hospitals in UK for first hand knowledge in the field of medicine. According to the ld. Representative, the assessee being a neuro-physician, he has to update his knowledge, therefore, it cannot be said that the expenditure incurred by the assessee for foreign travel is not for earning the income admitted by the assessee. 8. On the contrary, Ms.H. Kabila, ld. DR submitted that the assessee is an aged person and he is having restrictive movement in India due to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... we are unable to uphold the orders of the lower authorities. Accordingly, the addition made by the Assessing Officer to the extent of 1 lakh is deleted. 10. The assessee has taken one more ground with rgard to depreciation on motor car. 11. Shri G.Seetharaman, ld. Representative for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer disallowed 25% of the depreciation on the motor car towards personal usage. According to the ld. Representative, the car was used only for professional activity and not for personal use. 12. On the contrary, the ld. DR submitted that in the computation of income, the assessee himself added back 25% of the expenses towards personal usage. When the assessee himself added back 25% of the expenditure toward ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
