TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1161X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce of income/business and another for the other, so long as it is regularly employed and results in appropriate determination of income. Tribunal was justified in sustaining the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) holding that the rejection of Books of Account in terms of Section 145 of the Act was not justified Disallowance of business expenditure - Held that:- We find that once the accepted Books of Accounts have been admittedly subjected to audit, then expenses claimed therein have to be allowed. Unless of course, it is the Revenue's case that the expenses were not incurred for the purposes of the business or that the expenses were bogus. Even before us the Revenue does not urge that the expenses claimed were bo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ribunal (the Tribunal). The impugned order is in respect of Assessment Year 2004-05. 2. This appeal raises the following question of law for our consideration : (i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in sustaining the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) holding that the rejection of Books of Account in terms of Section 145 of the Act was not justified? (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the CIT(A) in allowing the expenses of ₹ 36,37,375/? (iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in upholding th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tances, the CIT(A) by his order dated 25th October, 2010 allowed the appeal. (c) Being aggrieved the Revenue carried the issue in appeal to the Tribunal. By the impugned order the Tribunal on independent examination of the contentions raised by the Revenue upheld the view of the CIT(A) holding that the Assessing Officer was not justified in rejecting the Books of Account. (d) The only grievance of the Revenue before us is that the Percentage Completion Method of accounting followed by the respondent- assessee resulted in varying profits/income being offered for tax in different assessment years. In support, our attention was invited to page 7 of the Assessment Order. (e) We are unable to understand the objection urged by the Revenu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are bogus, the expenses claimed in the audited accounts have to be allowed. The Assessing Officer was directed to allow business expenditure by reducing the disallowance, if any. In appeal, the Tribunal by the impugned order upheld the finding of the CIT(A). (d) We find that once the accepted Books of Accounts have been admittedly subjected to audit, then expenses claimed therein have to be allowed. Unless of course, it is the Revenue's case that the expenses were not incurred for the purposes of the business or that the expenses were bogus. Even before us the Revenue does not urge that the expenses claimed were bogus and/or not incurred for the purpose of business. (e) Therefore in the face of concurrent finding of fact of the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 17th January, 2004 and the equipment, plant and machinery was used by the respondent in the conduct of its hotel business. Therefore the respondent-assessee was entitled to a claim the loss for the subject Assessment Year and also depreciation to the extent of 50% as it was used for less than 180 days during the year under consideration. In appeal, the Tribunal upheld the finding of the CIT(A) on both the issues. (d) Before us the grievance of the Revenue as urged by Mr. Kotangale is that the hotel business of the respondent-assessee was not commenced during the previous year relevant to the subject Assessment Year and the equipments on which depreciation was claimed was not used in the subject Assessment Year. However no facts in suppor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
