TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1274X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Revenue is dismissed. Addition on account of profit received on sale of car - as per AO section 50(1) clearly state that any receipt arising from the transfer of short term capital asset shall be deemed to be the capital gains - CIT-A deleted the addition - Held that:- The block of asset was perused by the Ld. CIT (A) and finally it was found that the assessee has deducted the sale value of the vehicle from the written down value of the concerned block of asset and duly complied with the provision of the Act and, therefore, claimed lesser depreciation on such block in the year. We find no infirmity in the conclusion drawn by the Ld. CIT (A) more specifically when the assessee correctly computed short term capital gain as Rs. Nil in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lable on record. In view of the above, we are reproducing hereunder the order of the Tribunal in ITA Nos. 6452 6453/Del/2015 for AY 2011-12 order dated 31.08.2017 for ready reference and analysis: Since common questions of facts and law have been raised in both the aforesaid appeals, the same are being disposed off by way of consolidated order to avoid repetition of discussion. 2. Appellant, Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 5 (1), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the Revenue'), by filing the present appeals sought to set aside the impugned order dated 31.08.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)- 2, New Delhi, for the Assessment Years 2011-12 2012-13 on the grounds inter alia that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy at hand are : During scrutiny proceedings, Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has paid commission and ex- gratia allowances to its Directors, namely, Shri H.L. Khushalani, Shri Vivek Khushalani, Mrs. Raksha Walia and Mr. K.N. Sharma to the tune of ₹ 1,41,65,711/0 ₹ 29,91,600/- for AY 2011-12 and ₹ 1,41,65,711/0 ₹ 29,91,600/- for AY 2012-13 respectively. Being dis-satisfied with the explanation furnished by the assessee, AO invoked the provisions contained u/s 36(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') and proceeded to conclude that the bonus/commission paid to an employees is not allowable deduction, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - Commission Ex-gratia Total (Rs.) Mr. H.L. Khushalani 88,53,569 13,50,000 102,03,569 Mr. Vivek Khushalani 35,41,428 8,10,000 43,51,428 Ms. Raksha Khushalani 17,70,714 5,67,000 23,37,714 Mr. K.N. Sharma Nil 2,64,600 2,64,600 Total 1,41,65,711 29,91,600 171,57,311 8. Undisputedly, the issue in controversy has already been decided by the Revenue in favour of assessee in AYs 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09 and all the said orders have been affirmed by the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal. 9. In AY 2008-09, the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITA No.2922/Del/2013 order dated 23.09.2015 in assessee's own case while deciding the identical issue returned categorical findings by relying upon the case of Hon& ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ver, ld. CIT (A) deleted the addition on the ground that similar addition has been deleted in assessee's own case in AY 2010-11. Moreover, when the assessee has come up with specific plea that expenses which are in the nature of subscription fee and cost of services paid to various clubs as incurred by the assessee company for entertaining the customers at various meetings in the course of its business by the directors, disallowance of the same by the AO without recording any reason as to how the same is not business expenses, is not sustainable. So, again, we find no illegality or perversity in the findings returned by the ld. CIT (A) on this issue. Hence, grounds no.3 4 in AY 2011-12 is determined in against the Revenue. 13. R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on sale of car, ignoring the fact that section 50(1) of the Act clearly state that any receipt arising from the transfer of short term capital asset shall be deemed to be the capital gains. 3.1 The crux of argument advanced by the Ld. Sr. DR is in support of the addition made by the Ld. AO, whereas the Ld. Counsel for the assessee defended the impugned order. 3.2 We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts in brief are that from the computation of income, submitted by the assessee, it was observed that the assessee has deducted ₹ 5,18,641/- as profit on sale of vehicle from its business income and did not shown it as short term capital gain as per the provisions of Section 50 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
