TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 680X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or dated 2/5/2003, in which the appellant was directed to pay the lease rents at the increased rates. According to that the assessee has provided the enhanced claim of lease rent. As the award of arbitrator was received on 2/5/2003 same has not accrued during the year but in FY 2003-04 related to AY 2004-05. Such increased rent for earlier years. Therefore, same does not pertain to assessment year 2002 – 03. Even otherwise, it is not coming out of the record that when the arbitration award was received on 2/5/2003, how assessee could have made provision for the year ended on 31/03/2002 of above sum. No infirmity in the order of the learned CIT – A, in confirming the above disallowance as it did not crystallized during the year. Further s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the authority. With respect to the other expenditure out of the total expenditure appellant could not produce any details and evidence regarding the nature and the precise period to which the same pertains, before the lower authorities and therefore the disallowance was confirmed. Even before us no details have been furnished with respect to the above sum. We direct the learned AO to allow the sum as expenditure incurred during the year out of total sum. The balance sum has been correctly disallowed by the lower authorities. Accordingly, we allow the claim of assessee and confirm the disallowance. No infirmity in the order of the learned CIT – A to the extent mentioned above, in confirming the above disallowance - Appeal of the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cost. AO was of the view This being a contingent liability should have been added back to the total income of the assesse. Further the assessee has credited INR 5 3291914/ In its profit and loss account under the head prior period investment and actual receipt in this regard was INR 66200192/ which was netted of by prior period expenditure of INR 12905278/- . According to the AO this expenditure was not allowable expenditure. The whole of the receipt of ₹ 66200192/ should have been included in the total income instead of INR 5 3294941/ . Therefore, the AO took action under section 147 of the act stating that ₹ 7945552 and INR 12905278/- has escaped assessment . Therefore notice u/s 148 was issued on 27/3/2009. Assessee fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 6. Though the ld Authorised representative has applied for adjournment of hearing stating that appeal may be adjourned for a month as certain details were required, we found that appeal is filed on 13/5/2010 and many adjournments have been sought by the assessee under this pretext or any other pretext on 10 times. This dates is also fixed at the time of last hearing on 3/10/2018 at the request of the counsel. In view of these facts , we reject the adjournment application and proceed to hear the issue on merit. 7. The learned authorised representative submitted that mainly the excess billing was done in earlier years, which was offered to income tax in earlier years. Therefore, such excess billing has been written off during the year ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... during the year and therefore same is allowable as expenditure for this year. 10. With respect to the lease rent of ₹ 9408095/- assessee submitted a copy of the letter dated 5/5/2003, issued by the under Sec to the government of India, Ministry of civil aviation regarding the award of arbitrator dated 2/5/2003, in which the appellant was directed to pay the lease rents at the increased rates. According to that the assessee has provided the enhanced claim of lease rent. As the award of arbitrator was received on 2/5/2003 same has not accrued during the year but in FY 2003-04 related to AY 2004-05. Such increased rent was INR 9508095/ for earlier years. Therefore, same does not pertain to assessment year 2002 03. Even otherwise, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nds and Port Blair etc. which crystallized during the year. The assessee has shown the copy of the email and submitted that that these are the claims of the employees which was received during the year, though pertaining to the earlier year but admitted and provided in the books of account in this year. We are of the view that the above expenditure cannot be classified as prior period expenditure and should be allowed as and when admitted and approved by the authority. 14. With respect to the other expenditure out of the total expenditure of INR 2 465237, appellant could not produce any details and evidence regarding the nature and the precise period to which the same pertains, before the lower authorities and therefore the disallowance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
