TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 162X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rected to delete this disallowance made amount to Rs.146100/- and 293100/-. As argued that van rent amount was duly deleted by the ld. CIT(A). This particular van rent was taken twice both debit and credit side income of expenditure account for F.Y. 2014-15. Both the entries of van rent per contra. So, both the entries are deleted from income and expenditure account. The ld. Counsel has annexed the audit report with income and expenditure account. Accordingly, the assessee is an educational society and the gross receipt is calculated after deduction of van rent - Accordingly the assessee is eligible for benefit u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) r.w.s rule 2BC of the I.T. Rule 1962. We consider the submission of ld AO. The fact is that van re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... king disallowance at Rs. 293100/- at the rate of 10% of the total expense of Rs. 2930997/- on different heads without pointing out the particular expenditure which is of disallowable nature and without confronting the adverse material to the assessee. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) should have allowed the deduction u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) read with Rule 2BC of the Income tax Rules, 1962 on the basis of his finding in para 5.2 as per relief of Rs. 19,73,268/-, the receipt of the assessee would be below Rs. 1 crore. So, the necessary relief may kindly be given in second appeal. 4. That the appeal of the assessee for grant of registration u/s 12A is pending before the ITAT. So, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... related to addition of Rs.30,000/- paid to PSPCL and van rent Rs.1973268/-. Rest of the grounds are upheld in favour of the revenue. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before us. 4. During the argument it is mentioned that without finding proper lacuna the addition was made by deducting 10% of salary which was paid to 29 employees total amount of Rs.1461000/-. Further the addition was made @ 10% related to expenses in different heads amounting to Rs.2930997/- which is worked out amount of Rs.293100/-. 4.1 The ld. CIT DR vehemently argued and relied on the order of the revenue. He further relied on the observation of the CIT(A) in point no. 6 which is extracted as follows: 6. Ground of Appeal no. 4:- The ground of appeal is dir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3100/-. 6. The ld. Counsel further argued that van rent amount to Rs.1973268/- was duly deleted by the ld. CIT(A). This particular van rent was taken twice both debit and credit side income of expenditure account for F.Y. 2014-15. Both the entries of van rent per contra. So, both the entries are deleted from income and expenditure account. The ld. Counsel has annexed the audit report with income and expenditure account from pages no. 20 to 29 of APB. Accordingly, the assessee is an educational society and the gross receipt is calculated after deduction of van rent amount of Rs.81,64,461/- (Rs.10137729/- - Rs 1973268/-). Accordingly the assessee is eligible for benefit u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) r.w.s rule 2BC of the I.T. Rule 1962. We con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
