9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 1622X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the year was rightly deleted by the Ld. CIT(A), which does not need any interference on our part, therefore, we affirm the impugned order on the issue in dispute involved in ground no. 1 and accordingly reject the same. Addition under the sub-head marriage gift - HELD THAT:- We note that the expenditure incurred by the assessee is only towards meeting the social obligation towards the dealer and employees which is an important tool of business promotion and staff welfare. Moreover, the same is also covered matter, the disallowance made by the AO was rightly deleted by the Ld. CIT(A), which does not need any interference, hence, we uphold the same. Addition under the sub-head subscription expenses - We find that since the AO cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AO had disallowed adhoc amount of Rs. 4 lacs without resorting to actual disallowance on being satisfied that particular tours have not been undertaken for business purposes. CIT(A) considering the facts of the case and the decision of the ITAT, has rightly deleted the adhoc disallowance made by the AO of Rs. 4 lacs, which does not need any interference on our part, therefore, we affirm the impugned order on the issue in dispute involved in ground no. 5 and accordingly reject the same. Addition under the head sales promotion being unvouched - HELD THAT:- We find that before the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee has submitted all the voucher-wise details of expenses and stated that all the expenses were incurred for business purpose only, hence, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the consultancy expenses and addition of Rs.2,31,993/- being expenses incurred in advertisement in Hindustan Times on the anniversary Of Late. Sh. Janki Oas Kapoor which were personal in nature and not for the business purpose. 4 The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in deleting the addition of Rs.3,74,560/- under the sub head glow shine board expenses .Since the normal life of glow shine board is of three years and the expenses incurred on glow shine board are debited during the year under consideration which is not allowable .The Ld.CIT(A) has also erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs 3,00,000/- under the head worker and staff welfare for which no bills or vouchers were furnished during the assessment proceedings. 5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Revenue may be allowed. 5. Ld. Counsel of the assessee has relied upon the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and stated that Ld. CIT(A) has passed a well reasoned order which does not need any interference, hence, he requested that the appeal of the Revenue may be dismissed. He further stated that the similar and identical issues have also been decided in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal in Assessee s own case vide order dated 29.7.2016. In support of his findings, he filed the copy of the order of the Tribunal dated 29.7.2016. 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the records available on record especially the impugned order and the order of the ITAT, A Bench, New Delhi dated 29.07.2016 passed in ITA Nos. 784/Del/2010 (A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly deleted by the Ld. CIT(A), which does not need any interference, hence, we uphold the same. As regards the addition of Rs.4,12,414/- under the sub-head subscription expenses is concerned, we find that since the AO could not bring anything on record that the payments are not genuine/ not expended wholly and exclusively for the business purpose and further the issue being a covered matter, the adhoc disallowance made by the AO was rightly deleted by the Ld. CIT(A), which does not need any interference on our part, hence, we uphold the action of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issues in dispute and accordingly reject the ground no. 2 raised by the Revenue. 6.3 With regard to ground no. 3 relating to deletion of addition of deleting the addition of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... considered to be Revenue in nature, hence, Ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition in dispute being a covered matter, which does not need any interference on our part, therefore, we affirm the impugned order on the issue in dispute involved in ground no. 4 and accordingly reject the same. 6.5 With regard to ground no. 5 relating to deletion of addition of Rs 4,00,000/- out of foreign travel expenses, we find that AO had disallowed adhoc amount of Rs. 4 lacs without resorting to actual disallowance on being satisfied that particular tours have not been undertaken for business purposes. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) considering the facts of the case and the decision of the ITAT, has rightly deleted the adhoc disallowance made by the AO of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
