What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that neither party's submissions were entirely acceptable. The assessee failed to explain all expenses, and the Assessing Officer did not consider all facts. Therefore, the disallowance was further restricted.

The assessee's appeal for AY 2014-15 was filed with a delay, which was condoned. The core issue was the restriction of expenses claimed by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the expenses claimed by the assessee were sufficiently explained and substantiated before the lower authorities, leading to the extent of disallowance.

Sampath Subramaniam vs ITO | ITAT Hyderabad 2021

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD ‘SMC’ BENCH : Hyderabad

Before: SHRI S.S. GODARA

Hearing: 24/03/2021Pronounced: 20/04/2021

Date of Hearing : 24/03/2021 Date of Pronouncement : 20/04/2021 O R D E R This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2014-15 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) “[CIT(A)]”-9, Hyderabad’s order dated 03.12.2018 passed in case no.10174/2017-18 in proceedings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’].

Case called twice. None appeared on behalf of assessee. Heard Shri N. Srikanth, learned DR on behest of Revenue. Case file perused.

It is observed that there was 19 days delay in filing the appeal and the assessee filed condonation petition dated 07.03.2019 explaining detailed reasoning for the delay. The same stands condoned as per assessees’ corresponding averments in condonation petition.

Sri Sampath Subramaniam, Hyd.

Coming to assessee’s sole substantive grievance seeking to reverse CIT(A)’s findings restricting expenses claimed Rs.23,58,630/- to the extent of Rs.5 lakhs only. It transpires at the outset that neither party submissions deserve to be accepted in entirety since the tax payer has failed to explain each and every head of expenses before CIT(A) as well as Assessing Officer who has not considered the totality of facts and circumstances involved. I thus conclude larger interest of justice would be met if impugned disallowance of Rs.5 lakhs is further restricted to Rs.2,50,000/- with a rider that the same shall not stand as a precedent. This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed.

This assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed in above terms. Order pronounced in Open Court on 20/04/2021.

SAMPATH SUBRAMANIAM,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(1), HYDERABAD

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments