Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE SMC BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT
O R D E R This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld.
CIT(A)-I, Indore dated 02.7.2018 for the assessment year 2014-15.
The appeal is time-barred by two days. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that due to medical urgency, this short delay occurred, which may kindly be condoned. Looking to circumstances and in the interest of justice, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
The only ground raised by the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.6,84,071/- disallowed
2 SMC – Tanuj Shrivastav ITA 902 of 2018 by the Assessing Officer. Facts giving rise to the ground of appeal are that the assessee is an individual and deriving income from medical profession. The return of income declaring income at Rs.19,45,090/- was filed and the Assessing Officer while framing the assessment made addition of Rs.6,84,071/- disallowing excessive/unreasonable expenses. The assessee went in appeal and the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer on the ground that assessee did not furnish the requisite evidences except receipt of clinic, cash memos of petrol and bill of trip from Mumbai to Indore. Thus, the assessee is before this Tribunal.
3. Before me, learned counsel for the assessee has reiterated the submission made before the authorities below and submitted that the assessee is a medical professional and total expenses at Rs.7,84,071/- were claimed but the Assessing Officer had only allowed Rs.1 lakh on adhoc basis and remaining amount of Rs.6,84,071/- was also disallowed on adhoc basis. The revenue
3 SMC – Tanuj Shrivastav ITA 902 of 2018 authorities did not consider the fact that against total receipts of Rs.30,24,898/- from the medical profession, only Rs.7,84,071/- were claimed on account of expenses, therefore, remaining gross receipt around 75% offered for taxation is quite reasonable because as per provisions of sec. 44ADA of the Act, 50% presumptive rate for professional has been considered as reasonable. Learned counsel for the assessee also relied on relevant judicial pronouncements in this regard and contended that the addition is unjustified. On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR relied on the orders of the Revenue Authorities.
I have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and gone through the material available on the file. On consideration of above facts, I find that the assessee had claimed the following expenses:
1 Advertisement 58815 2 Bank Charges 2513 3 Conveyance 114639 4 Medical camp 93080 5 Electricity 17659
4 SMC – Tanuj Shrivastav ITA 902 of 2018 6 Educational Conference 86798 7 Office expenses 44061 8 Rent 42800 9 Salary and wages 70000 10 Telephone expenses 10470 11 Travelling expenses 243236 TOTAL: 784071 I find that the Assessing Officer allowed Rs. One lakh without referring any evidence i.e. on adhoc manner and remaining balance i.e. Rs.6,84,071/- was disallowed without bringing any corroborative material on record. It is not disputed that out of total receipts of Rs.30,24,898/- from the medical profession, only Rs.7,84,071/- were claimed on account of expenses. Thus, remaining gross receipt comes to around 75% and as per provisions of sec. 44ADA of the Act, 50% presumptive rate for professional has been considered as reasonable. However, expenses on account of advertisement and travelling expenses are appearing excessive because personal user cannot simply be ruled out. Therefore, looking to these facts and to meet an end to the justice, I direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of 5 SMC – Tanuj Shrivastav ITA 902 of 2018 Rs.5 lacs out of remaining addition of Rs.6,84,071/-. Accordingly, the only ground no.1 raised by the assessee is partly allowed.
In result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.
Order was pronounced in the open court on 20.1.2020.