ACIT CIRCLE-8(1), NEW DELHI vs. EMCIPI ELECTRONICS PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4253/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 July 2022AY 2010-114 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that expenses incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business are allowable as deduction, irrespective of whether they result in immediate income. The CIT(A)'s order was found to be without error.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition of Rs. 1,83,85,198/- made by the AO on account of disallowance of expenses. The AO had disallowed expenses claimed by the assessee as not incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes.

What were the issues?

Whether expenses incurred for business purposes are allowable even if they do not result in immediate income. Whether the AO erred in disallowing expenses without proper appreciation of accounts.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘B’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI B. R. R. KUMAR & SH. YOGESH KUMAR U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Upvan Gupta, Adv.;
For Respondent: Shri Lalit Kishore, Sr. D.R.;
Hearing: 25.05.2022Pronounced: 08.07.2022

ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM

This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order dated 11/02/2019 passed by CIT(A)-34, New Delhi for Assessment Year 2010-11.

2.

The Revenue has raised the following ground of appeal:-

“ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law and on the facts of the case in deleting the addition of Rs.1,83,85,198/- made by the AO on account of disallowance of expenses, not incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business. “

3.

Brief facts of the case are that, the assessee filed its return of income on 26.09.2010 showing the total income of Rs.2,16,45,540/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and the notice u/s 143(2) of the I.T Act was issued and served on 23.09.2011. In response to notice u/s 143(2) of the I.T Act, the Authorized Representatives of the assessee company attended the assessment proceedings and furnished the detail called for. The assessment order came to be passed on 28/01/2013 by disallowing the expenses of Rs. 3,60,09,520/- claimed by the assessee under the business expenses and passed assessment order by assessing the total income of the assessee at Rs.5,75,55,060/- as against the returned income of Rs.2,16,45,540/-.

4.

Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 28/01/2013, the assessee has challenged the same before the CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 06/02/2019, confirmed the addition to the extent of Rs. 82,75,866.20/- made by the A.O and allowed the expense claimed by the assessee as against the business income at Rs. 1,83,85,198/-, accordingly, partly allowed the Appeal on 11/02/2019.

5.

The Department of Revenue aggrieved by the order dated 11/02/2019, filed the present Appeal on the grounds mentioned above.

6.

The Ld. DR submitted that, the CIT(A) has committed an error in deleting an amount of Rs. 1,83,85,198/- on accounting of disallowance of expenses which was not occurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business. Further, the Ld. DR has relied on the order of the A.O.

7.

Per contra, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that, the assessee has shown the business income in the subsequent years i.e. Assessment Year 2011-12 & 2012-13 which has been allowed as expenses against the business income shown under the head of consultancy and electricity and generator expenses. Further submitted that, so long as expenses are incurred for the purpose of business, the same should be allowable as deduction and it is not necessary that expenditure may result in income immediately, the quantum of income is therefore, irrelevant for the purpose of considering the allow ability of expenses. So long as expenses are incurred for the purpose of business, the expense is allowable as deduction. Thus, justified the order of CIT(A).

8.

We have heard both the sides, considered the material on record. The Ld. CIT(A) while deleting the addition found that, the assessee has shown the business income in the subsequent year i.e. 2011-12 & 2012-13 and the A.O has allowed the expenses against the business income shown under the head of consultancy and electricity and generator expenses. Further found that, the Ld. Assessing Officer has not given any finding and without appreciating the accounts filed by the appellant disallowed the expenses against the business income shown by the assessee.

9.

The issue of quantum of income and allowableness of the expenses it has to be seen that, whether the expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business or not. So long as the expenses are incurred for the purpose of business, in our opinion the same should be allowable as deduction and it is not necessary that the expenditure may result in income or there must be substantial income. The said view has been supported by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Malyalam Plantation Ltd. 53 ITR 140 and CIT Vs. Rajinder Pd. Moodi 115 ITR 519.

10.

In view of the above discussion, we do not find any error or infirmity in the order of CIT(A). Accordingly, the Grounds of Appeal of the Revenue are dismissed.

11.

In the result, the Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on : 08 /07/2022.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →