SARR FREIGHTS CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 62(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3222/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2022AY 2015-164 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that ad-hoc disallowances without specific defects pointed out are arbitrary and lack legal foundation. The Tribunal relied on a High Court judgment stating there is no basis for ad-hoc disallowances.

What were the facts?

The assessee's income was recomputed by the AO with several disallowances on expenses like transportation, travelling, salaries, business promotion, vehicle repair, and telephone. The CIT(A) deleted some disallowances but sustained others.

What were the issues?

Whether ad-hoc disallowances on business expenses are permissible without specific defects being pointed out by the AO and CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 234B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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 & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Khandelwal, CA
For Respondent: Ms. Yagya Saini Kakkar, CIT DR
Hearing: 05/05/2022Pronounced: 19/05/2022

O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, J. M.:

1.

1.

The appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 15/03/2019 of Ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-20, New Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. „FAA‟) in appeal No. 10197/2017-18 arising out of an appeal before it against the order dated 15.12.2017 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as „the Act‟) passed by the ld. Assessing Officer, Deputy commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-62(1), New Delhi (hereinafter referred as the Ld. AO).

2. The facts in brief are that the Assessee filed return of income declaring income of Rs. 1,00,43,220/-, which was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s 143(2) followed by notice u/s 142(1) of the Act were issued and based upon verification of the bills, vouchers, Page | 1 muster-rolls, wage sheets etc the income of the Assessee was recomputed by the Ld. AO as follows:- Subject to above discussions, the income of the assessee is recomputed as under: S.No. Particulars (Amount in ?) Income as per computation filed by 1,00,43,220/- the assessee I. Disallowance on account of 4,00,000/- Unverifiable Transportation & Truck Operation Expenses II. Disallowance on account of 2,00,000/- Travelling Expenses III. Disallowance out of Salaries & 1,00,000/- Allowances IV. Disallowance on account of Business 1,00,000/- Promotion Expenses V. Disallowance out of Repair & 1,32,363/ Maintenance - Vehicle VI. Disallowance on account of 1,12,674/ Telephone/Mobile Expenses Total disallowance 10,45,037/- Total Income 1,10,88,257/- Rounded off 1,10,88,260/-

3.

In appeal, the ld. First Appellate Authority had deleted the additions of Rs. 4 lakhs on account of unverifiable transportation expenses and truk operation expenses, Rs. 1 lakh on account of salaries and allowances, and Rs. 1 lakh on account of business promotion expenses. However, the remaining additions made by the Ld. AO were sustained.

4.

Arguments were heard and record was perused. On behalf of the Assessee it was contended that the ld AO and the Ld CIT(A) have fallen in error in making dis-allowances on ad hoc basis in regard to the expenditure which was specifically explained and were normal business expenses. It was submitted that no dis-allowances can be made unless specific defect is pointed out. It was submitted that dis- allowance were made merely to prevent leakage of revenue and same has no legal foundation. Ld. Counsel submitted that for Page | 2 Assessment Year 2014-15 and 2013-14 such ad hoc dis-allowances were set aside by the Ld. CIT(A) in Assessee‟s own case. 5. On the other hand the Ld. DR supported the findings of the tax authorities submitting that the orders are well reasoned. 6. The Assessee has come in appeal before the Tribunal raising following grounds of appeal:-

More judgments on Section 234B

All 10,214 judgments and leading authorities on Section 234B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →