M/S. DARSHANLAL ANAND PRAKASH & SONS (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since the lower authorities found certain expenses unverifiable, some estimated disallowance was warranted. However, the disallowance was reduced to Rs. 25,000 for miscellaneous expenses and Rs. 50,000 for sales promotion expenses.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a tea company, claimed miscellaneous and sales promotion expenses. The Assessing Officer made an ad-hoc disallowance of Rs. 50,000 and Rs. 1,00,000 respectively, despite the assessee furnishing all details and audited accounts.
What were the issues?
Whether the ad-hoc disallowance of miscellaneous and sales promotion expenses made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A) was justified.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Sri S.S. Godara & Sri M. Balaganesh
Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Darshanlal Anand Prakash & Sons (P) Ltd………….……………….…...……..…….............Appellant Nilhat House 6th Floor 11, R.N. Mukherjee Road Kolkata – 700 001 [PAN : AADCB 3299 C] Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Kolkata…….....................…...........Respondent Appearances by: Shri Sujoy Sen, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Sankar Halder, Addl. CIT D/R. appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : December 27th , 2018 Date of pronouncing the order : January 1st , 2019 ORDER Per Bench :- This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -2, Kolkata, (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 05/01/2018, arising out the assessment order of the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. AO”), passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), relating to Assessment Year 2011-12.
The only issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the Id. CIT(A) was justified in confirming the estimated adhoc disallowance of Rs.50,000/- made by the Id. Assessing Officer on account of miscellaneous expenses and Rs.1 Lakhs/- towards sales promotions expenses in the facts and circumstances of the case.
The brief facts of this issue is that the assessee is Private Limited Company, engaged in the business of growing, manufacturing and selling of tea. The return of income for the Assessment Year 2011-12 was filed by the assessee company on 26/09/2011, declaring total income of Rs.91,79,330/-. The Id. Assessing Officer observed in the assessment order that the assessee had claimed miscellaneous expenses of Rs.24,37,548/- and sales promotion expenses of Rs.7,24,792/-, which were debited in Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Darshanlal Anand Prakash & Sons (P) Ltd the profit and loss account and claimed as deduction in the return of income. The details of all the expenses were indeed furnished by the assessee before the Id. Assessing Officer, which fact has been duly acknowledged by the Id. Assessing Officer in first paragraph of the assessment order. The Id. Assessing Officer, however, resorted to making estimated adhoc disallowance of Rs.50,000/- towards miscellaneous expenses of Rs. 1 Lakh/ - towards sales promotion expenses. The assessee argued before the Id. CIT(A) that the Id. Assessing Officer had not pointed out any specific item of expenditure in both the above heads which were found unsupported or unverifiable. It was pleaded that the entire books of accounts, duly audited, together with bills and vouchers, were indeed furnished before the Id. Assessing Officer and hence there is no question of making any estimated adhoc disallowance thereon. The Id. CIT(A) without appreciating these contentions simply upheld the action of the Id. Assessing Officer.
Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us.
We have heard rival submissions. It is not in dispute that the books of account together with the bills and vouchers were indeed furnished before the Id. Assessing Officer by the assessee. We find that the lower authorities had given a categorical finding that certain expenses debited in the above two heads were found to be unverifiable. In that scenario, certainly some estimated disallowance of expenses is required to be made. In our considered opinion, disallowance of Rs.25,000/- towards miscellaneous expenses and Rs.50,000/- towards sales promotion expenses would meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are partly allowed.
In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Mehra Mac Industries Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- Santosh Das And Anr. vs. Union Of INDIACalcutta · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026