BISWANATH AGARWALA,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 44, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2449/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 September 2018AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restricted the disallowance on advertisement, Basa, and general expenses to 10% of the total expenditure. It also restricted the disallowance on motor car expenses to 10% of the total expenditure. The disallowance of service tax payments was allowed.

What were the facts?

The revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order concerning assessment year 2009-10. The appeal involved disallowances on advertisement, Basa, and general expenses, as well as motor car expenses, and a disallowance of service tax payments.

What were the issues?

Whether disallowances made on an estimation basis for certain expenses are justified, and whether service tax payments made before the due date for filing the return are deductible.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(1),Section 250,Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy

Appearances by: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri S.M. Das, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R. appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : July 5th, 2018 Date of pronouncing the order : September 07th, 2018 ORDER Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM :- This is an appeal filed by the revenue directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 13 Kolkata, (hereinafter the ‘Ld. CIT(A)’), dt. 08-08-2017, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’), relating to Assessment Year 2009-10.

2.

Ground No. 1 is general in nature.

3.

Ground No. 2, is on the disallowance of Rs.75,000/-, out of total expenditure of Rs.3,46,236/- from advertisement expenses, Basa expenses, general expenses on estimation basis. As the disallowance is made on an estimate basis, I restrict the same to 10% of the total expenditure of Rs.3,46,236/-, in the facts and circumstances of the case as in my view this would meet the ends of justice.

4.

Ground No. 3, is not pressed due to the smallness of the amount. Though, the assessee has sufficiently good case. He requests that this concession should not be considered as a precedent or for levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. This submission is accepted.

2 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Manoj Jain HUF 5. Ground No. 4, is on the disallowance of Rs.63,331/- out of the total expenditure of Rs.3,16,656/-, from motor car expenses. As the disallowance is made on an estimate basis, I restrict the disallowance to 10% of the total expenditure on motor car expenses, as in my view, this would meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, this ground of the assessee is allowed in part.

6.

Ground No. 5 is not pressed and accordingly dismissed.

7.

Ground No. 6, is against the disallowance of service tax payments of Rs.1,42,130/-. As these payments were made before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act, for filing of the return of income, the deductions in question should be allowed. Accordingly, this ground of the assessee is allowed.

8.

Ground No. 7, is general in nature.

9.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part.

More judgments on Section 139(1)

All 8,117 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →