ORCHID DESIGNS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO CORPORATE WARD 5(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2520/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 February 2018AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the disallowance of depreciation on software needs re-examination by the Assessing Officer. It further held that pooja expenses incurred in business premises are for business purposes and should be allowed. The disallowance of miscellaneous and fuel expenses due to lack of vouchers was confirmed.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed depreciation on software and pooja expenses, which were disallowed by the Assessing Officer. The assessee also claimed miscellaneous and fuel expenses, a portion of which was disallowed due to lack of proper bills and vouchers.

What were the issues?

Whether depreciation on software used for business is allowable and if pooja expenses are deductible as business expenditure.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 32,Section 37(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY

For Respondent: Shri B. Sahadevan, JCIT
Hearing: 14.02.2018Pronounced: 28.02.2018

आदेश /O R D E R

PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 3, Chennai, dated 30.06.2017 and pertains to assessment year 2012-13.

2.

The first issue arises for consideration is disallowance of depreciation of ₹2,07,760/- on the ground that the assessee has not put to use the asset for business.

3.

We heard Ms. S. Sriniranjani, the Ld.counsel for the assessee and Shri B. Sahadevan, the Ld. Departmental Representative. The assessee claimed depreciation on the software. The Assessing Officer found that the software was installed on instalment basis. The assessee has also taken over the building on lease. However, the Assessing Officer disallowed the depreciation to the extent of ₹2,07,760/-. According to the Ld. counsel, the software was installed in the business premises of the assessee and used for the business of the assessee.

The business of the assessee being design, the assessee would not have carried on its business without the aid of software. This fact was not examined by the Assessing Officer. Moreover, no material is available on record with regard to lease building. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the matter needs to be re-examined. Accordingly, orders of both the authorities below are set aside and the disallowance of depreciation is remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall re-examine the matter in the light of the material that may be filed by the assessee and thereafter decide the issue afresh in accordance with law, after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

4.

The next issue arises for consideration is disallowance of pooja expenditure.

The assessee incurred an expenditure of ₹61,178/- towards pooja 5. expenses. The Assessing Officer found that pooja expenditure is inadmissible. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that performing pooja in the business premises is for improving the business and well- being of employees, therefore, the pooja expenditure is for business. Hence, the CIT(Appeals) is not justified in confirming the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, orders of both the authorities below are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to allow the pooja expenses of ₹61,178/-.

6.

The next issue raised by the assessee is with regard to disallowance of miscellaneous expenditure and fuel expenditure.

The Assessing Officer disallowed ₹69,289/- out of total 7. expenditure claimed by the assessee to the extent of ₹17,66,259/- towards miscellaneous expenditure. Similarly towards fuel expenditure, the Assessing Officer disallowed ₹35,130/- as against the claim of ₹9,86,654/-. The Assessing Officer found that the claim made by the assessee to the extent of disallowance was not supported by proper bills and vouchers. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that when the assessee has not maintained any proper vouchers and bills to support the claim, the expenditure claimed was disallowed by the Assessing Officer. The disallowance as confirmed by the CIT(Appeals) is justified. Therefore, this Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority and accordingly the same is confirmed.

8.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed.

Order pronounced on 28th February, 2018 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 32

All 2,762 judgments and leading authorities on Section 32 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →