M/S. RAJINDER SERVICE STATION,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2175/DEL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 January 2016AY 2008-093 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal rejected the ground related to car and telephone expenses, finding no justification for the 1/5th disallowance. However, it directed the Assessing Officer to re-examine the credit for TDS and advance tax, and the carry forward of losses.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a partnership firm, appealed against the CIT(Appeals)'s order confirming additions to car and telephone expenses. The Assessing Officer had disallowed 1/5th of these expenses, assuming personal use. The assessee also claimed credit for TDS and advance tax, and carry forward of previous year's losses.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of 1/5th of car and telephone expenses was justified. Whether credit for TDS and advance tax, and carry forward of losses, should be allowed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not explicitly mentioned, but implied sections related to disallowance of expenses and credit for taxes paid.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Before: SHRI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWALG.D. AGRAWALG.D. AGRAWAL & G.D. AGRAWAL & AND & SHRI KULDIP SINGH SHRI KULDIP SINGHSHRI KULDIP SINGH SHRI KULDIP SINGH

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Bhalla, CA
For Respondent: Shri R.S. Negi, Senior DR
Hearing: 06.01.2016Pronounced: 21.01.2016

PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VP PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VP :- PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VP PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VP This appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2008-09 is directed against the order of learned CIT(A)-XXII, New Delhi dated 9th November, 2012.

2.

The first ground of the assessee’s appeal reads as under:-

1.

“On the facts and circumstances of the case and under law, the CIT(Appeals) was not justified for confirming the addition of Rs.71,110/- & Rs.1,939/-.”

3. We have heard the submissions of both the sides and have perused relevant material placed before us. The Assessing Officer has disallowed 1/5th out of car expenses and telephone expenses. The 2 ITA-2175/Del/2013 assessee is a partnership firm. The personal use of the car as well as of the telephone cannot be ruled out. Therefore, we do not find any justification for 1/5th disallowance out of car and telephone expenses. The same is sustained. Ground No.1 is rejected.

4.

Ground Nos.2 & 3 of the assessee’s appeal read as under:-

“2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and under law, the ld.CIT(Appeals) erred in law for not granting the credit for TDS and advance tax paid.

3.

On the facts and circumstances of the case and under law, the ld.CIT erred for not considering/allowing the carry forward of previous year’s losses.”

5.

We have heard the submissions of both the sides and have perused relevant material placed before us. We are of the opinion that both the above matters need re-examination at the end of the Assessing Officer. We direct the Assessing Officer to examine the tax deducted at source from the assessee as also advance tax paid by the assessee and allow the credit for the same as per law. Similarly, we also direct the Assessing Officer to examine whether there is any carry forward loss available from earlier years. If it is so, then set off the same in accordance with law.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is deemed to be partly allowed for statistical purposes. Decision pronounced in the open Court on 21.01.2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →