SHRI ANILKUMAR ISHWARBHAI BHOI,BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GODHRA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1833/AHD/2014Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 October 2017AY 2010-112 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' disallowance, noting the assessee's concession that the claim lacked evidence and that the Supreme Court's decision in T. K. Ginarajan vs. CIT applied.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed conveyance and business procurement expenses as an LIC Development Officer. The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) disallowed these claims.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of conveyance and business procurement expenses was justified due to lack of supporting evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

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, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH AHMEDABAD

Hearing: 05.10.2017Pronounced: 10.10.2017

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH AHMEDABAD

BEFORE, SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No. 1833/Ahd/2014 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shri Anilkumar Ishwarbhai Bhoi Shantivan Apartment, Near Adarsh School, Varghadi Road, Lunawada 389230 Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1,Godhra Respondent

PAN: ACHPB6290Q

आवेदक क� ओर से/By Assessee : Shri Parin Shah, A.R. राज�व क� ओर से/By Revenue : Shri V. K. Singh, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 05.10.2017 घोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement : 10.10.2017

ORDER PER S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2010-11 arises against the CIT(A)-V, Baroda’s order dated 19.03.2014 in case no. CAB(A)-V/161/13-14, upholding Assessing Officer’s action disallowing an amount of Rs.1,27,484/- as expenditure incurred for conveyance expenses and Rs.63,742/- under the head business procurement, in proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”. Heard both sides. Case file perused.

ITA No. 1833/Ahd/14 [Shri Anilkumar Ishwarbhai Bhoi vs. ITO] A.Y. 2010-11 - 2 -

2.

Learned counsel representing assessee states at the outset that both the lower authorities have disallowed assessee’s claim to have incurred the impugned expenditure for conveyance and business procurement while discharging his duties as LIC Development Officer. He thereafter concedes that hon’ble apex court’s judgment in T. K. Ginarajan vs. CIT (2013) 36 taxmann.com 583 (SC) squarely applies herein as there is no evidence in support of the impugned conveyance and expenditure claim. We appreciate this fair stand and uphold learned CIT(A)’s lower appellate findings affirming Assessing Officer’s action as per hon’ble apex court’s decision hereinabove.

3.

This assessee’s appeal is dismissed.

[Pronounced in the open Court on this the 10th day of October, 2017.]

Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (S. S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 10/10/2017

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →