Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH: KOLKATA
Before: Shri Mahavir Singh, JM]
For the Appellant: N o n e For the Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT, Sr. DR ORDER This appeal by assessee is arising out of order of CIT(A)-XX, Kolkata vide Appeal No. 325/CIT(A)-XX/Wd-36(4)/2011-12/Kol dated 23.10.2013. Assessment was framed by ITO, Wd-36(4), Kolkata u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for Assessment Year 2008-09 vide his order dated 30.12.2010.
The first issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) in disallowing interest of Rs.79,894/- on borrowed funds not utilized for business purpose.
I have heard Ld. Sr. DR and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. I find that the assessee has paid interest on unsecured loan amounting to Rs.1,01,258/-. The assessee has taken this amount of interest but advanced loan to various parties. The CIT(A) restricted the disallowance of interest only for Ms. Praveena Karnawat to whom an amount of Rs. 1 lac was advanced, the AO estimated notional interest at Rs.10,000/-. I find that CIT(A) has not considered this issue and passed a cryptic order on the same. Hence, this issue is set aside to the file of CIT(A) to pass a reasoned order. This issue of assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
The next issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order or CIT(A) in disallowing a sum of Rs. 9,800/- on account of telephone expenses on estimate basis.
I have heard Ld. Sr. DR and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. I find that the AO has disallowed 10% of telephone expenses at Rs.9800/- out of total expenditure of Rs.97,995/- treating the same as personal expenditure of telephone. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A) who also confirmed the action of AO. I find that neither the AO nor the CIT(A) could prove the element of personal in nature and this is purely an ad hoc disallowance. Accordingly, I delete the disallowance and allow this issue of assessee’s appeal.
2 Trilok Chand Karnawat, AY 2008-09 6. The next issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) disallowing vehicle expenses and depreciation.
I have heard Ld. Sr. DR and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. I find from the facts of the case that the assessee has claimed vehicle expenses and depreciation which is necessary for carrying out the business and no element of personal nature was attributed. Hence, I delete the addition and allow this issue of assessee’s appeal.
The next issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) confirming the disallowance of business promotion expenses amounting to Rs.22,722/- and general expenses amounting to Rs.29,732/-.
I have heard Ld. Sr. DR and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. I find from the facts of the case that the AO and CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance of these expenses without a speaking order. Hence, I set aside the order of CIT(A) and restore this issue to his file to pass a speaking order on this and accordingly, this issue of assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.