2014 (6) TMI 887 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance of travelling expenses and sundry expenses - Held that - disallowance of 20 per cent. on ad hoc basis out of the claim of travelling expenses was on the higher side considering the details of expenses submitted by the assessee and the annual turnover of ₹ 30.13 crores of the business for the current assessment year. In over all view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the disallowance under this head is ordered to be reduced to 5 per cent. of the expenses claimed. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) himself has noted in the impugned order that the increase in this expenditure was mainly on account of photo shoot expenses and water proofing charges for the work carried out in one of the shops. Considering the nature of the business of designer jewellery and maintenance of showroom for the said purpose, the said expenditure was for the purpose of the business of the assessee and does not call for any disallowance. Accordingly the disallowance on account of sundry expenses is hereby ordered to be deleted.- Decided partly in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues: Appeal against order of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) for assessment year 2009-10; Condonation of delay in filing appeal; Disallowance of expenses by Assessing Officer; Grounds of appeal by the assessee; Disallowance of 20% of various expenses; Disallowance of 10% of sundry expenses and 20% of travelling expenses; Reduction of disallowance percentages; Deletion of disallowance on sundry expenses.

Analysis:
1. The appeal filed by the assessee was against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) for the assessment year 2009-10, and the appeal was delayed by 12 days. The assessee requested condonation of the delay, which was granted due to the explanation provided and the shortness of the delay period. Consequently, the appeal was heard on merits.

2. The assessee, a partnership firm engaged in the trade of jewellery, declared a total income of &8377;9,58,46,796 for the relevant year. The Assessing Officer disallowed 20% of various expenses, including telephone, printing, sundry, travelling, and sales promotion expenses, citing concerns over self-made vouchers and the possibility of personal elements in the expenses. The assessee appealed this decision before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals).

3. During the appeal, the authorised representative of the assessee explained that the firm specialized in designer jewellery for high net worth individuals and participated in international exhibitions to boost export sales. The turnover and profit margins were provided to show the reasonableness of the expenses claimed. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) found some expenses reasonable but disallowed portions of sundry and travelling expenses due to doubts about personal use elements.

4. The Tribunal reviewed the submissions and records, noting that the disallowances by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) were on the higher side. The disallowance of 20% on travelling expenses was reduced to 5% considering the details submitted by the assessee and the business turnover. However, the disallowance of 10% on sundry expenses was deleted as the expenses were deemed necessary for the business of designer jewellery.

5. Ultimately, the appeal of the assessee was partly allowed, with the disallowance percentages reduced for travelling expenses and the deletion of the disallowance on sundry expenses. The order was pronounced on June 27, 2014, in favor of the assessee.