2010 (2) TMI 879 - AT - Income Tax

Addition on account of building repair refreshment outside business p0resent expenses wine and beer expenses Misc. expenses subscription to club traveling expenses postage telephone printing and stationery expenses foreign tour expenses disallowance of other repairs workers welfare expenses for which complete supporting vouchers were not produced by the assessee - Held that - observation of the Ld CIT(A) is not proper because when the Assessing Officer says in the assessment order that the assessee did not prduce any supporting bills and vouchers etc. it is not possible for the Assessing Officer to pin-point any specific item of expenses which is not supported by the relevant bills and vouchers. Since the facts in the present year are different we feel that earlier Tribunal orders cannot be followed besides the issue is before us because in the present year Ld DR of the revenue was able to satisfy us that in the present year bills and vouchers were notn produced by the assessee before the Assessing Officer. order of the ld CIT(A) set aside on all cases appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes Addition made on account of ate deposit of employee s contribution of ESI and EPF which is contrary to section 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(xi) of the I.T. Act Held that - last deposit was made on 22.2.2005 which is within the accounting year itself and hence admittedly these deposits were before the due date of filing of return of income by the assessee and hence as per judgments of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of P.M. Electronics (2008 -TMI - 31356 - DELHI HIGH COURT) cited by the Ld AR of the assessee no interference is called for in the order of ld CIT(A) on this issue. Ground of the revenue stands rejected whereas remaining grounds are allowed for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues:
Revenue's appeal against Ld CIT(A) order for assessment year 2005-06 regarding various deletions and additions without supporting vouchers.

Analysis:
1. The revenue raised multiple grounds challenging the deletion of various additions made without supporting vouchers by the assessee. The Ld DR argued that all issues should be sent back to the Assessing Officer for fresh decision due to lack of supporting vouchers. However, the Ld AR contended that Tribunal decisions in earlier years favored the assessee, indicating that the issues were covered. The Tribunal examined past judgments and found that lack of proper vouchers was not adequately addressed by the authorities in those years. Therefore, the Tribunal decided to set aside the Ld CIT(A) order and remand all issues back to the Assessing Officer for proper examination based on supporting evidence.

2. Regarding the deletion of addition on account of late deposit of employee's contribution to ESI and EPF, the Tribunal noted that the deposits were made within the accounting year before the due date of filing the return. Citing judgments of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, the Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the Ld CIT(A) decision on this issue. Consequently, the Tribunal rejected the revenue's ground related to this matter while allowing the remaining grounds for statistical purposes.

3. In conclusion, the Tribunal partially allowed the revenue's appeal for statistical purposes, with the order pronounced in open court. The decision emphasized the importance of producing relevant bills and vouchers to support expenses, underscoring the need for proper documentation to substantiate claims during assessments.