9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (10) TMI 1025 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance being 50% of Foreign Travelling Expenses - no evidence substantiating the claim was furnished - Held that - Assessee before us has not filed any documentary evidence justifying the Foreign Travel Expenses. On perusal of the order of authorities below we note that it has been admitted by the AO that the documentary evidence were furnished by the assessee in haphazard manner. Therefore, the disallowance was made to the tune of 50% of the total travelling expenses. We note that the lower authorities has admitted the genuineness of the expenses to the tune of 50% and the balance was disallowed on ad hoc basis. After considering the facts in totality, we are inclined to confirm the disallowance of total foreign travelling expenses to the tune of 25%. Disallowing the Domestic Travelling Expenses - Held that - On perusal of the order of authorities below we note that it has been admitted by the AO that the documentary evidence were furnished by the assessee in haphazard manner. Therefore, the disallowance was made to the tune of 75% of the total travelling expenses. We note that the lower authorities has admitted the genuineness of the expenses to the tune of 75% and the balance was disallowed on ad hoc basis. After considering the facts in totality, we are inclined to confirm the disallowance of total foreign travelling expenses to the tune of 25% i.e. ₹ 1,56,370/- only. Disallowance of depreciation on motor car - Held that - The assessee fairly agreed that the issue can be decided against the assessee in view of non availability of supporting documentary evidence. Thus, the ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Addition u/s 68 - Held that - We find that the loan confirmation as well as the bank statement was not produced by the assessee before the lower authorities. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play we are inclined to restore this issue to the file of AO for fresh adjudication in accordance with the provisions of the law. DR did not raise any abjection if the matter is restored back to the AO. Hence we are inclined to restore this issue to the file of AO with the direction to adjudicate the same afresh in accordance with the provision of law. It is needless to mention that the assessee shall cooperate in the assessment proceedings.
Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of Foreign Travelling Expenses 2. Disallowance of Domestic Travelling Expenses 3. Disallowance of Depreciation on Motor Car 4. Addition of Loan under Section 68 of the Act Issue 1: Disallowance of Foreign Travelling Expenses: The appellant contested the disallowance of 50% of Foreign Travelling Expenses by the CIT(A). The AO had disallowed the expenses due to lack of evidence. The appellant submitted ledger accounts and justifications, but CIT(A) upheld the disallowance. The ITAT reduced the disallowance to 25% of the total expenses, amounting to ?1,68,200, considering the genuineness of 50% of the expenses. The appellant's appeal was partly allowed. Issue 2: Disallowance of Domestic Travelling Expenses: The appellant challenged the disallowance of ?4,69,112 for Domestic Travelling Expenses. The AO disallowed 75% of the expenses due to lack of justification. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, citing insufficient details provided by the appellant. The ITAT confirmed the disallowance of 25% of the expenses, totaling ?1,56,370, acknowledging the genuineness of 75% of the expenses. The appellant's appeal was partly allowed. Issue 3: Disallowance of Depreciation on Motor Car: The appellant admitted the lack of supporting evidence for claiming depreciation on a motor car worth ?75,000. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed against the appellant. Issue 4: Addition of Loan under Section 68 of the Act: The appellant failed to provide evidence for a loan of ?5,00,000, leading to its disallowance and addition to the total income. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision. However, the ITAT decided to remand the issue back to the AO for fresh adjudication, considering the documents provided during the appeal. The appellant's appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. Conclusion: The ITAT partially allowed the appellant's appeal on the disallowance of travelling expenses while dismissing the appeal on depreciation. The issue of the loan was remanded for further assessment. The appellant's appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and the decision was in favor of the appellant on specific grounds.
|
