9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Depreciation claim on motor car. 2. Claim for advertisement expenses. 3. Dispute regarding shop expenses. 4. Excess bonus disallowed by the ITO. Issue 1: The first ground of the appeal concerns the depreciation claim on a motor car. The ITO disallowed one-third of the total claim for depreciation due to alleged personal use, which was later reduced to one-fifth by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellant argued that the entire depreciation should have been allowed regardless of personal use. However, the tribunal upheld the disallowance based on the Income-tax Act, which restricts deductions for assets not exclusively used for business purposes. The tribunal concluded that the proportionate disallowance was justified, and thus rejected the ground. Issue 2: The dispute over advertisement expenses arose when the ITO disallowed a sum for lack of proper vouchers. The AAC upheld the disallowance, stating that the expenses were not solely for business purposes. However, the tribunal found that the AAC's decision was not based on the actual reason for disallowance by the ITO. The tribunal directed a fresh examination by the Commissioner (Appeals) to consider the objection raised by the ITO and the expenses' position in earlier years. Issue 3: The disagreement regarding shop expenses stemmed from the ITO's disallowance based on an estimate, which the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld citing lavish expenditure. The tribunal found a misunderstanding in the Commissioner's decision and directed a reevaluation based on the ITO's original grounds and previous year's orders to determine the issue accurately. Issue 4: The final dispute involved the disallowance of excess bonus by the ITO, which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellant argued that the bonus was necessary for employee satisfaction and should be allowed as legitimate business expenditure. However, the tribunal upheld the disallowance, emphasizing that the bonus exceeded the limit under the Payment of Bonus Act and could not be claimed as a deduction under sections 36 or 37 of the Income-tax Act. The tribunal directed a fresh review of the claim's allowability based on the specific nature of the payment and legal provisions. In conclusion, the tribunal partly allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, directing further examination and reconsideration of the disputed expenses and bonus payments by the Commissioner (Appeals) to ensure a fair and accurate decision based on the provisions of the Income-tax Act.
|
