2012 (7) TMI 249 - AT - Income Tax

Addition on account of unvouched expenses - Salary expenses - partial relief in dis-allowance granted by CIT(A) on ground that assessee s books of accounts were subject to tax audit and AO has failed to record specific defects and particular vouchers in his assessment order - Held that - Assessee, neither before CIT(A) nor before us, submitted any explanation regarding above infirmity, as noted by authorities below, despite an opportunity to submit the same. The addition of Rs.35,000 finally made by CIT(A) comes to less than 10% of expenses claimed i.e. amounting to Rs.3,90,105 and, accordingly, the addition on account of unvouched expenses deserves to be sustained. Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of expenses under the head "salaries to staff" by the AO.
2. Appeal against the order of CIT(A) reducing the addition made by the AO.

Issue 1: Disallowance of expenses under the head "salaries to staff" by the AO

The AO made an addition of Rs.70,000 to the income of the assessee due to unvouched nature of expenses claimed as salaries to staff. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal and reduced the addition to Rs.35,000. The appellant argued that proper details and evidence of payment of salaries were maintained, and the AO did not ask for further details or specify defects in the vouchers. Citing relevant case laws, the appellant contended that the disallowance was on an ad hoc basis without rationality. The Tribunal observed that the appellant failed to provide an explanation for the noted infirmity, and the addition of Rs.35,000 was less than 10% of the claimed expenses, justifying its sustenance. The Tribunal found no perversity or infirmity in the AO's action, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

Issue 2: Appeal against the order of CIT(A) reducing the addition made by the AO

The appellant contested the CIT(A)'s decision to confirm the addition of Rs.35,000 without a reasonable basis, arguing that the expenses were properly vouched. The AO and the CIT(A) maintained that the disallowance was to prevent revenue leakage due to unvouched expenses. The Tribunal noted that the appellant failed to establish any fault in the AO's action upheld by the CIT(A). As the appellant did not provide an explanation for the deficiency in vouching the expenses, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision. Consequently, the Tribunal found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the disallowance of Rs.35,000 out of the claimed expenses under the head "salaries to staff," as the appellant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the lack of proper vouching. The appeal against the CIT(A)'s decision to reduce the addition made by the AO was dismissed due to the absence of evidence supporting the appellant's claims.