9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (2) TMI 142X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rest purported to have been paid to two charitable trusts, namely, Shadi Lal Trust and Mohan Lal Trust. A perusal of the assessment order passed by the ITO shows that this disallowance was made on the ground of non-filing of the relevant documents and other evidence in support of the claim. It is an accepted fact between the parties that the disallowance was subsequently upheld by the CIT(A) as also by the Tribunal. The other item for consideration is the addition of Rs. 42,000 made by the ITO vis-a-vis the foreign travel expenses of the assessee in his capacity as the Managing Director of a company, namely, M/s Gulab Singh Sons P. Ltd. Taking note of the reasons recorded by the ITO, assessing the company, the same was treated as a perqui ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ulab Singh Sons P. Ltd. that being the company in which the assessee was the Managing Director and it was in the case of the company that the Assessing Officer had treated the expenditure to be on personal account and not for business purposes. 5. Attention was invited to the observations of the ITO in the case of the company, whereby he had observed that "at best, 7 days could have been spent on the business of the company. 6. On the basis of the aforesaid submissions, it urged that no penalty under s. 271(1)(c) was exigible, inasmuch as no item had been concealed and nor had inaccurate particulars been furnished. 7. The CIT(A), after considering the aforesaid arguments, opined that in so far as the question of interest was concern ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... confirmation of the penalty originally levied by the Assessing Officer. 8. The learned counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, vehemently argued that no penalty was leviable on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. His subsequent arguments were a reiteration of those tendered before the tax authorities. The following points were highlighted: 1. The claim on account of interest had been allowed all along in the past, but the disallowance in the assessment year under appeal had been made only because the relevant facts could not be placed on record due to the death of the assessee. 2. That in some of the preceding assessment years, viz., 1974-75 to 1979-80, the assessments were reopened by the Assessing Officer, but the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on on the part of the assessee or to establish any conscious concealment or filing of inaccurate particulars. It is an undisputed fact that the claim for deduction on account of interest had been accepted all along in the past and it was only due to the death of the assessee that the relevant documents could not be placed before the Assessing Officer. It is not challenged on behalf of the Revenue that some of the preceding assessments were reopened by the Assessing Officer, and the interest once again came to be allowed. Then again, the Tribunal in the asst. yr. 1981-82, did not uphold the disallowance although it had done so in the asst. yr. 1980-81. The matter was restored back to Assessing Officer for making necessary enquiries. 11. As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
