9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (9) TMI 179X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... usband. I have seen the voucher dt.5th Nov., 1987. Other expenses have been debited at Rs. 830. Hotel expenses are Rs. 311. The hotel bill shows that the assessee has incurred hotel expenses ranging from Rs. 144 per day to Rs. 118 per day. This does not include the refreshment expenses which has been separately included in the voucher. The travelling expenses are to be restricted as per r. 6D. The expenses claimed are in excess of limit permissible under r. 6D. Such instances of excessive expenses are there. It was the duty of the assessee to have claimed the expenditure permissible under r. 6D. The assessee has not worked out the expenditure disallowable under r. 6D. Therefore, I am declining to interfere with the findings of the AO. 4th ground of the appeal is dismissed. (b) On 5th ground of appeal raised before him, learned Dy. CIT(A) sustained disallowance of Rs. 1,500 with the following remarks: 5.4 I have considered the submissions of the learned authorised representative. It is true that staff welfare expenses are allowable and these are not to be treated as entertainment expenses. However, it is not possible to verify that each and every item debited under the head st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riginal memorandum: 1. That the orders of assessment under s. 143(3) is bad in law as the AO not only failed to determine in writing the sum payable based on such assessed income but also failed to communicate to the assessee within the limitation provided under s. 153(1)(a). 2. That since the first ground hits the very root of the assessment order and purely a question of law, though omitted to be agitated before the first appellate authority, may be permitted to be raised before the Hon ble Tribunal. 3. That the AO disallowed Rs. 4,000 from travelling and conveyance expenses based on suspicion, conjecture, surmises, contrary to facts of the case, by non-speaking order and without adhering to the provisions of natural justice and statutory provisions under s. 143(3) whereas learned Dy. CIT(A) erred in law and facts in sustaining disallowance by applying sub-r. (1) when the appellants case falls within the ambit of sub-r. (2) of r. 6-I of IT Rules, 1962. 4. That the AO erred in law and facts in clubbing staff welfare and customers welfare expenses by treating them as entertainment expenses and disallowed a sum of Rs. 6,535 whereas, the Dy. CIT(A) erred in law and facts by r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had appeared before the Bench was directed to file proper power of attorney. On23rd June, 1996, when Shri G.D. Aggarwal already stood transferred from the Delhi Benches, the husband of the assessee Shri R.K. Mangla requested Vice-President, who directed that this appeal be heard by a Bench in which Mr. Gandhi was a Member. Accordingly these appeals were fixed before a Bench comprising of Shri Vimal Gandhi and Shri N.S. Chopra as Members. The appeals were taken for hearing on17th July, 1996. It was also heard on18th July, 1996. At the very outset the husband of the assessee Shri Raj Kumar Mangla argued that additional ground raised by him pertaining to territorial jurisdiction of AO under s. 124(3) has already been accepted as order to above effect was announced on behalf of the Bench by the Judicial Member on 16th Jan., 1996. Shri Mangla was informed that this claim was false and there was no material on record to support such a claim. He was, therefore, asked to argue the appeal on all the grounds. Shri Mangla accordingly started arguing the appeal. He first argued on additional ground relating to territorial jurisdiction of AO under s. 124 of the IT Act. According to Shri Mangla, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (1) of s. 142 or sub-s. (2) of s. 143 or after the completion of the assessment, whichever is earlier; (b) where he has made no such return, after the expiry of the time allowed by the notice under sub-s. (1) of s. 142 or under s. 148 for the making of the return or by the notice under the first proviso to s. 144 to show cause why the assessment should not be completed to the best of the judgment of the AO, whichever is earlier." In the light of above statutory provision, the question cannot be raised for the first time before the Tribunal particularly when the same was not raised at any stage of assessment proceedings or in other proceedings before the Revenue authorities. There is no doubt that purely legal question not requiring any investigation of facts can be raised for the first time before the Tribunal and the Tribunal can permit the assessee to raise additional ground of appeal relating to legal questions. But all this would depend upon facts and circumstances of the case. In the present case, having regard to statutory provisions, there would be no authority with the Tribunal to permit the assessee to raise the question through additional ground of appeal. The assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . He further contended that computation of tax was also to be served on him within the prescribed period of limitation. The said computation has not been served upto this day and, therefore, assessment made was out of time and vitiated. The mandatory requirement of s. 143(3) has not been satisfied in this case. Shri Mangla relied upon decision of J K High Court in the case of S. Mubarik Shah Naqshbandi vs. CIT 1977 CTR (J K) 180 : (1977) 110 ITR 217 (J K). He also cited decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Kalyan kumar Ray vs. CIT (1992) 102 CTR (SC) 188 : (1991) 191 ITR 634 (SC). It was accordingly submitted that assessment made in this case be declared as null and void and illegal. (2) On merit, Shri Mangla submitted that the assessee was carrying on business at four places and expenditure on travelling were incurred exclusively for business purposes. The husband of the assessee was an employee and provisions of r. 6D were not applicable in the case of foreign travelling. The husband has gone toKathmanduand details of travelling were filed with the AO and before learned Dy. CIT(A). Shri Mangla did not think it necessary to file those details before the Tribunal. ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ilable on record. There was no error apparent from record. As regards additional grounds of appeal, the Departmental Representative pointed out that the same were not permitted to be raised by the Tribunal on 18th July, 1996, and, therefore, application moved by the assessee dt.7th Aug., 1996, and affidavit of Shri Mangla were of no consequence. 7. We have given careful thought to the rival submissions of the parties. As regards the question that assessment order is illegal and without jurisdiction as computation has not been made in the body of order, we may only refer to decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Kalyan Kumar Ray where such plea advanced by the assessee was not accepted by their Lordships of Supreme Court. As per the headnote, their Lordships observed as under : ""Assessment" is one integrated process involving not only the assessment of the total income but also the determination of the tax. The latter is as crucial as the former. The ITO has to determine, by an order in writing, not only the total income but also the net sum which will be payable by the assessee for the assessment year in question and the demand notice has to be issued under s. 156 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have it signed by the ITO and have it served on the assessee along with ITNS 65. That will enable the assessee to have the full details necessary to enable him to file a proper appeal, if needed, against the order and demand. If these safeguards are not taken, there is a danger of the tax calculations being left entirely to the subordinate staff, the ITO contenting himself with a cursory glance thereat. Though, largely, the tax calculations are only matters of detail and arithmetic, there do arise sometimes difficult questions of interpretation of the provisions relating to tax rates, additional tax, interest and so on, and the assessee should, in all fairness, have full details regarding the computation to enable him to take further steps in the matter." Their Lordships did observe in the last para that to avoid unnecessary controversy, it would be useful practice if the calculation sheet signed by the ITO is served on the assessee but their Lordships did not grant relief to the assessee on a similar claim made in the case before them. The said decision was given after considering earlier decisions including decision of Hon ble J K High Court in the case of Mubarik Shah Naqshba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n under s. 154 is rejected, the matter can be taken in appeal before the Tribunal or higher authority. From this argument of Shri Mangla, it is clear that he does not understand the difference between a regular appeal against order under s. 250 and an appeal in proceedings under s. 154 of IT Act. Be that as it may, we do not find any substance in this appeal and are unable to grant any relief to the assessee. 8. From the above discussion, it is clear that a small issue relating to disallowance of Rs. 4,000; Rs. 1,500 and 1/5th of car maintenance has been sought rolled into much larger controversies. Shri Mangla has gone to the extent of making groundless allegations of accepting the claim through oral pronouncement in favour of the assessee. The application dt.7th Aug., 1996, uses intemperate and offensive language. As an illustration, we may produce the following extract from para 5 of above application: "5. The Bench sought clarification as to how to get out of the mischief of the provisions in s. 124(3) of the Act." He purposely underlined above sentence. During the course of hearing when it was pointed out that he has used impermissible language, Shri Mangla retorted that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
