9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (2) TMI 283X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 143(3). 3. Assessee which is a limited company filed its return on 25th Nov., 1994, declaring nil income. Prima facie adjustment was made vide intimation under s. 143(1)(a), dt. 8th Feb., 1995, which inter alia, included Rs. 1,09,098 on account of guest-house expenses and Rs. 40,271 under s. 40A(9). Appeal was preferred by the assessee before learned CIT(A), who upheld the prima facie adjustment. Aggrieved against the order of learned CIT(A), assessee has filed the present appeal but did not contest the disallowance of Rs. 40,271 made under s. 40A(9) seriously and, therefore, this disallowance having been made as per law in the intimation is confirmed. Therefore, the sole issue which survives for our consideration is as to whether A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t was argued by learned Departmental Representative that guest-house expenses cannot be allowed under any circumstances and AO was justified in making disallowance by way of prima facie adjustment. He further submitted that under the IT Act, principle of res judicata does not apply and, therefore, the decision of the Tribunal for asst. yrs. 1984-85 and 1985-86 would not apply to the year under appeal. 7. We have heard rival submissions and have gone through the adjustment made and the order of the learned CIT(A) carefully. It is by now settled law, that only errors apparent on the face of the record deducible on the basis of return and its accompanying documents alone, can be corrected by way of prima facie adjustment in the proceedings u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n some remote place where the persons who officially visited the factory, like auditors, bankers, executives and employees stayed there and expenditure was incurred in that connection. In the background of this fact, Tribunal allowed 50 per cent of the expenditure in asst. yrs. 1984-85 and 1985.86. Therefore in the background of the decision of the Tribunal, it was justified on the part of the assessee to claim 50 per cent of the guest-house expenditure, as business expenditure and that too by giving a note in the computation to that effect. Therefore, to disallow that 50 per cent of the expenditure, which was backed by the decision of the Tribunal in assessee s own case in earlier years was highly unjustified and a serious blow to the doct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction of a Court is to interpret the law. To read the law ignoring the judicial pronouncements is bound to lead to miscarriage of justice. This is what has been done precisely by the learned CIT(A) in the instant case. Tribunal s order given in earlier years, in assessee s own case dealing with identical issue, was found "running counter to the provisions of the Act" by the learned CIT(A). We are afraid that such approach of lower judicial authority can at all be appreciated. Intemperate observations of learned CIT(A) smack of high degree of arrogance and scant regard to the rule of law. It was nothing but an act of judicial impropriety. There is heirarchy in the judicial system and the decision of a higher judicial authority deserves not o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
