1983 (12) TMI 126

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for the asst. yr. 1978-79 was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue and directing the ITO to modify the same in the light of the direction given by the Commissioner in the said order. 2. The facts briefly stated are that the only source of income by the assessee as disclosed in the return filed on 28th Aug., 1980 was the commission received from LIC. The gross receipts amount .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... allowed by the ITO in excess of Rs. 10,000 was wrongly allowed. In respect of such excessive allowance by the ITO, the Commissioner held this order to be erroneous the prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. He directed the ITO to modify his order accordingly and raise the additional demand. 3. The assessee is aggrieved against the above order of the CIT. Shri Dani, the ld. counsel for the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... with the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the Board Circular referred to above is only a guide line for the ITOs. If any expenditure is incurred over and above Rs. 10,000 the same has to be considered as allowable deduction. The CIT has not recorded any finding that the expenditure claimed by the assessee was no warranted on the facts of the case. He was merely swept away by the Circular of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X