9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 684X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing he could not produce the bills, disallow the 10% of claimed expense - In respect of expenses on “wages and salaries”, no details have been produced and the entire payment has been made in cash and assessee has not been able to substantiate the claim of the said amount, therefore upheld the addition made by AO @ 12% - In respect of claim of petrol, telephone and other maintenance charges, sustain the addition @ 12 % by AO. Decision appeal is partly allowed in favour of assessee - ITA no. 3548/Mum./2011 - - - Dated:- 4-7-2012 - SHRI B.R. MITTAL AND SHRI RAJENDRA, JJ. Revenue by : Mr. P.C. Mourya Assessee by : Mr. R.C. Jain ORDER PER B.R. MITTAL, J.M. The present appeal preferred by the Revenue, is direc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of enquiry to verify the genuineness of the expenditure. He has stated that such huge expenditure as listed above seems to be on higher side and needs verification especially in view of the fact that huge sundry creditors of Rs. 1,28,94,455, shown in the balance sheet. The Assessing Officer has stated that mere debiting the expenditure in the Profit Loss account by itself would not entitle the assessee to deduction of a particular expenditure unless the same is proved to be genuine. He has stated that the assessee failed to establish the facts necessary to support his claim for deduction under section 37(1) of the Act. The Assessing Officer, on an ad hoc basis, disallowed 12% of the claim of the assessee which works out to Rs. 36,29,753 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oceedings the assessee could produce bills relating to transport charges paid of Rs. 66,25,633 only out of the total expenses debited of Rs. 1,63,61,545 which have been verified. As regards the balance bills, the assessee claims that they have been destroyed by white ants. From the bills produced it is seen that 60 to 70% of the bills is paid in cash at the time of loading the truck and only the balance is paid by cheque. As neither the ledger accounts, bills, nor details of the balance parties were produced, the same could not be verified. 5. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has stated that for the expenses under the head Transport Charges of Rs. 1,63,61,545, Rs. 70,32,042, was paid in cash and Rs. 70,32,042, was paid in cash and Rs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ls) has also sustained 10% of the cash payment of Rs. 9,21,224, in respect of tyre replacement charges claimed by the assessee which comes to Rs. 92,122. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has further stated that in respect of vehicle repair and maintenance charges, the Assessing Officer has reported in the remand report that the assessee produced bills only for 1/3rd of the amount claimed. Further, the assessee also admitted that out of Rs. 21,98,958, the expenditure claiming cheque payments are Rs. 2,54,153, and third parties bills are Rs. 8,07,336, and he balance amount of Rs. 11,37,468, were cash. Therefore, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) disallowed 10% of the cash payment which comes to Rs. 1,13,747. Similarly, for the expenditu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der of the learned Commissioner (Appeals). He further filed a chart stating that the net profit shown by the assessee is 3.94% and after considering the disallowance sustained by the learned Commissioner (Appeals), the net profit works out to 6.19% which is more than the preceding assessment year as well as succeeding assessment year. He submitted that the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) be confirmed. 8. We have carefully considered the submissions of the learned Representative of the parties and the orders of the authorities below. We observe that the assessee filed the details before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and the learned Commissioner (Appeals) called for the remand report from the Assessing Officer. It is a fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has stated that no details have been produced and the entire payment has been made in cash. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has also stated that for the salary payment, the assessee has not been able to substantiate the claim of the said amount of Rs. 23,84,320 under the head Wages , and Rs. 9,38,235, under the head Salary . Considering the facts of the case, we are of the considered view that the disallowance, as made by the Assessing Officer @ 12% should be sustained under the head Wages Claimed Salary Claimed aggregating to Rs. 33,22,555, which comes to Rs. 3,98,707, as against Rs. 2,38,432, made by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). Hence, we make further disallowance of Rs. 1,60,275. 10. In respect of claim of petrol, telep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
