9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 841X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the AO can not sit in the arms of the businessman and cannot decide how to run the business. This is a well settled legal proposition laid down by various courts of law. In the facts and circumstances of the case, no infirmity in the order of CIT(A), who has rightly deleted the addition so made - ground raised by Revenue is dismissed. - I.T.A. Nos. 314, 386 & 387(Asr)/2011 - - - Dated:- 1-6-2012 - SH. H.S. SIDHU, AND SH. B.P.JAIN, JJ. Appellant By: Sh. R.L. Chhanalia, DR Respondent By:S/Sh. Vijay Kumar Umat Rakesh Magow, CAs ORDER PER BENCH: These three appeals of the Revenue arise from three different orders of the CIT(A), Amritsar, dated 22.03.2011, 07.04.2011 07.04.2011 for the assessment years 2005-06, 2006-07 2007-08 respectively. 2. In ITA No.314(Asr)/2011, the Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal: i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) Amritsar, has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.22,97,165/- made on account of business promotion expenses without appreciating the facts that the assessee failed to produce list of the recipients to whom gifts were made, inspite of the facts that sufficient opportunitie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or more grounds of appeal. 4. In ITA No.387(Asr)/2011, the Revenue has raised following grounds: i. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.50,000/- made by the AO on account of disallowance under business promotion expenses. ii) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.22,61,000/- made by the AO on account of disallowance under the head legal professional expenses representing such payments made to M/s. Mishra Mishra Associates, Lucknow. iii) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting both the above additions without appreciating the facts that the assessee failed to lead any record/evidence under both the heads during the course of assessment proceedings. iv) The appellant craves leave to amend or add any or more grounds of appeal. 5. First of all, we take up appeal of the Revenue in ITA No.314(Asr)/2011 for the assessment year 2005-06. The brief facts in ground No.1 are that the assessee had claimed the business promotion expenditure amounting to Rs. 30,04,175/- and expenditure of Rs.22,97,165/- had been i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he facts of the case. We concur with the views of the ld. CIT(A) that the assessee had incurred expenses for the purpose of business and to maintain cordial relations with the suppliers and other persons and to maintain good business reputation and to meet the market competition. Also there is no dispute of having incurred expenditure which have been argued to have been incurred by making account payee cheques for purchasing the said gifts. No such expenditure, which has been prohibited by law, has been brought on record by the AO and in the facts and circumstances of the case, such expenses by taking the volume of the turnover and the income declared being second year operation of the assessee s business, the expenditure incurred is reasonable. In view of the above discussions, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A), who has rightly deleted the addition so made. Thus, this ground of the revenue is dismissed. 7. As regards ground No.2, the brief facts are that the assessee had incurred the expenditure of Rs. 11 lacs i.e. Rs. 8 lacs by payment to M/s. Mishra Mishra Associates and Rs. 3 lacs to Mr. Anand Somani of M/s. Balaji Sales Corpn. for legal and professional c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se material about the claim of the assessee. The amount has been paid through cheques after deducting tax at source. Copies of the bills and TDS certificate are on record. Moreover, the AO can not sit in the arms of the businessman and cannot decide how to run the business. This is a well settled legal proposition laid down by various courts of law. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A), who has rightly deleted the addition so made. Thus, ground No.2 of the Revenue is dismissed. 9. Ground Nos. 3 4 of the Revenue are general in nature and therefore, do not require any adjudication. 10. As regards appeal of the Revenue in ITA No.386(Asr)/2011 for the assessment year 2006-07, the facts and grounds of appeal are identical to the facts in Revenue s appeal in ITA No.314(Asr)/2011 for the A.Y. 2005-06. The AO in the present appeal made a disallowance of Rs.14,50,000/- being payments made to M/s. Mishra Mishra Associates and Rs.2,00,000/- to M/s. Balaji Sales Corpn. The facts in the present case are identical to the facts as in assessee s own case for the assessment year 2005-06. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition on iden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
