9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 62X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2009 (1) TMI 774 - DELHI HIGH COURT]– Appeal dismissed. - I.T.A.No.6393/Del/2012 - - - Dated:- 28-6-2013 - SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, AND SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JJ. For the Appellant: Shri Tarun Seem, Sr. DR For the Respondent: Shri Amit Arora ORDER PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal has been preferred by the revenue against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax(A)-II, Dehradun dated 12.10.2012 in Appeal No. 294/C.I.T.(A)-II/2011-12 for AY 2009-10. 2. The main ground raised in this appeal read as under:- 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in allowing the expenditure incurred by the assessee even when business activity had ceased and drillship had left India w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an Ocean and stops operation of services. The DR further contended that when the contract of the assessee was terminated and even otherwise the detail of expenses provided by the assessee were not fully verifiable and substantiated, then disallowance and addition made by the Assessing Officer was sustainable. Pointing out the impugned order, the DR vehemently contended that the disallowance and addition made by the Assessing Officer was deleted by the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) without any reasonable basis and cogent reason. The DR concluded his argument with a final submission that the impugned order may be set aside by restoring that of the Assessing Officer. Replying to the above, assessee s representative contended that there was a t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re us, we observe that the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) has decided in favour of the assessee with following observations:- 3.2 The facts as brought out by the Ld. AO and the contentions of the Ld. ARs have been considered. An important fact mentioned in the averments of the Ld. ARs extracted above is that the Appellant concern could procure business for itself during financial year 2009-10. This would readily prove a situation where there is a temporary lull in business d not a complete cessation of activities. The case laws cited by the Ld. ARs merely illustrate and confirm a well established judicial precedent that expenses of a business en during a lull period shall be allowed if it is not proved that there is a complete cessation o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... again continued and the assessee undertook substantial business activities during this period. In this situation, we are inclined to hold that there was a temporary lull during the year under consideration in the business activity of the assessee and the business activities were again started by the asessee during the subsequent years by receiving huge amounts. 7. In view of above, we hold that the Assessing Officer wrongly disallowed the expenses and made addition to the income of the assesse which was rightly deleted by the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) by passing the impugned order. We are unable to see any infirmity, perversity or any other valid reason to interfere with the findings of the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) in the impugn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
