9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 431X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ract penalty u/s 271(1)(c) – Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.1729/Ahd/ 2010 - - - Dated:- 8-2-2013 - Shri Mukul Kumar Shrawat And Shri Anil Chaturvedi,JJ. Shri D. K. Singh, Sr. D. R. Shri Sunil H. Talati, A. R . ORDER Per : Anil Chaturvedi, Accountant Member This appeal is against the penalty order passed by A.C.I.T. vide order dated 24.06.2009. 2. The facts, as culled out from the order are as under:- Assessee is an individual having income from long term capital gain, short term capital gain and interest income. She filed her return of income on 31.07.2006 declaring total income of Rs.19,12,490/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter the assessment was framed u/s 143(3) vide order dated 19.12 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... only those expenses are allowable u/s 57 of the I.T. Act which are directly relatable to earning of such income. In other words, there has to be one to one nexus between the expenses claimed u/s 57 and the income shown u/s 56 of the Act. If there is no one to one nexus then the expense is not allowable. In other words, the expenses in the nature of Legal Professional exps Rs.4500/- Telephone trunk call exps Rs.27,943/- Account writing charges Rs.24,000/- Interest on bank overdraft Rs.1,23,197/- do not have any direct nexus with the income shown under the head of income from other sources. In short the appellant claimed patently wrong claim u/s 57. It has been held by the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Supreme Industries 122 TTJ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts Pvt. Ltd. 322 ITR 158. He, thus urged that the penalty levied by the A.O. be deleted. 5. Ld. D.R., on the other hand, submitted that the addition made by the A.O. have been sustained as the expenses were not at all related to earning of income. The assessee has filed inaccurate particulars of income. He further submitted that no evidence is on record to prove the assessee's contention that the mistake is bonafide in nature. He thus relied on the order of the A.O. and CIT(A). 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. It is an undisputed fact that the aggregate expenses on account of various heads amounting to Rs.1,88,247/- were disallowed by the A.O. during the course of assessment proceedings. It is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
