9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 777X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l water bottle to the customers who have got their fuel tanks filled for more than ₹ 1,000, almost all the expense has been incurred by account payee cheque and the expenses have not been found to be bogus not supported by any evidence and at the same time, the aforesaid submissions of the Assessee have also not been controverted by Revenue. Further, Revenue has also not placed any evidence on record to demonstrate that the expense is not for business purpose. Considering the fact that the submissions of both the parties are not supported by any evidence, the disallowance being made by A.O on adhoc basis, the passing of a cryptic order of ld. CIT(A), we are of view that in the present case considering the fact that the matter is more ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... turn of income for AY 2008-09 on 30.9.2008 declaring total income of ₹ 21,14,633/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter assessment was framed u/s 143(3) vide order dated 30.12.2008 and the total income was determined at the ₹ 30,69,080/- Aggrieved by the order of A.O, Assessee preferred appeal before ld. CIT(A) who vide order dated 26.3.2012 granted partial relief to the Assessee. Aggrieved by the order of ld.CIT(A), Assessee is now in appeal before us and the grounds raised by the Assessee reads as under:- 1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition on the ground of alleged undervaluation of closing stock to the tune of ₹ 28,453/-. 2. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was subjective and without any evidence and proof. He accordingly rejected the books results as regards the closing stock u/s 145 of the Act and thereafter valued the stock of oil at ₹ 112.6 per liter and made addition of ₹ 28,453/-. Aggrieved by the order of A.O, Assessee carried the matter before ld. CIT(A) who upheld the order of A.O by holding as under:- 8.2 The Assessing Officer has taken the Valuation of closing stock at cost basis. Appellant claims that it has valued at market value which is lower than cost. However, no evidence regarding the same, which could be verified, has been submitted. Therefore, this ground of appeal is dismissed. 6. Aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(A), Assessee is now in before us. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s which was stated to be towards providing 1 liter of mineral water bottle to the customers who refilled their fuel tank in excess of ₹ 1000/-. A.O noted that Assessee did not support its contention by furnishing the names, addresses and complete details of the customers. He accordingly held that the expense had remained unverifiable and accordingly disallowed 50% of expenses. The action of A.O was confirmed by ld. CIT(A) by holding as under:- 8.5 Claim of advertisement expenses is allowed in full as these expenses have been incurred for advertisement in TV Channels / Cable TV etc. Sales promotion expenses are mainly expenses of mineral water bottles claimed to have been distributed free of cost as gift to customers. Sine this exp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... purpose. Considering the fact that the submissions of both the parties are not supported by any evidence, the disallowance being made by A.O on adhoc basis, the passing of a cryptic order of ld. CIT(A), we are of view that in the present case considering the fact that the matter is more than 7 years old and no useful purpose would be served in remanding the matter back. In such a situation, we are of the view that the ends of justice shall be met if the disallowance is restricted to ₹ 25,000/- as against ₹ 2,20,000/- made by A.O. We thus direct accordingly. In the result this ground of Assessee is partly allowed. 3rd ground is with respect to disallowance of tanker and house- keeping expenses 14. A.O noticed that Assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
