9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 356X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e as well as detailed discussion made in the assessment order and materials brought on record by the A.O. ii. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in deleting the freight & forwarding expenses amounting to Rs. 18,25,262/- ignoring the facts of the case as well as detailed discussion made in the assessment order and materials brought on record by the A.O. iii. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in deleting the addition without giving a finding that these expenses were incurred wholly and exclusively for business so as to be a allowable deduction U/s 37 of the I.T. Act. iv. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not giving any finding despite the fact that he was exercising co-terminus jurisdiction with A.O. in term of e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and submitted that the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has deleted the disallowance without examining whether the expenses were incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business. 4. On the other, the learned Authorized Representative of the assessee, relied on the findings of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. As regards the above disallowances are concerned, we find that the Assessing Officer has disallowed expenses with following remarks: "............Assessee has shown Rs. 7443522/- as CWC - NSEZ Expenses for the current year against Rs. 2695650/- for preceding year. As explained ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng Expenses the appellant has vehemently claimed that AO has made addition on estimate basis without specifying the basis where as they had provided every information/detail called for during the assessment proceedings. The appellant has also claimed that no opportunity was accorded to the assessee to furnish details/explanation in respect of above addition. With above submission the appellant has clarified that the increase in above expenses by Rs. 57,54,321/- were mainly on account of Octroi paid to Mumbai Municipal Corporation. With above submission the appellant has pleaded that the above two additions made by the AO be deleted. On careful consideration of submission made by the appellant, facts brought out by the AO in assessment ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asis under above two heads of expenses and therefore the same are deleted." 7. We find that the Assessing Officer while making disallowance has not noted any deficiency in the bills or vouchers in respect of the expenses incurred and made disallowance merely on the basis that in the year under consideration, expenses under the relevant heads have increased in percentage terms on sales as compared to preceding year. The Assessing Officer has not even examined the detail of the expenses. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals), on the other hand, examined the details of the expenses and in respect of first disallowance found that in the preceding assessment year vaulting/warehousing expenses were shown separately, whereas in the yea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
