9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 1189X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... following the same reasoning, AO has disallowed 5% of the expenses which were restricted to ₹ 7 lacs by the ld. CIT(A)and the revenue is apparently not in appeal against the said order of the Ld. CIT(A) and the same has attained finality. In the facts and circumstances of the case given that the addition have been made purely on adhoc basis. At the same time given the fact that some of the expenses are not supported by proper evidences. The Ld. CIT(A) has restricted the disallowance to a reasonable level. Disallowance of 5% of the Hammali expenses - Held that:- The addition has been made against on purely adhoc basis without highlighting as a specific defect in the claim of the case, we do not see any infirmity in the order of Ld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 40/JP/16 - - - Dated:- 21-2-2017 - SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM Assessee by : Shri Mahendra Gagieya (CA) Revenue by : Shri Prithviraj Meena (Addl.CIT) ORDER PER SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A. M. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of ld. CIT(A), Kota dated 16.08.2016 for A.Y. 2012-13. In its appeal, the Revenue has taken following grounds of appeal: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in : (i) restricting the disallowance out of Fuel expenses to ₹ 10 Lacs. (ii) restricting the disallowance out of Hammali expenses to ₹ 1 lac. (iii) Deleting the addition of ₹ 37,172/- made by disallowing Loading Ve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etails of the local farmers from whom the Husk has been purchased in terms of name of farmers, quantity purchased, weighment slip and mode of payment has been maintained and submitted to the AO. It was submitted that AO has not pointed out any specific defect or any instance of irregularity in the purchase of Husk. It was further submitted that the decision of Hon ble AP High court in case of Transport Corporation of India is distinguishable on facts and not applicable in the case of the assessee. In that case, the assessee had claimed deduction of secret commission paid to unspecified employees of its customer to garner more business and the commission payments was held not verifiable in view of the assessee failing to furnish name and add ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 12 . It was further submitted that the AO had merely proceeded on suspicion and could not pointed out any specific defect. It was further submitted that the percentage of husk consumed with respect to turnover is comparable to last year wherein husk consumed this year was 2.006% as against 2.073% last year. 2.4 The Ld. DR is heard who has relied on the order of the AO. 2.5 We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The AO has disallowed 5% of the expenses holding the same as not verifiable. As per Ld. CIT(A) rightly held that the AO on estimation of 5% disallowance is not back by any logical reasoning or comparable cases. The ld. CIT(A) has also given a findings that the assessee has maintained a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the assessee has maintained all vouchers in respect of the payment made on account of Hammali expenses. 3.2 The ld. CIT(A) after considering the assessee s submission has partly allowed the assessee s claim and restricted the disallowance to ₹ 1 lac out of ₹ 3,56,326/- disallowed by the A.O. The relevant findings of the Ld. CIT(A) is as under: As I have pointed out in discussion related to ground No.1 above, the AO has resorted to making the addition based on case law of Transport Corporation of India (256 ITR 701) but the facts of the above cited case are not applicable in the case of the assessee since the above case law deals with payment of secret commission con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al contentions and perused the material available on record. We have gone through the order of the ld. CIT(A) given that the addition has been made against on purely adhoc basis without highlighting as a specific defect in the claim of the case, we do not see any infirmity in the order of Ld. CIT(A) who has restricted a disallowance to ₹ 1 lac. Hence we hereby confirmed the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 4. In ground No.3 the AO has disallowed 5% of the loading vehicle expenses amounting to ₹ 37,172/-. The ld. CIT(A) has deleted the said addition following his order for A.Y. 2011-12 which is not in appeal by the Revenue, we accordingly do not see any infirmity in the findings of the ld. CIT(A) which is reproduced as under: As I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
