9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 987X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on record to indicate that the assessee may make such payments whenever he thinks fit. - expenses allowed. - Decided in favor of assessee. Payment of rates and taxes - whether capital expenditure - Held that:- the payments were made based on laws of the Government and in connection with the business. The bills or receipts of the payments nowhere show that the alleged payments were in the nature of penalty. - claim of expenses allowed as revenue expenditure - Decided in favor of assessee. Addition u/s. 43B - payments made late on account of ESI and Provident Fund - Held that:- In this case the payments were made before filing of the due date of the return of income and hence the same is allowable under section 43B. Our aforesaid view is for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. That the further grounds shall be submitted at the time of hearing. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a partnership firm which is engaged in carrying on the business of trading in garments and accessories. It also derives from house prorty. The assessee filed its Return of Income declaring income of ₹ 1,91,40,837/-. The returned income consists of income of ₹ 2,58,02,861/- from the house property and business loss of ₹ 46,15,732/-. After claiming set off of business loss of ₹ 46,15,732/- against the income of ₹ 2,58,02,861/- from the house property, the net current year income was shown at ₹ 2,11,87,129/- in the computation of income annexed wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .3.2014 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. Against the aforesaid assessment order, assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A)-XXVI, New Delhi, who vide his impugned order dated 28.08.2014 has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. During the course of hearing, Ld. Counsel of the assessee has filed a Paper Book containing pages 1 to 29 and stated that the ground no. 2 and 3 has been covered by the ITAT, 'B' Bench, Delhi in assessee's own case for the assessment year 2009-10 in the case DCIT vs. Deepsons Southend vide order dated 30.10.2015, hence, he requested to follow the same and the ground no. 2 & 3 may be allowed. As regards ground no. 4 relating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve related to the block assessment completed in the case of the partner or in the case of other concern of the group. He, therefore, disallowed the expenses u/s. 37(1) of the Act. The ld.CIT(A) allowed the claim of assessee stating that the appeals against the block assessment proceedings are pending at the stage of Tribunal and the bill of the consulting firm narrating the legal fee for representation in block assessment proceedings, is addressed to the assessee firm. 9. The ld. DR contended that the block assessment proceedings, initiated as a result of search dated 26.02.02, stood completed on 27.02.2004 and even the appeal before the CIT(A) stood disposed of on 20.12.2004. Therefore, there is no reason to make payment in the A.Y. 200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t explain whether any provision for payment of preceding years' expenses in subsequent years, was made in the books of account. It is also a thing of common practice that no consultant would leave its fee unpaid for such a long period after completion of work assigned to him as per narration given in the bill. We, therefore, find that the ld. CIT(A) has committed an error while deleting the disallowance made by the AO. Accordingly, ground No. 3 of appeal of Revenue stands allowed." 6.1 We further find that the Tribunal vide order dated 30.10.2015 has decided the similar in assessee's own case, as raised in ground no. 3 in this Appeal as under:- "13. Ground No. 5 challenges the deletion of addition of ₹ 16,04,832/- made by the AO o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed on laws of the Government and in connection with the business. The bills or receipts of the payments nowhere show that the alleged payments were in the nature of penalty. He, therefore, deleted the disallowance." 6.2 After perusing the aforesaid findings of the ITAT, we are of the considered view that the issues raised in ground no. 2 & 3 are squarely covered by the aforesaid order of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for the assessment year 2009-10, hence, respectfully following the above precedent, we allow the ground no. 2 & 3 raised by the assessee. 7. With regard to ground no. 4 relating to confirmation of disallowance of ₹ 4565/- u/s. 43B of the Act read with Section 2 Clause 24 sub clause (x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
