9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 56X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claim merely on the basis of payment being made by cheque and TDS having been deducted. The facts in entirety have been considered and thereafter, a conclusion has been arrived at that it was a business expenditure which was genuinely made towards payment of lease rent. Whether the assessee could not prove the business expediency of expenses when the said premises had not been used for the purpose of business? - Held that:- This question challenging the deletion of addition made as the assessee failed to prove the business expediency as the said premises was not used for business purposes is not a question of law, much less a substantial question of law. Merely because there was some difficulty faced by the assessee in commencing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT is right in deleting the addition of ₹ 72,00,000/- by holding that if the payment for lease rental has been made by cheque after deducting the due TDS, then genuineness business expediency of any expenditure stands established? (ii) Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT is right in deleting the addition of ₹ 72,00,000/- by ignoring the fact that the assessee could not prove the business expediency of expenses when the said premises had not been used for the purpose of business? 3. The Assessing Officer finalished the assessment under Section 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, Rs.the Act'), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... electricity connection cannot be denied, which also could have been the reason for being not able to start the business, since it is not possible to carry on the business without electricity. In order to reduce losses, the appellant had given a part of premises on rent to Ms. Madhu Ahuja at the end of the year and this also proves the genuineness of appellant's case on the issue. It is, therefore, held that the Assessing Officer was not right in disallowing the amount of lease rental. It may also be mentioned that the Assessing Officer has disallowed the amount u/s 40A(2)(a) of the Act, but the amount was not paid to any person covered u/s 40A (2) (b) and so the observation of the Assessing Officer in this regard is not correct. In any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ideration all these factors and held that the claim of lease money paid cannot be denied. The conclusion reached is logical. 7. Question No.1 is framed incorrectly. The question has been worded to suggest that the authorities held that if the payment of lease rent has been made by cheque and TDS has been deducted, the genuineness of the same and the business expediency stands established. Indeed mere payment by cheque purportedly towards lease rent and the deduction of TDS would not establish a case for deduction. However, the Appellate Authorities have not allowed the claim merely on the basis of payment being made by cheque and TDS having been deducted. The facts in entirety have been considered and thereafter, a conclusion has been ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
