9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 996X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le documentary evidence adduced. The claim of the expenditure allegedly incurred in relation to earning of income by way of interest and remuneration from partnership firm is also totally unproved in the quantum proceedings. The explanation offered by the assessee, thus, cannot be assumed to be bonafide. In the absence of relevant facts relating to expenses claimed, the observations of the co-ordinate bench in quantum proceedings would squarely apply. We also note that the CIT(A) has categorically observed the claim of the assessee to be false and without any evidence. The plea of the assessee sounds hollow on the face of such reasonings. We thus find no infirmity in the conclusion drawn by the CIT(A) and thus decline to interfere therew ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment were placed on record. The learned AR submitted that while the disputed disallowances might have been sustained in the quantum proceedings by appellate authority including ITAT, this by itself, is not sufficient to warrant imposition of penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the Act which is altogether a different and independent proceedings. It was submitted that expenses have been incurred to earn business income and are therefore deductible from business income although incorrectly claimed under the head income from other sources . As regards disallowance of car expenses and car depreciation, it was contended that the observation of the lower authorities that no evidence regarding ownership of vehicle has been submitted is incorrect. The le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred in disallowing business expenses of ₹ 6,44,023/-. We first come to assessee s tabulation in page 5 of the CIT(A) s order and notice that the above disallowance figure comprised of car loan interest, car depreciation, bank commission, petrol expenses, car expenses, salary telephone expenses of ₹ 78,702/-, ₹ 4,38,257/-, ₹ 2985/-, ₹ 6400/-, ₹ 65,356/-, ₹ 51,000/- ₹ 1323/-; respectively. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had not furnished any evidence regarding ownership of the vehicles in question followed by their utilization for the purposes of the business of seven firms wherein he is a partner. He further noticed that there was no proof by way of vouchers and bills etc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee has failed to substantiate the expenses except for making generalized observations towards existence of car in the balance sheet and incurring other expenses. The entry shown in an unaudited balance sheet does not inspire confidence in the absence of any tangible documentary evidence adduced. The claim of the expenditure allegedly incurred in relation to earning of income by way of interest and remuneration from partnership firm is also totally unproved in the quantum proceedings. The explanation offered by the assessee, thus, cannot be assumed to be bonafide. In the absence of relevant facts relating to expenses claimed, the observations of the co-ordinate bench in quantum proceedings would squarely apply. We also note that the CIT(A) h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
