9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 465X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Reddy had accompanied the assessee on several occasions , the element of personal tour cannot be denied. When the assessee is contending that Mrs. Swetha Reddy was an employee of the firm, he should have produced sufficient documents to establish the said contention. Further it is not the case of the assessee that there is perversity in the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) and in the order of the Assessing Officer. No substantial question of law. - T.C.A. No. 464 of 2012 - - - Dated:- 7-4-2021 - THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA For the Appellant : Ms. Sri Niranjani Srinivasan For the Respondent : Mr. T.R.Senthil Kumar, Sr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax Act. However, the Assessing Officer disallowed the claims made under section 37(1) apart from making other additions. 2.3 Challenging the order passed by the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Commissioner of Income Tax also confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer disallowing the expenses incurred on foreign travel of the appellant as well as Mrs. Swetha Reddy . 2.4 Aggrieved over the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the assessee filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, and the Tribunal also confirmed the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved over the same, the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned counsel appearing for the appellant, Mrs. K.G. Usha Rani, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the assessee has not produced any salary certificate of his wife Mrs. Swetha Reddy to establish that she was an employee of the firm, viz., M/s.Shoetek Agencies. Further the learned counsel submitted that the assessee has not raised any substantial question of law with regard to non-consideration of the alleged documents produced before the Assessing Officer. 6. On a careful consideration of the materials available on record and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, it could be seen that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has categorically stated that at the time of hearing of the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urpose. Further, the Assessing Officer observed that since Mrs. Swetha Reddy had accompanied the assessee on several occasions , the element of personal tour cannot be denied. When the assessee is contending that Mrs. Swetha Reddy was an employee of the firm, he should have produced sufficient documents to establish the said contention. Further it is not the case of the assessee that there is perversity in the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) and in the order of the Assessing Officer. 8. In these circumstances, we find no ground much less any substantial question of law to interfere with the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and by the other authorities. Hence, the Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
