9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 580X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal: "1. That the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law as well as on facts. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the following additions/disallowances made by the Ld. AO: Rs. 3,00,000/- out of claim sampling expenses of Rs. 25,15,902/- Rs. 1,50,000/- out of claim of travelling expenses of Rs. 15,30,110/- Rs. 50,000/- out of vehicle running expenses of Rs. 4,56,974/- Rs. 75,000/- out of general expenses of Rs. 5,19,795/- Rs. 40,000/- out of repair and maintenance of Rs. 3,83,256/- Rs. 85,000/- out of claim of communication expenses of Rs. 8,59,831/- Rs. 60,000/- out of claim of depreciation of vehicles covered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... certain ad-hoc disallowances of expenses aggregating to Rs. 8,30,000/- the income of the assessee was determined at Rs. 10,25,080/-. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee assailed the assessment order before the CIT(Appeals) but without any success. 4. The assessee being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(A) has carried the matter in appeal before us. 5. At the very outset of hearing of the appeal, the Ld. Authorized Representative (for short 'AR') for the assessee, submitted, that the Assessing Officer had grossly erred in law and on facts of the case in disallowing expenses on an ad-hoc basis. Elaborating on his aforesaid contention, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that the Assessing Officer while disallowing certain expenses on an ad-hoc basis h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oth the parties, perused the material available on record and the orders of the lower authorities. As is discernible from the assessment order, we find, that as stated by the Ld. AR, and rightly so, the disallowance of certain expenses on an ad-hoc basis by the Assessing Officer is merely backed by general observations and not on the basis of any material which would support the same. Admittedly, an assessee remains under a statutory obligation to substantiate that his claim for deduction of expenses falls within the four corners of Sec. 37(1) of the Act. As such, any expenditure which does satisfy the mandate of Sec. 37(1) of the Act can justifiably be disallowed by the A.O. But then, an A.O cannot carry out disallowance of expenses on an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r considered view, such disallowance of expenses on an ad-hoc basis, i.e, de hors any supporting material can by no means be permitted. In the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, we find substantial force in the claim of the ld. A.R that devoid of any specific infirmity qua the assessee's claim for deduction of the aforesaid expenditure by the lower authorities, the disallowance of a part of the same in a most arbitrary and a whimsical manner, i.e, on an ad- hoc basis could by no means be held to be justified. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the order of the ITAT, Kolkata in the case of Animesh Sadhu Vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Hoogly, ITA No. 11/Kol/2013, dated 12.11.2014 and that of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of ACIT, New Delhi Vs. M/s Modi Rubb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
