9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 541X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allowed. - ITA No. 1715/Del/2015 - - - Dated:- 12-10-2022 - SHRI KUL BHARAT , JUDICIAL MEMBER Appellant by : Shri P. C.Yadav , Adv. Respondent by : Shri Om Parkash , Sr. DR ORDER PER KUL BHARAT , JM : The present appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2008- 09 is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A), Meerut dated 10.02.2015. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. That on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the expenditure on Truck maintenance for the period 1.5.2007 to 15.11.2007 being fully vouched and verifiable constituted admissible deduction. The disallowance of Rs. 159580/- made by Assessing Officer and sustained by the Ld. CIT (Appeals) being illegal, erroneous and untenable on facts and in law deserves to be deleted. 2. That the salary paid to the Driver and Conductor for the period 1.11 2007 to 15.11.2007 constituted admissible deduction. There was no legal warrant to make any disallowance. The disallowance of Rs. 18750/- made by Assessing Officer and sustained by the Ld. CIT (Appeals) being illegal, erroneous and untenable on facts and in law deserves to be deleted. 3. That the labour c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of paper book filed dated 15.12.15) AO s observation in its Remand Report (Refer page no. 39 of paper book filed dated 15.12.15) 159580.00 5.5 (Refer page no. 49 of paper book filed dated 15.12.15) I have considered the facts of the case and submissions of the AR carefully. The AO in his remand report has accepted the facts that details with supporting bills and vouchers were filed by the AR during the course of assessment proceedings and were on record of file. He further submitted that addition to the extent of Rs. 50000/- may be deleted. However, The AO has not given any satisfactory comments for disallowance of Rs. 109580/-whereas AR has submitted details and explained the reasonableness of the expenditure. Thus, the addition made amounting to Rs. 159580/- stands deleted. In its remand report AO also contended that addition of Rs. 50000/- ma y be deleted. 3 Driver Conductor Salary (Salary paid is for full month of November and the work was done in part of the month) (Refer page no. 13 of paper book - Ledger account filed dated 15.12.15) 18750.00 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sallowance may be deleted. 73410.00 8.5 (Refer page no. 54 of paper book filed dated 15.12.15) 8.2 (Refer Page No.53 of Paper Book filed dated 15.12.15) I have considered the facts carefully. The facts of the case show that the assessee had rendered contractual works in the month of May. The payment of truck hire charges amounting to Rs. 146821/- seems to be correctly accounted for and Disallowance of 50% by the AO amounting to Rs.73410/- is not correct on the facts of the case. Thus, addition is deleted. 6. On the other hand, Ld. Sr. DR opposed the submissions and submitted that the claim of the assessee is not tenable under the law and Ld.CIT(A) has rightly rejected the same. He submitted that the assessee cannot compute it as per section 44AE of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ the Act ] for the part of the year and the remaining part under normal provisions thereby, claiming deduction of business expenditure against the business receipts. 7. In rejoinder, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that section 44AE of the Act operates in different fields and during the part of the year if the receipts fall outsid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, shall be an amount equal to one thousand rupees per ton of gross vehicle weight or unladen weight, as the case may be, for every month or part of a month during which the heavy goods vehicle is owned by the assessee in the previous year or an amount claimed to have been actually earned from such vehicle, whichever is higher; (ii) other than heavy goods vehicle, shall be an amount equal to seven thousand five hundred rupees for every month or part of a month during which the goods carriage is owned by the assessee in the previous year or an amount claimed to have been actually earned from such goods carriage, whichever is higher. (3) Any deduction allowable under the provisions of sections 30 to 38 shall, for the purposes of sub-section (1), be deemed to have been already given full effect to and no further deduction under those sections shall be allowed : Provided that where the assessee is a firm, the salary and interest paid to its partners shall be deducted from the income computed under subsection (1) subject to the conditions and limits specified in clause (b) of section 40. (4) The written down value of any asset used for the purpose of the business ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd [b] He is engaged in the business of plying, hiring or leasing of such goods carriages. 11. In the case in hand that there is no dispute that the assessee fulfilled the aforesaid conditions, he owned not more than ten carriages at any time during the previous year and he was also engaged in the business of plying, hiring or leasing of such goods carriages. Therefore, the receipts related to such goods carriages which owned by the assessee, would be subjected to provisions of section 44AE of the Act. However, in the present case, the assessee has taken certain goods carriages on hire which is not owned by the assessee and the assessee claimed certain expenses related to such carriages which is disallowed by the lower authorities. Ld.CIT(A) has not appreciated this aspect. Therefore, the AO is directed to give deduction of expenditure which related to the goods carriages which were not owned by the assessee but taken on hire from the open market for carrying out the transportation activities. Hence, Ground Nos. 2, 3, 4 5 raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed in terms indicated herein above. 12. Ground No.1 raised by the assessee is general in nature and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
