9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1706X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7- and society charges of Rs.3,78,8317- claimed on Housing accommodation on the ground that these expenses are not incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the Appellant's business. 2. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the adhoc disallowance of Rs.5,20,5837- made by the AO, being 5% of various expenses debited to the Profit & Loss A/c as not incurred wholly and exclusively for business purpose." 2. The ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the issues under appeal stand covered by the order of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for the assessment year 2009-10. The Ld.DR agreed to the proposition. 3. With regard to ground No.1, we find that the "E" Bench of the Tribunal in ITA No.224/Mum/2013 for the assessment year 2009-10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar issue in assessee's own case in ITA no.7282/Mum./2011, dated 17th June 2015, for assessment year 2008-09, the Tribunal held as under:- "22. The issue in ground of appeal no. 4 is against the disallowance of depreciation on residential premises of Rs.7,91,136/- the claim of the assessee before the authorities below was that it had provided the said residential premises but its employees who were working with the assessee for the past several years. The AO further, denied the said claim of the assessee as no evidence was produced by the assessee in support thereof. The CIT(A) also upheld the order of CIT(A) for the absence of any evidence having been filed by the assessee merely because depreciation was allowed in the earlier years, was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal, we restore the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer with similar direction. This ground is allowed for statistical purposes." 4. Consistent with the view already taken by the Tribunal, we restore the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer with similar direction. This ground is allowed for statistical purposes. 5. With respect to the second ground, this ground also stands decided by the Tribunal against assessee with the following observations:- "12. In ground no.3, assessee has challenged ad-hoc disallowance of Rs. 1,04,564 being 5% of various expenses aggregating to Rs. 20,91,282. 13. While completing assessment, the Assessing Officer made ad- hoc disallowance of 5% on various expenditure claimed b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
