9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 887X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hough the details referred to in Clause 21(c) does make a reference of both the amounts admissible and inadmissible, but a careful perusal of the same reveals that the said details are sought only as regards the expenses therein set out which are inadmissible u/ss.40(b)/40(ba) of the Act. On the basis above no infirmity emerges from the non-mentioning of the amount of remuneration paid by the assessee firm to its partners in Clause 21(c). Unable to persuade to subscribe to the view taken by the lower authorities who had disallowed the assessee s claim for deduction of remuneration under sec. 40(b) - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 27/RPR/2023 - - - Dated:- 18-4-2023 - SHRI RAVISH SOOD , JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncluded this income in their respective income tax returns and has duly paid the tax on the same. 6. Because, the CIT(A) ignored the fact that making an addition in the hands of the Appellant would lead to double taxation of income which is against the foundational intent of the Act. 7. Because, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in disregarding the position that inadvertent mistake of third party/auditor in the Tax Audit Report cannot form basis for disallowance of expenses/deduction rightfully incurred by the Appellant. 8. Because, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the total interest of Rs.15,161/- u/s 234B Rs.11,723/- and Rs. 3,438/- u/s 234C of the Act. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, modify or withdraw any o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sr. No. Particulars Amount 1. Remuneration paid to Shri Avinash Karnani (partner) Rs.2,00,501/- 2. Remuneration paid to Shri Shivpal Singh (partner) Rs.2,00,501/- Total Rs.4,01,002/- Ostensibly the aforesaid remuneration paid by the assessee firm was calculated as per clause (vi) of its partnership deed. On a perusal of the records it transpires that the aforesaid claim for deduction of remuneration was disallowed by the A.O for the reason that the assessee firm had failed to mention Clause 21(c) of Form ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 21(c) does make a reference of both the amounts admissible and inadmissible, but a careful perusal of the same reveals that the said details are sought only as regards the expenses therein set out which are inadmissible u/ss.40(b)/40(ba) of the Act. On the basis of my aforesaid observations, I am of the view that no infirmity emerges from the non-mentioning of the amount of remuneration paid by the assessee firm to its partners in Clause 21(c). 7. Be that as it may, as the assessee firm had in no way contravened the provisions of sub-section (b) of Section 40 of the Act viz. (i) claimed deduction of remuneration paid to a partner who is not a working partner; or (ii) claimed deduction for payment of remuneration to a working partner whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
