9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1808X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the year under consideration, hence, allowable expenditure HELD THAT:- Assessee did not argue with regard to Prior Period Expenses. In the absence of any argument and any challenge to the findings of authorities below, no interference is called for on this matter. The addition is, therefore, confirmed. Remaining addition CIT(Appeals) found from the submissions of the assessee that the claim of the assessee is based on the fact that in earlier years, the income from FDR was shown excessive, therefore, excess income declared in the earlier year was claimed as expenditure in assessment year under appeal - As admitted that assessee has not incurred any expenditure in this year on this amount and he was not able to satisfy as to how the excess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eriod is not allowable in the current year. The Assessing Officer, therefore, disallowed the same and made addition. 3. The assessee filed written submission before ld. CIT(Appeals) and filed details of the Prior Period Expenses which are telephone, entertainment, repair and maintenance of computer, office maintenance, FBT and legal expenses totaling to Rs. 87,263/-. The Prior Period Income was shown on account of excess interest as income on FDR amounting to Rs. 6,49,923/-. Thus, total addition was of Rs. 7,37,186/-. The assessee submitted that out of Prior Period Expenses of Rs. 87,263/-, FBT expenses of Rs. 48,182/- are not allowable expenses and this is not expenditure. Balance amount of Rs. 39,081/- are the expenses received, have ari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at in case any income has been shown in excess in earlier year, the only remedy for the same is by revising the return for that year. Under no provision of Income Tax Act, can such excess income be clamed as expenditure in the subsequent year. The addition was confirmed and appeal of the assessee was dismissed. 5. We have heard ld. Representatives of both the parties and perused the findings of authorities below. The ld. counsel for the assessee did not argue with regard to Prior Period Expenses totaling to Rs. 87,263/-. In the absence of any argument and any challenge to the findings of authorities below, no interference is called for on this matter. The addition of Rs. 87,263/- is, therefore, confirmed. As regards remaining addition of R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
