9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (3) TMI 11X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Advocate for the Appellant. Mr. R Santhanam, Advocate for the Respondent. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.] - These are appeals preferred by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the „Act‟) against a common judgment dated 22.12.2006 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the „Tribunal‟) in ITA No. 3655/Del/2000, ITA No. 3657/Del/2000 and ITA No. 3656/Del/2000 in respect of assessment years 1993-94, 1995-96 and 1994-95 respectively. 2. In an earlier round the assessee had filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Act against a common judgment of the Tribunal dated 31.01.2005. A Division Ben ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applied its mind to this aspect of the matter. On the contrary, we are constrained to note that the impugned judgment of the Tribunal dated 22.12.2006 in the second round is, but for the change in the composition of the Bench and a cosmetic change in language, almost similar to the judgment dated 31.01.2005 passed by the Tribunal in the first round. 4. The assessee in the present appeal is aggrieved by the disallowance of the following amounts claimed as allowances/expenses:- (i) expenses on gifts or expenses on articles gifted which are stated to be in excess of the prescribed limit under Rule 6B of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the „Rules‟); (ii) travelling expenses in excess of limits prescribed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... round, here also the addition has been made without any application of mind. Likewise, this addition too is deleted. 5. Ground no.3- This pertains to a disallowance of Rs.1,15,073/- in respect of payment made by the appellant to clubs. Out of this amount Rs.1 lakh relate to fee for admission as a corporate members in Friends Club, New Delhi, and Rs.12,000/- is the annual membership. The addition has been made by the A.O. in the computation of income without any discussion at all. 5.1 Before me the A.R. has stated that the membership of such clubs helps them to cultivate business relationships for latter operations. [The] judgment of CIT V. Hindustan Don Oliver 48 TTJ 552: Reliable Cigarette and Tobacco Inds. 51 TTJ 103, OTIS Elevator CO. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed before the Assessing Officer. 11.1 It appears that A.O. ignored the proviso to Section 43B and also ignored the date of actual payment and was misguided by the date shown on the challan. To my mind there is no reason for any disallowance as the payment has been made within the time statutory allowed. 11.2. Ground no.10- This pertains to the disallowance of Rs.111893 made on the alleged ground that the statutory liability had been paid beyond the due date. The order is silent about the details. 12. Before me the A.R. has indicated that this ostensibly refers to payment made after the end of the previous year but before filing of the return and the proviso to Section 43B clearly entitles the appellant to claim this deduction. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the original revised return of income 3) in deleting disallowance of 115073/- on account of payments to club despite the fact that this disallowance was made by the assessee itself in the original revised return of income. 4) in deleting disallowance of 208108/- u/s 37(2) despite the fact that this disallowance was made by the assessee itself in the original revised return of income. 5) in deleting disallowance of Rs.23,94,030/- pertaining to previous year‟s expenses despite the fact that this disallowance was made by the assessee itself in the original and revised return of income. 6) in deleting addition of Rs.5,25,703/- on account of loss on sale of asset 7) in allowing 50% of statutory liability of Rs.111893 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dditions or disallowances were called for, in view of the binding precedents of Courts and/or Tribunal in respect of each of the addition/disallowance. The observations made in the Tax Audit Report could not have formed the basis of additions/disallowances by the Assessing Officer. On this aspect of the matter the observations in the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co Ltd vs State of Kerala and Anr: (1973) 91 ITR 18 at Page 20 being apposite are extracted hereinbelow:- "It is no doubt true that entries in the account books of the assessee amount to an admission that the amount in question was laid out or expended for the cultivation, upkeep or maintenance of immature plants from which no agricultural i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
