9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 580X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iple that ordinarily it is for the assessee to decide whether any expenditure should be incurred in the course of his business. The Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Sasoon J. David and Co. (P) Ltd. [ 1979 (5) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT] held that expenditure may be incurred voluntarily and without any necessity and if it is incurred for promoting the business and to earn profits, the assessee can claim deduction for the same. Therefore, we find that both the expenditure incurred in both the assessment years are for business purpose, and hence it should be allowed to the assessee company. We direct the AO to allow the expenditure on maintenance of guest house. Hence, additions made are directed to be deleted. Decided in favour of assessee. - D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... favour of the assessee company and the said property has been sold by the assessee company during the AY.2015-16. The company after gathering the documents relating to legal ownership, decided to file appeal before the Tribunal and in this process, the delay of 13 days has occurred, which may be condoned in the interests of justice. 4. However, Learned Senior Departmental Representative (Ld. Sr. DR) for the Revenue submitted that assessee has failed to explain the sufficient cause in both the appeals, therefore, the delay should not be condoned. 5. We have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue and noted that assessee has explained the sufficient cause in the petition of condonation of delay as noted above, therefore, having rega ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... house is taken by relatives of ex-chairman. Under the circumstances the amount of Rs. 7,71,084/- was disallowed by AO as personal, non-business expenses. 9. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has confirmed the action of AO. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that the AO disallowed the said expenditure of Rs. 7,71,084/- in the assessment order stating them to be non-business/ personal expenditure and also pointed out that the company had lost in the suit filed in the court regarding the ownership of the Guest House Mumbai. 10. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 11. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee pleaded that during the year under consideration, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich is for the purpose of the business, hence, it should be allowed. It is also a settled principle that ordinarily it is for the assessee to decide whether any expenditure should be incurred in the course of his business. The Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Sasoon J. David and Co. (P) Ltd. vs. CIT, 118 ITR 261 (SC) held that expenditure may be incurred voluntarily and without any necessity and if it is incurred for promoting the business and to earn profits, the assessee can claim deduction for the same. Therefore, we find that for AY.2014-15, the assessee-company has incurred expenditure to the tune of Rs. 7,71,084/- and for AY.2015-16 to the tune of Rs. 5,03,091/-, therefore, we find that both the expenditure incurred in both the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
