9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 1057X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... we accept the assessee s contention and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition. Payment to Kochar(Anesthetist) as professional charges - We agree that these Operation Notes were not filed before the AO/CIT(A). These Operation Notes have been considered by us as an evidence only to substantiate the primary evidence filed by the assessee before AO and CIT(A). We have already discussed in earlier paragraphs the evidences filed by assessee before the AO and CIT(A) in the form of copy of bank statement of Dr.RK, copy of TDS Return etc. We are convinced that assessee had made payment to Dr. RK as professional fees. The said amount was wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business of the assessee. Hence, we direct AO to delete the addition. Petrol and Diesel Expenditure - Accountant only considered Rs. 5,955/- and failed to consider remaining amount of Rs. 1,05,230/-. No specific evidence has been filed by the assessee before us to prove the Diesel Expenditure. Assessee merely filed a Ledger Account at page no.60 and 61 of the paper book. The Ledger Account shows certain cash payments at periodic intervals. However, that does not prove that the expenditure has been i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the said amount. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in sustaining the disallowance of Rs. 5,68,000 made by the A.O towards Professional Charges paid to two doctors on vague grounds without appreciating that the said payments were made through banking channel after deduction of TDS and the said receipts were also offered to tax by the recipient doctors in their ITRs filed for A.Y.2020 - 21 and therefore, there was no reason to disallow the said expenses merely because the deduction in respect of the same remained to be claimed in the original ITR u/s 139(1). 4. The learned CIT(A) erred in sustaining the disallowance of Rs. 1,54,180 made by the A.O by disallowing the Petrol Diesel Expenses of Rs. 1,05,230 and Salary Wages Expenses of Rs. 48,950claimed additionally in the revised ITR filed u/s 139(5) without appreciating that the said expenses were genuinely incurred for business purposes and there was no reason to disallow the same merely because the said expenses remained to be claimed in the original ITR filed u/s 139(1) for A.Y.2020-21. 5. The appellant craves, leave to add, alter, amend and delete any of the above grounds of appeal. Brief facts of the case : 2. Assessee Dr.Nitin Pra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee had made payment of Rs. 1,57,500/- to Doctor Daniel Fernandes after deducting TDS of Rs. 17,500/-. The assessee failed to claim the said expenditure in the Original Return of Income, hence, claimed it in the Revised Return of Income. 3.3 Further, as per TDS returns filed for 4th Quarter which were filed on the record of the AO, the impugned payment by cheques and tax deducted at source are reflected. Evidence of Payment of TDS are submitted in paper book. Further, impugned professional charges of Rs. 1,75,000/- after deducting TDS of Rs. 17,500/- i.e., Rs. 1,57,500/- were paid by cheques (Rs.90,000/- on 19.04.2020 Rs. 67,500/- on 24.07.2020) and bank statements showing the above payments were filed during assessment proceedings. The copy of ledger account of Dr. Daniel in the books of the assessee and bank statement showing the impugned payment submitted in the paper book. The assessment proceedings were conducted in the FY 2021-22 i.e., much after the actual payments made by account payee cheques in the year 2020. Therefore, by no stretch of imagination, it can be said that the claim of the appellant in Revised return is an afterthought and made for reducing Taxable income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee wherein the payments made by cheques to Dr. Rashmi Kochar are reflected. In view of the above facts and evidence the addition of Rs. 3,93,000/- on account of disallowance of professional fees paid to Dr. Rashmi Kochar is not justified. The assessee owns a Volkswagen Vento motor car bearing number ME1-15DC-8387 which was exclusively used by him for profession and total petrol diesel expenses incurred during the year were Rs. 1,11,185/- which includes cheque payments of Rs. 5,955/-. The accountant had considered only cheque payments and hence, cash payments were remained to be accounted for. The impugned expenses are about of Rs. 9.250/- per month which is reasonable considering the Professional Services rendered by the assessee to various hospitals. Copy of ledger account of the assessee. 3.4 Ld.AR for the assessee filed an elaborate paper book. Submission of ld.DR : 4. The ld.DR for the Revenue relied on the order of AO and ld.CIT(A). The ld.DR submitted that assessee was working as a Consultant in Six Sigma Medicare Research Ltd., Nashik. As per the procedure, entire payment is collected from the Patient by the Hospital. Then, the hospital in turn pays to various doctors ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Return of Income and its Annexures of Dr.Daniel Fernandes, it is observed that total professional receipts of Dr.Daniel Fernandes were Rs. 17,28,776/-, out of that Rs. 3,25,000/- has been received from Nitin Kochar i.e. Assessee. Remaining amounts are from Sahyadri Hospital, Six Sigma Medicare Research Ltd., Nashik and Vinod. Thus, in the Return of Income of Dr.Daniel Fernandes, Rs. 3,25,000/- is shown as receipt from Assessee. The Assessee has also filed copy of Ledger Account of Dr.Daniel Fernandes at page no.37 of the Paperbook which reflects Rs. 1,75,000/-. Therefore, assessee has proved that assessee had made payment of Rs. 3,25,000/- to Dr.Daniel Fernandes. Hence, we accept the assessee s contention and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of Rs. 1,75,000/-. Payment of to Dr.Rashmi Kochar : 5.3 Assessee has claimed that he had paid Rs. 3,93,000/- to Dr.Rashmi Kochar(Anesthetist) as professional charges, however, it remained to be claimed as expenditure in the Original Return of Income. Assessee submitted that Dr.Rashmi Kochar is a Qualified Anesthetist, therefore, her services were availed by Assessee. The Assessee had filed copy of Form No.26AS of Dr.R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the TDS Return and other evidence regarding payments made to Dr.Rashmi Kochar. However, ld.CIT(A) has not bothered to discuss anything about the contentions raised by the assessee, the evidences filed by the assessee and merely dismissed the appeal in one line. 6.1 In this case, during the appeal proceedings before this Tribunal, we specifically asked ld.AR of the assessee to prove that Dr.Rashmik Kochar has acted as an Anesthetist during surgeries performed by the assessee by filing copies of the Operation Notes maintained by the hospital. Ld.AR filed copy of Operation Notes for the Surgery performed on 23.08.2019 wherein Dr.Rashmi Kochar s name appears as Anesthetist along with Dr.Tipre, Anesthetist. Similarly, on perusal of the Operation Notes of the Surgery performed on 27.08.2019, Dr.Rashmi Kochar s name appears as Anesthetist along with Dr.Tipre, Anesthetist. Similarly, for the Operation performed on 24.07.2019, Dr.Rashmi Kochar s name appears as Anesthetist along with Dr.Tipre, Anesthetist. 6.2 The ld.DR has also perused the impugned Operation Notes which contains name of the patient, registration number, date of admission, surgeon s name and other medical details. For th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
