TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal overturns assessment order, disallows unwarranted expenses, citing precedent.</h1> <h3>Mrs. Nilu Ashok Goyal Versus The Income Tax Officer, Ward 24 (2) (1)</h3> Mrs. Nilu Ashok Goyal Versus The Income Tax Officer, Ward 24 (2) (1) - TMI Issues involved: Reassessment based on u/s 148 notice for u/s 2(22)(e) applicability, addition of expenses without u/s 2(22)(e) addition justification.The appeal arose from the CIT(A)'s order for assessment year 2001-2002. The return declared income of &8377; 1,09,366, assessed u/s 143(1). A notice u/s 148 was issued due to transactions with M/s.BLR India Private Limited, covered u/s 2(22)(e). The Assessing Officer made no u/s 2(22)(e) addition but disallowed &8377; 5,88,487 under certain expenses. The assessee contended that since no u/s 2(22)(e) addition was made, other additions were unwarranted. The CIT(A) upheld the assessment order rejecting the challenge.The Tribunal observed that reassessment was initiated under u/s 148 for u/s 2(22)(e) applicability, but no addition was made as the AO accepted the assessee's submissions. Citing CIT Vs. Jet Airways (I.) Ltd., the Tribunal held that if the grounds for reassessment were non-existent, the AO should not proceed with reassessment. As expenses were not part of the reassessment issue, the AO was unjustified in making such additions without u/s 2(22)(e) addition. Following the judicial pronouncement, the Tribunal set aside the order and ordered deletion of the additions.In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, pronouncing the order on April 27, 2011.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
