2012 (11) TMI 177 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal directs AO to verify expenses, allows appeal in part. Disallowances deleted based on accounting practices.

Prithvi Associates Versus Joint Commissisoner of Income Tax, Range-10,

Prithvi Associates Versus Joint Commissisoner of Income Tax, Range-10, - TMI Issues Involved:1. Disallowance of Sales Promotion Expenses2. Disallowance of Prior Period Expenses for Commission3. Disallowance of Electricity Charges4. Disallowance of Generator Hire Charges5. Disallowance of Maintenance Charges6. Disallowance of Salary to Hyderabad Office7. Disallowance of Consultancy Charges8. Disallowance of Municipal Tax9. Disallowance of Cash Payment for MaintenanceDetailed Analysis:1. Disallowance of Sales Promotion Expenses:The assessee claimed sales promotion expenses totaling Rs.7,61,700/-, which included gifts such as gold coins and discount coupons. The A.O. disallowed these expenses due to the lack of evidence proving business expediency. The CIT (A) upheld this disallowance. However, the appellate tribunal noted that such expenses are customary in the advertising business and constitute only 0.25% of the total turnover. The tribunal remitted the issue back to the A.O. for verification, directing that the expenses be allowed if the list of recipients is produced and verified.2. Disallowance of Prior Period Expenses for Commission:The assessee paid commissions to two individuals, which were disallowed by the A.O. on the grounds that they pertained to the previous financial year. The CIT (A) upheld these disallowances. Upon review, the tribunal found that the commissions were paid and TDS was deducted in the current financial year. The tribunal directed the A.O. to delete the disallowances of Rs.5,30,233/- and Rs.1,26,000/- respectively, as they pertained to the current year.3. Disallowance of Electricity Charges:The A.O. disallowed electricity charges of Rs.25,846/- for March 2007, which were accounted for in April 2007. The CIT (A) upheld this disallowance. The tribunal noted that the assessee consistently followed an accounting policy of booking expenses from March to February, which was accepted by the department. Therefore, the tribunal directed the A.O. to delete the disallowance.4. Disallowance of Generator Hire Charges:The A.O. disallowed generator hire charges of Rs.1,60,815/- for March 2007, accounted for in April 2007. The CIT (A) upheld this disallowance. The tribunal, considering the consistent accounting policy and its acceptance, directed the A.O. to delete the disallowance.5. Disallowance of Maintenance Charges:The A.O. disallowed maintenance charges of Rs.80,000/- for March 2007, accounted for in April 2007. The CIT (A) upheld this disallowance. The tribunal, considering the consistent accounting policy and its acceptance, directed the A.O. to delete the disallowance.6. Disallowance of Salary to Hyderabad Office:The A.O. disallowed salary expenses of Rs.52,000/- for March 2007, accounted for in April 2007. The CIT (A) upheld this disallowance. The tribunal, considering the consistent accounting policy and its acceptance, directed the A.O. to delete the disallowance.7. Disallowance of Consultancy Charges:Ground No.8 related to disallowance of consultancy charges was not pressed by the assessee at the time of hearing and hence was not adjudicated.8. Disallowance of Municipal Tax:The A.O. disallowed Rs.27,206/- out of Rs.81,619/- of municipal tax, stating it was for a period extending beyond the current financial year. The CIT (A) upheld this disallowance. The tribunal noted that municipal tax is covered under Section 43B of the Act, which allows for deduction on a payment basis. Since the tax was paid in the current year, the tribunal directed the A.O. to delete the disallowance.9. Disallowance of Cash Payment for Maintenance:The A.O. disallowed Rs.23,840/- paid in cash for maintenance, citing Section 40A(3). The CIT (A) upheld this disallowance. The tribunal found that the payments were below the prescribed limit of Rs.20,000/- and were for different purchases and reimbursements. Therefore, the tribunal directed the A.O. to delete the disallowance.Conclusion:The appeal was partly allowed, with several disallowances being deleted based on consistent accounting practices and compliance with relevant tax provisions. The tribunal directed the A.O. to verify certain expenses and provide reasonable opportunity for the assessee to present evidence.