2014 (4) TMI 827 - HC - Income Tax

High Court rules in favor of assessee, dismissing Tax Case Appeal on disallowance of expenses

Commissioner of Income Tax Versus The Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd.

The High Court dismissed the Tax Case (Appeal) regarding the disallowance of 10% of the assessee's claimed expenses, ruling in favor of the assessee. The ... Disallowance of 10% of claim of other expenses – No specific rejection placed – Vouchers not produced - Held that:- The Tribunal rightly held that neither the AO nor the CIT(A) had any material on record to reject the claim of the assessee - once the AO held that 90% of the expenditure was liable to be accepted, there was no reason for restricting the claim to 90% alone and disallow 10% - the issue is purely a factual one – Decided against Revenue. Issues:Admissibility of Tax Case (Appeal) regarding the disallowance of 10% of the assessee's claim of other expenses amounting to Rs.84,33,561 for the assessment year 2004-05.Analysis:The judgment delivered by the High Court of Madras pertained to the admissibility of a Tax Case (Appeal) concerning the disallowance of 10% of the assessee's claim of other expenses amounting to Rs.84,33,561 for the assessment year 2004-05. The assessee, a banking company, had claimed a deduction of Rs.8,43,35,691 as petty cash expenditure for various items like data entry charges, ticket collection charges, branch cleaning charges, etc., which were considered insignificant per branch/office due to the large network of branches and offices. The Assessing Officer disallowed 10% of the claimed expenditure, amounting to Rs.84,33,569, on the basis that it could be of personal nature not exclusively necessary for business. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld this disallowance as the assessee failed to produce vouchers or proper accounts for the expenditure. However, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal reversed this decision, stating that there was no material to reject the claim and that if 90% of the expenditure was accepted, there was no justification for disallowing the remaining 10%.The High Court, in its judgment, refused to admit the Tax Case (Appeal) as it deemed the issue to be purely factual. It highlighted that the Revenue did not dispute the number of branches and offices of the assessee, and the claimed expenditure was related to petty cash expenses. Since the Revenue had accepted 90% of the claim, the court found no valid reason to disallow the remaining 10% based on the possibility of personal expenditure. The court rejected the appeal at the admission stage, emphasizing that the justification for the Revenue's contention was lacking in the factual context presented.In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the Tax Case (Appeal) and ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that no costs were to be incurred. The judgment emphasized the importance of factual considerations in such cases and the need for proper justification to support any disallowances made by the Revenue.