Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Adhoc disallowances on general expenses deleted without specific enquiry or merit examination being impermissible</h1> <h3>M/s Bajaj Auto Centre Versus Income Tax Officer 2 (1), Kanpur.</h3> ITAT Lucknow allowed the assessee's appeal against adhoc disallowances made by AO on general expenses, staff welfare expenses, sales promotion expenses, ... Adhoc disallowance of expenses - addition of general expenses and staff welfare expenses and disallowances on account of sales promotion expenses and freight expenses - expenses which are not verifiable - as argued absence of conducting any specific enquiry before making addition, these disallowances acquires the character and nature of ad-hoc disallowances, which are not permissible within the scope and realm of taxation laws - HELD THAT:- As coming out from assessment order itself, that from time to time assessee has provided answer to the questionnaire issued by the AO and has also produced books of account along with bills and vouchers, which were test checked. When all these documents were there before the Department, asking for further presentation of these documents before the CIT(A) seems to be a meaningless exercise. The power of the ld. CIT(A) being co-terminus with that of the AO has also not gone into the merits of the case regarding disallowances and has summarily disposed of the appeal confirming the additions made by the AO - We take guidance from the decision of J.J. Enterprises [2001 (9) TMI 6 - SUPREME COURT] wherein it has been categorically held that addition to the income of the assessee made on the basis of pure guess work was unsustainable. In the instant case, as we have examined, all the disallowances were made on adhoc basis and on the basis of pure guess work, therefore, relying on various judicial pronouncements on the issue, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and direct deletion of these adhoc disallowances thereby allowing the appeal of the assessee. Issues:Disallowance of expenses on ad-hoc basis by Assessing Officer for A.Y. 2014-15.Analysis:The appeal arose from the order of the ld. CIT(A)-I, Kanpur confirming various additions/disallowances made by the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2014-15. The Assessing Officer disallowed Rs. 83,253 on account of personal use of telephone and mobiles, Rs. 10,000 out of general expenses and staff welfare expenses, and another Rs. 10,000 out of sales promotion and freight expenses on an ad-hoc basis. The assessee contended that these disallowances were made without specific evidence or proper inquiry, rendering them ad-hoc and impermissible under tax laws. The ld. CIT(A) upheld the additions as the assessee failed to produce books of account and vouchers for re-verification.During the proceedings, the assessee argued that the disallowances were arbitrary and lacked a factual basis, citing various judicial decisions to support their position. The Department, however, relied on the lower authorities' orders. Upon review, the ITAT found that the Assessing Officer had made the disallowances on an ad-hoc basis without conducting a specific inquiry or providing evidence. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the additions solely due to the non-production of documents, overlooking the material already submitted during the assessment. The ITAT referenced the decision in J.J. Enterprises vs. CIT, emphasizing that additions based on guesswork are unsustainable. It also cited other ITAT decisions where ad-hoc disallowances were deleted, emphasizing the need for a factual basis for such actions.Consequently, the ITAT set aside the ld. CIT(A)'s order and directed the deletion of the ad-hoc disallowances, thereby allowing the assessee's appeal. The judgment highlighted the importance of factual basis and proper inquiry in making disallowances, emphasizing that arbitrary additions without substantiation are not permissible under tax laws.This detailed analysis of the judgment provides insights into the issues raised, arguments presented, legal principles applied, and the final decision rendered by the ITAT Lucknow.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found