2000 (4) TMI 170 - AT - Income Tax

ITAT decision: Appeal partly allowed, firm status recognized, adjustments in accounts, expenses scrutinized

The ITAT allowed the appeal in part, directing the AO to consider the appellant as a registered firm for the year under consideration. The ITAT also ... Continuation Issues:1. Additional ground raised regarding the status of the appellant firm.2. Confirmation of additions in diesel account and petrol expenses.3. Confirmation of addition in oil account.4. Disallowance of tent and telephone expenses.Issue 1: The appellant raised an additional ground challenging the refusal to grant renewal of registration and treating the firm as AOP. The appellant argued that the status question can be raised in a composite appeal disputing various additions. The appellant relied on judgments from Rajasthan and Gujarat High Courts to support their position. The ITAT noted that the firm had been granted registration under s. 186(1)/250 for the base year 1988-89, and all conditions for continuation of registration under s. 184(7) were met. The ITAT directed the AO to consider the appellant as a registered firm for the year under consideration.Issue 2: Grounds 2 and 3 involved the confirmation of additions in diesel and petrol accounts. The ITAT found no justification for sustaining the additions as the shortage claimed was less than 1%, which was considered normal by the oil company. The books of account were audited, and no trading additions were made in past years. Therefore, the ITAT directed the AO to delete the additions in both accounts.Issue 3: The next ground related to the confirmation of an addition in the oil account. The appellant argued that it was impractical to issue bills for small oil sales and provided details of the sale process. The ITAT agreed with the appellant, stating that the disallowance was an attempt to manipulate trading results and directed the AO to delete the addition.Issue 4: The final grounds involved the disallowance of tent and telephone expenses. The ITAT found no justification for sustaining the disallowance of tent expenses, as the appellant provided verifiable bills. However, the disallowance of telephone expenses was confirmed as no arguments were presented by the appellant. Therefore, the ITAT partly allowed the appeal, directing the AO to delete certain additions while confirming others.