TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (2) TMI 879
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....- on account of building repair, for which no supporting vouchers were produced by the assessee. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the CIT(A) has erred in the law and facts in deleting the addition of Rs.2,00,000/- on account of refreshment outside for which no supporting vouchers were produced by the assessee. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the CIT(A) has erred in the law and facts in deleting the addition of Rs.1,00,000/- on account of business p0resent expenses, for which complete supporting vouchers were not produced by the assessee. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the CIT(A) has erred in the law and facts in deleting the addition of Rs.38688/- o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....000/- on account of foreign tour expenses, for which complete supporting vouchers were not produced by the assessee. 11. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the CIT(A) has erred in the law and facts in deleting the addition of Rs.2,00,000/- on account of disallowance of other repairs, for which complete supporting vouchers were not produced by the assessee. 12. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the CIT(A) has erred in the law and facts in deleting the addition of Rs.1,00,000/- on account of workers welfare expenses, for which complete supporting vouchers were not produced by the assessee. 13. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the CIT(A) has erred in the law and fact....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd in particular our attention was drawn to para No.7 of this Tribunal order wherein it is noted by the Tribunal that the Assessing Officer made the disallowance on the ground that the expenses were not properly vouched. It was submitted that it goes to show that this aspect was also considered by the Tribunal in earlier years and hence the issues are squarely covered in favour of the assessee. 5. Regarding ground No.13 of the revenue regarding deletion of addition made by the Ld CIT(A) on account of late deposit of employee's contribution to ESI and EPF. It was submitted that this issue is also covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of P.M. Electronics and also in the ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s regarding deletion of addition of Rs.1.5 lakhs made by the Assessing Officer on account of building repairs expenses without any cogent reason. This goes to show thatin that year, it was not the grievance of the revenue before the Tribunal that vouchers were not produced by the assessee before the Assessing Officer. It is also observed by the Tribunal that the Assessing Officer has made the disallowance on the ground that the expenses were not properly vouched. This observation of the Tribunal also does not suggest that the vouchers were not produced by the assessee before the Assessing Officer in that year. The objection of the Assessing Officer was not that vouchers were not produced before him hbut the objection of the Assessing Office....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....even a single item of expenditure which has not been vouched and supported by relevant bills and vouchers. This observation of the Ld CIT(A) is not proper because when the Assessing Officer says in the assessment order that the assessee did not prduce any supporting bills and vouchers etc., it is not possible for the Assessing Officer to pin-point any specific item of expenses which is not supported by the relevant bills and vouchers. Since the facts in the present year are different, we feel that earlier Tribunal orders cannot be followed besides the issue is before us because in the present year, Ld DR of the revenue was able to satisfy us that in the present year, bills and vouchers were not produced by the assessee before the Assessing ....