TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (8) TMI 430
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... M/s Modi Rubber Ltd. whereas the assessee failed to prove that the claim amount of expenditure was made for the purpose of business and was commercially expedient? 2.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, ld. ITAT was legally justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 12, 00, 000/- being rent paid to M/s Silver Tone India Ltd. for hiring certain premises; ignoring that premises was being used as a guest house in contravention of provision of Section 37 (4) read with Section 37 (5) of IT Act? 3.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, ld. ITAT is legally justified in confirming the order of CIT (A) allowing assessee's claim of lease rentals/charges of Rs. 3, 30, 68, 110/- even though ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s were given during the year and submitted that these are actual business discounts and are thus fully allowable. The AO found that in the assessment year 1993-94 and 1994-95 the discount to the extent of 2% of the sale was for business purposes and the balance was gratuitous in nature. The CIT (A) had restored the file to AO. In the fresh assessment the AO again held that the discount to the extent of 2% was for business purpose and the balance was for the non-business purposes. 4. The AO found that the details of the discount allowed by 13 regions of the company were given in the reply dated 9.2.99, giving the details of the customers, dates, C/N supp. bill no. and amount. The postal address of the customers was not furnished so as to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 7. Shri R.K. Upadhyay, appearing for the revenue submits that the CIT (A) had restored the matter to the file of AO for verification of the facts and examining the claim of discount on actual basis. The ITAT erred in law in interfering with the remand order on the issue on the ground that no rough and short method of estimate should be applied to these facts. The Tribunal, however, misread the findings of AO/CIT (A) in finding that they have not found any fault on actual allowance of discount and in the absence of any defect in the actual amount claimed and the defect found in the invoices, the total amount should be allowed. 8. We find substance in the contention of Shri R.K. Upadhyay appearing for the revenue, that the Tribunal did no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owed in the assessment of previous years. The assessee company had claimed substantial increase in the disallowance namely of Rs. 63, 59, 106/-, corresponding to 0.8% which was required to be verified. 11. Shri R.R. Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-assessee submits that since the increase was only in fraction of 0.8% as compared to the previous years, the satisfaction of the Tribunal should not be doubted and that small claims of such nature should be treated to be findings of fact, which do not require interference of the High Court. 12. We are of the opinion that in order to claim discounts, which had increased for assessment year in question from 2% to 2.8% and which turned down to Rs. 63, 59, 106/-, the insist....