2012 (11) TMI 842

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2. That confirming addition of Rs.20,000/- out of telephone expenses is wrong and illegal. 3. That addition of Rs.50,000/- out of vehicle running & maintenance expenses is wrong and without any test. 4. That addition of Rs.10,000/- out of traveling expenses is wrong and without any justification. 5. That sustaining of addition of Rs.25,000/- on account of bills and voucher is incorrect. 6. That confirming the addition of Rs.10,038/- on account of bills for financial year 2001-02 received in financial year 2002-03 in respect of telephone, water, electricity and advertisement are wrong and without any justification. 7. That order is against law and facts of the case. 8. That proper opportunity should have been allowed. 9. Any other gr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat the assesse had claimed an expenditure in the stipend account. The assesse could not produce any evidence in support of payments recorded under this head. The AO observed that since the assessee had filed no details as to whom the said stipend was paid whether it is incidental to the business activities of the assessee and when the said amount was paid, the AO disallowed the whole amount of Rs.5,00,523/-. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee had produced the books of account, but no details of the persons to whom the money had been paid for the purpose of payment was produced by the assessee. As regards the reliance in assesse's own case for the assessment year 2001-02 decided by the Tribunal is different to the facts of the pr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s were filed before the AO during the assessment proceedings. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, it is not a case where no details with regard to the payment of stipend is there with the assessee but the same were not filed by the assessee during the assessment proceedings, which were filed before the ld. CIT(A) but were appreciated for the reasons mentioned in his order. Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly allowed 50% of the claim made by the assessee and has rightly disallowed the balance of the claim. We find no infirmity in his order. Thus, ground No.1 of the assessee and ground No.1 of the Revenue are dismissed. 7. As regards ground No.2 of the asse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the case. The contention of the assessee that vehicles were not allowed to be used by the partners for personal purposes has rightly not been accepted by the Ld. CIT(A). In the over all circumstances and facts of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly restricted the disallowance at RS.50,000/-. We find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A). Thus, ground No.3 of the assessee and ground No.3 of the Revenue are dismissed. 11. As regards ground No.4 of the assessee and ground No.4 of the Revenue, the AO made a disallowance of Rs.3 lacs out of travelling expenses since the bills were not properly maintained and the assessee did not produce bills even on the next date of hearing. The Ld. CIT(A) following the decision of his predecessor i....