TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (11) TMI 842
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... account which is without any logic and basis. 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....und No.1 of the assessee and in ground No.1 of the Revenue, the brief facts are that 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ho forwarded the same to the AO for his comments. The AO observed that no such details 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....disallowance at Rs.50,000/-. 10. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the facts 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 bil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....but the same were not admitted as additional evidence. The defects pointed out by the AO were few as compared to the total expenditure incurred by the assessee at Palwal Unit. We concur with the views of the Ld. CIT(A) that such large disallowance should not be made and accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly restricted the disallowance at Rs.20,000/- and we find no infirmity in his order. Thus, ground No.5 of both the assessee and that of the Revenue are dismissed. 15. As regards ground No.6 of the assessee in respect of bills of telephone, water, electricity and advertisement, the AO had made an addition of Rs.10,038/- on the basis of tax audit report pointing out certain bills of last year were debited in the books of account of the c....