AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (3) TMI 693
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../Ahd/2010 "1. The order passed by the CIT(A) is bad in law, contrary to legal pronouncement and same be quashed." 3. This ground of appeal of the assessee is general in nature and requires no adjudication. 4. The ground no.2 of the assessee's appeal is as under: "2. The CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the AO for the reopening to be justified. Your appellant submits that no reasons for reopening were provided and reopening is not justified merely on the basis of suspicion. Hence, your appellant submits that the CIT(A) has erred both in law and in facts in justifying the reopening. Your appellant therefore submits that reopening is bad in law and in turn the order passed being illegal be quashed." 5. The learne....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ee's appeal is as under: "5. The CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs.85,722/- being 20% of the printing and stationery expenses of Rs.4,28,613/-. Your appellant submits that the expenses are genuine and incurred for the purpose of business and ad hoc disallowance without any findings is unjustified and called for. The AO be directed to allow the claim in full." 12. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that no mistake in the details of printing and stationery expenses was found by the AO, and therefore, the ad hoc disallowance made at the rate of 20% at Rs.85,722/- was not justified. The learned DR submitted that the assessee could not produce any documentary evidence in support of the expenses incurred ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... year and hence be allowed as claimed." 17. This ground of the assessee is not pressed by the learned counsel for the assessee, and accordingly, the ground no.7 is dismissed. 18. The ground no.8 of the assessee is as under: "The CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs.33,996/- out of conveyance expenses. Your appellant submits that the expenses are genuine and incurred for the purpose of business and ad hoc disallowance without any findings is unjustified and uncalled for. The AO be directed to allow the claim in full." 19. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that conveyance expenses incurred only for business purpose, and therefore, no disallowance should have been made. The learned DR submitted that ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and the fact that the difference in the accounts does not pertain to this year, we hold that no case of disallowance of Rs.21,379/- for the relevant assessment year could be made out by the Revenue, and accordingly, the ground no.9 of the assessee is allowed. ITA No.82/Ahd/2010 - Asstt.Year 1999-2000 23. The ground no.1 of the assessee's appeal is as under: "1. The order passed by the CIT(A) is bad in law, contrary to legal pronouncement and same be quashed." 24. This ground of appeal of the assessee is general in nature and requires no adjudication. 25. The ground no.2 of the assessee's appeal is as under: "2. The CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the AO for the reopening to be justified. Your appellant su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ground no.4 of the assessee is as under: "4. The CIT(A) has erred in confirming the depreciation on dies at 25% as against the claim at 40%. Your appellant submits that the same be directed to be allowed as claimed." 31. The learned counsel for the assessee has not pressed this ground of the appeal of the assessee, which is accordingly dismissed. 32. The ground no.5 of the assessee's appeal is as under: "5.The CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs.13,791 and Rs.30,066 being 10% of the sales promotion expenses and conveyance expenses. Your appellant submits that the disallowance is without verifying the full facts of the case and hence, be deleted." 33. We have heard the parties. We find that conveyance ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... were filed before the AO and no specific basis for such disallowance was given by the Revenue. Considering volume of the business of the assessee, and that the reasoning of the AO regarding the sales made through these parties for whom these expenditure were incurred being untenable, and that the ad hoc disallowance was made, we hold that the disallowance made is not justified and the ground no.2 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 38. The ground no.3 of the assessee's is as under: "3. The CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs.3,05,637/- being provision for gratuity. Your appellant submits that the AO be directed to allow the same on payment basis. It be held so now." 39. The learned counsel for the asses....