TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (11) TMI 1060
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....w and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 36,200/- made by the Assessing Officer out of conveyance expenses. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 50,611/- made by the Assessing Officer out of travelling expenses. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 15,250/- made by the Assessing Officer out of miscellaneous expenses. 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in, law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 19,100/- made by the Assessing Office 'out of telephone and telex expenses. 7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 17,000/- made by the Assessing Officer out of Vehicle running and maintenance expenses. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 20,000/- made by the Assessing Officer out of vehicle depreciation expenses. 9. On the facts and in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s 9 to 15. For the sake of convenience, we are reproducing the relevant findings of the Ld. CIT(A) as under:- "7. I have considered the facts of the appellant, material placed on record and, order of assessment. It is evident from the assessment order that the AO has made the. impugned disallowances which is not based on any incriminating document/ material found during the course of search. On this issue the Kolkata Bench of ITAT has held the following in the case of LMJ International Ltd. vs. DCIT .119 TTJ 214, which is as under:- "Where nothing incriminating is found in the course of search relating to any assessment years, the assessments for such years cannot be disturbed; items of regular assessment cannot be added back in the proceeding under s. l53C when no indiscriminating documents were found in respect of the disallowed amounts in the search proceedings." Also, Visakhapatnarn Bench in the case of KGR Exports vs. JCIT in ITA No. 494IV /2007 held as under:- "Since section 153A overrides provisions of section 147 of and 148 can it be the intention of the legislature to give enormous powers on the Assessing Officer for opening a completed assessment time and agai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....#39;other person' but the material found indicates disclosed income. Suppose, loan confirmations relating to loans duly disclosed in the return of income of A are found at the time of search in the premises of B, Should the assessments of A be reopened for all the six preceding years merely because search action has been initiated against B? In selecting out of different interpretations, the Courts shall adopt that which is just, reasonable and sensible rather than that which is none of those things. One may also refer to CBDT Circular No. 7 of 2003, dt. 15th Sept., 2003. A reading of the circular clearly indicates that the appeal, revision etc. arising out of earlier assessments shall not abate. In other words, there is no merger of the earlier assessments with the assessments done under the new scheme, i.e., s. 153A or 153C." Further, following the decision of Delhi Bench of Tribunal in the case of Anil Kumar Bhatia vs. ACIT, it has been held by Murnbai Bench in the case of Anil P. Khemani as under: "13. A perusal of the assessment orders in all these cases, clearly demonstrate that the sole addition in question is on account of low withdrawals. This had not been made, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r about such a return. (iii) The power given by the Proviso to "assess" income for six assessment years has to be confined to the undisclosed income unearthed during search and cannot include items which are disclosed in the original assessment proceedings. (iv) On facts, s the returns had been processed u/s 143(I), the assessments were not "pending" and as no material was found during the search, the additions could not be sustained. " Respectfully following the same, we delete all the additions made and allow the appeals of the assessee." Finally, Mumbai Bench in the case of Guruprerna Enterprises vs. Asstt. CIT in ITA No. 255, 256 and 257/Mum/20 I 0 for Assessment Years 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06 dated 07.01.20 11 after noticing the case of M/s Viraj Forgins Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA No. 1945/M/200S and, M/s Viraj Impoexpo Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA No. 1949/M/200S held as follows: "4.2 We have perused the records and considered the rival contentions carefully. The legal dispute raised in this ground is whether issues considered and decided in the regular assessment can be reconsidered in an assessment proceedings initiated under section 153A. In ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iated by the AO which are pending on the date of initiation of search, the same shall abate and AO cannot proceed with such pending assessment. Thus as per the decision of the Tribunal, only the assessment/reassessment .proceedings pending before AO shall abate. The issue whether the assessment already completed by AO and pending in appeal or revision will also abate was not before the Tribunal." In view of above decisions of the coordinate Bench, we have to necessarily hold that only the assessments pending before the AO for completion shall abate and that under section 153A the issues decided in the assessment cannot be reconsidered and readjudicate, unless there is some fresh material found during the course of search in relation to such points. As in this case, the undisputed fact is that, there is no incriminating material found or seized in the search, the ground of the assessee has to be accepted by respectfully following the order of the Coordinate Bench. Though on the legal issue, we have decided in favour of the assessee, as the case was heard at length on merits we adjudicate the same." 7.1 From the aforesaid decision, it is evident that, it has been consiste....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ook and has submitted that in the absence of any basis given by the AO for making the disallowances, the same is not tenable. Reliance in this regard has been placed on the decision in case of State of Orissa vs. Maharaja Shri BP Singh Deo 76 ITR 690 (SC); Goodyear India Ltd. vs. ITO 73 ITD 189 (Del.); Hughes Escorts Communications Ltd. vs. JCIT 106 TTJ 1065 (Del.) among other cases. The appellant has placed a comparative chart to establish that expenditure has been incurred for the purpose of business of the appellant company in each of the year under consideration and no disallowance has been made in the past that is prior to framing of the impugned assessments for AY 2002-03 to 2008-09. Further it is settled law that a company does not have any personal expenditure as held in the cases of DCIT vs. Haryana Oxygen ltd., 76 ITD 32 (Del); Sayaji Iron and Engg. Co. vs. CIT 253 ITR 749 (Guj.); Dinesh Mills Ltd. vs. CIT 173 478 (Guj.) I have carefully gone through the submissions and the copy of the ledger account and comparative chart filed by the appellant who has contested the disallowance made as also the case laws relied upon by the appellant. It is noted that no specific insta....