2016 (3) TMI 814

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... learned Commissioner of Income Tax(A) has not been pleased to appreciate the evidence and other material on record propertly. 3. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 6 lacs made by the Assessing Officer disallowing the expenses paid to Mr. U.A. Rana (Resident Partner) as reimbursement of Rs. 4,00,000/- per annum for running and maintaining the motor car and Rs. 1,20,000/- per annum given for maintenance of consultation room at his residence and Rs. 80,000/- per annum as entertainment expenses, for entertainment of clients at the consultation room etc., according to the restrictions as per Clause 10.1 of partnership deed dated 1st July 2008. Hence, the addition made is illegal, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tation room maintained at the residence of the resident partners for working late hours and on Sunday and holidays and the amount was restricted to Rs. 80,000/- as per clause 10.1 of the partnership deed. The assessee also claimed to produce vouchers for the said expenses, however, the ld. Assessing Officer noticed that the vouchers were in respect of monthly reimbursement of the expenses and no actual bills/invoices were attached with those vouchers. According to the ld. Assessing Officer, those payments were made to the resident partner, Mr. U.A. Rana, however, there was no actual expenditure made by the assessee firm. He further observed that the payments were made only to one resident partner and only on salary and interest paid to the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e, the car owned by the partner was utilized by the firm. He further submitted that the said expenses have been allowed in the earlier years and, therefore, though the res judicata is not applicable to income-tax proceedings , but in view of the consistency principle, the expenses should have been allowed. 5. On the other hand, learned Sr. Departmental Representative relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record, including the orders of the lower authorities and the paper book filed by the assessee. The assessee has claimed expenses of Rs. 4,00,000/- for the amount reimbursed to the resident partner Sh. U.A. Rana for the use and maintenance of the motor car. It....