TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 1217
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 7,83,150/- made by the AO on account of disallowance of legal and professional charges. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 6,43,236/- made by the AO on account of disallowance of entertainment expenses; 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 23,42,772/- made by the AO on account of disallowance out of travelling expenses." 2. Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy at hand are : During the scrutiny proceedings, Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee company has claimed legal and professional charges to the tune of Rs. 15,12,000/- paid to M/s. Luthra & Lut....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e case. GROUND NO.1 5. Ld. DR for the Revenue challenging the impugned deletion of Rs. 7,83,150/- contended that these expenses cannot be treated as business expenses. So far as amount of Rs. 2,37,150/- paid as legal and professional fee to M/s. Luthura & Luthra is concerned, undisputedly the assessee has filed its submission dated 17.01.2014 along with bills and the assessee has duly explained before the ld. CIT (A) that these legal expenses were incurred to settle a police complaint filed against the Director, Shri Sandeep Murthy by some of its investors against the Director and the company in their official capacity. It is also brought on record by the assessee company that the allegations in the complaints were of criminal breach of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....laimed by the assessee company on account of entertainment charges for want of link of such activities to the business of the assessee company and on the ground that the invoice of the hotel was not legible. Ld. CIT (A) deleted the addition on the ground that the assessee company has produced copy of invitation card and communication through email to various dignitaries including known industrialists to attend the annual day celebration. The assessee company produced two invoices, namely, invoice dated 21.12.2010 whereupon guest name is not legible and another invoice dated 24.11.2010 whereupon Function at Dome has been written before the AO. First of all, ld. CIT (A) has not given the date of Annual Day allegedly celebrated by the assessee....