TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (1) TMI 1606
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....9;s contribution to Provident Fund, ESIC and Family Pension which barring a few had been paid only a some days before due date of filing the Income Tax Return". 2. "The Learned CIT(A) has erred on facts and circumstances of the case in deleting the addition ofRs. 63,13,302/- on account of Clinical Support Expenses". 3. "The Learned CJT(A) has erred on facts and circumstances of the case in deleting the addition ofRs. 1,29,40,870/- being disallowance made by the A.O. @20% of Rs. 6,47,04,350/- for the reason that most expenses had been incurred in cash and as the claim remained unsubstantiated, element of professional expenditure was implied". 4. The Appellant prays that the order of the CIT(Appeals) on the above grounds be set aside....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. 6.1 Before we decide the merits of the case, it is necessary to evaluate the orders passed by Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) has dealt with the above grounds raised by the revenue in para no. 7 of its order and the same is reproduced below:- 7. Ground of Appeal No.2 A.O. is directed to allow Rs. 34,47,825/- as delayed employee contribution to Provident Fund and ESIC and Family Pension. It is seen that all the payments barring a few days delay have been paid on or before filing of the return of income and therefore relying on the judgements of the Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Ghatgi Patil Transport Ltd. (368 ITR 749) and Hindusthan Organic Chemical Ltd.(366 ITR 1) the same is allowed. Therefore, Ground of Appeal No.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A). The Ld. CIT(A) has dealt with the above grounds raised by the revenue in para no. 8 of its order and the same is reproduced below:- 8.Ground of Appeal No.3 Disallowance of Rs. 63,13,302/- has been made of clinical support expenses. During the course of hearing attention was invited to the Hon'ble Mumbai IT AT order dt.23.6.2016 passed in appellant's case in relation to appeal against order u/s.263of the I.T. Act for A.Y. 2009-10 and A.Y. 2010-11 in ITA No.2765 and 2702/Mum/2014. It is seen that the Hon'ble ITAT has deleted the disallowance of Rs. 31,36,884/- as directed by CIT. It is seen that no such disallowance was made under this head. Ground of Appeal No.3 is allowed. 8.2 After having gone through the facts of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Ld. CIT(A) has dealt with the above grounds raised by the revenue in para no. 9 of its order and the same is reproduced below:- 9.Ground of Appeal No.4 It is seen that disallowance has been made at 20% on adhoc basis without bringing out anything on record in the assessment order. Perusal of the Tax Audit Report also shows that no expenditure is quantified as cash expenditure. Thus it is held that no disallowance can be made on pure estimation without any basis or documentary proof on mere surmises and presumptions. Thus, Ground of Appeal No.4 is allowed. 10.2 After having gone through the facts of the present case and hearing the parties at length, we find that AO had made additions under this head by specifically holding that a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enses have been incurred for the purposes of business only. 10.3 On the contrary, the Ld D.R submitted that the assessee has failed to furnish the details that were called for by the AO. 10.4 There should not be any doubt that the question of personal element does not arise in case of expenses incurred by the employees of the assessee company. There is merit in the contentions that the assessee, being a pharma company, has to necessarily incur expenses for sales promotion. Hence, we agree with the submission that there should not be any adhoc disallowance out of travelling expenses incurred by sales personnel and other employees. In respect of other expenses, it is submitted that the assessee has furnished the details, but the AO has not ....