2019 (9) TMI 253

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o.1, assessee challenged the Order of Ld. CIT(A) in upholding the addition of Rs. 1,16,353/- on account of travelling expenses. 5. The A.O. noted that assessee has claimed Directors Travelling Expenses of Rs. 6,82,484/-. The assessee explained that Smt. Lalita Nijhawan w/o. Shri Sham Nijhawan was an employee of the company. He could not offer any explanation as to why she was required to accompany with the husband on business trip as an employee of the company. The A.O. accordingly disallowed Rs. 1,16,353/- under the Head "Directors Travelling Expenses". The assessee submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that Smt. Lalita Nijhawan is major shareholder and an employee of the assessee company and wife of the Director Shri Sham Nijhawan. The assess....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business. In the absence of any evidence on record for the purpose of personal visit to Abroad by the wife of the Director of the assessee company, the same cannot be allowed as business expenditure. An employee who is getting small salary of Rs. 4,20,000/- per annum, it is difficult to believe that huge expenses would be spent for her visit Abroad. Assessee made only general explanation that she was associated with travelling business, but, it is not supported by any evidence or material on record. Ground No.1 of the appeal of Assessee is accordingly dismissed. 9. On Ground Nos. 2 and 3, assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 2,89,410/- on account of business promotion expenses. ....