2021 (5) TMI 842

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppearing for the respondent - Revenue. 2. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) is directed against the order dated 26.4.2019 made in ITA.No.115/Chny/2019 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the assessment year 2012-13. 3. The Revenue has filed this appeal by raising the following substantial questions of law : "1. Whether the adhoc/arbitrary disallowance of expenses charged in the audited financial statements of the appellant is permissible within the scope of law relating to the computation of taxable total income under the Act ? 2. Whether the audited financial statements of the p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Rs. 50.59 lakhs. On the first two issues, the Tribunal remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh consideration. On the third issue, the Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer granted 50% relief and held that the assessee had not submitted the detailed statement of expenditure with supporting material before the Tribunal. Therefore, the Tribunal rejected the argument of the assessee. 5. Before us, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant - assessee would submit that the Tribunal, having accepted that the assessee furnished details during the course of hearing on 16.4.2019 in the form of a paper book comprising of 62 pages, ought not to have stated that no details were produced before the Tribunal. 6. Mr.M.Swam....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ad they produced relevant documents to justify the expenditure claimed by them, which, according to them, were towards vessel handling charges, traveling and conveyance allowances, labour charges, secretarial expenses, postage and courier, then, in all probabilities, the assessee might have got relief before the Tribunal. 8. The second aspect is that before the First Appellate Authority, the assessee did not effectively contest the matter though they were represented by an authorized representative, who appeared to have given an explanation, which, in all probabilities, did not appeal to the First Appellate Authority and he had stated that the authorized representative had no explanation as to why additions made were incorrect or excessi....