2021 (7) TMI 308

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....urt on the following substantial questions of law: "(1) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the disallowance of credit card expenses of Rs. 6,50,921/- incurred wholly and exclusively in earning the income and consequently passed a perverse order on the facts and circumstances of the case. (2) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the disallowance of Business Development Expenses of Rs. 7,61,200/- incurred wholly and exclusively in earning the income and consequently passed a perverse order on the facts and circumstances of the case. (3) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the disallowance of foreign travel expenses of Rs. 37,18,705/- incurred wholly and exclus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 6,50,921/-.   (b) Disallowance of business development expenses - Rs. 7,61,200/-. (c) Disallowance of 50% of foreign travel expenses - Rs. 37.18,705/-. (d) Disallowance under Section 40(a)(iia) of the Act- Rs. 96,247/-. 3. The assessee thereupon filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) who by an order dated 29.08.2016 dismissed the appeal. The assessee thereupon filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the tribunal' for short). The tribunal by an order dated 24.07.2017 remitted the issues with regard to disallowance under Section 40(a)(iia) of the Act remitted the matter to the Assessing Officer, however, with regard to remaining ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... MANDAL HAIRHAR MANDAL VS. STATE OF BIHAR', AIR 1957 SC 810, 'PCIT VS. R.G.BUILDWELL ENGINEERS LTD.', (2018) 99 TAXMANN.COM 284 (SC)', 'S.A.BUILDERS LTD. VS. CIT', (2007) 288 ITR 1 (SC) and decisions of this court in M/S DELUXE ROADLINES PVT. LTD. VS. DCIT', ITA NO.213/2014 DATED 14.10.2014 and 'M/S KODAGU DISTRICT CO-OPEARTIVE BANK LTD. VS. ACIT', ITA NO.318 OF 2016 DATED 19.01.2021. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue submitted that auditor could not certify the expenses incurred by the assessee for the purposes of business and burden is on the assessee to prove the fact that the assessee had incurred expenditure for business under Section 37(1) of the Act. It is further submitted t....