AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 984
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(1) of the Income Tax Act for AY 2012-3 in so far as it is against the Appellant is opposed to law, weight of evidence, natural justice, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case. 2. The appellant denies itself liable to be over the returned income of Rs. 2,27,76,012/- on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The learned CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 21,83,116/- being the expenditure incurred towards Annual general meeting, by holding that the appellant has not furnished any details, when the genuineness of the expenditure was not in dispute, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. The learned CIT(A) was not justified in appreciating that the expen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ay interest under section 234B and 234C of the Act, in view of the fact that there is no liability to additional tax as determined by the assessing officer. Without prejudice, the rate, period and on what quantum the interest has been levied are not in accordance with the law and are not discernible from the order and hence deserves to be cancelled on the facts and circumstance the case. 10. The appellant craves leave of this Hon'ble Tribunal, to add, alter, delete, amend or substitute any or all of the above grounds of appeal as may be necessary at the time of hearing. 11. For these and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing of appeal, the appellant prays that the appeal may be allowed for the advancem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the remand proceedings by ITAT while giving order effect to an order passed in assessment year 2008-09. 5. We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides in light of records placed before us. 5.1 For year under consideration, assessee claimed expenses towards annual general meeting which was disallowed by the Ld.AO. Coordinate bench of this Tribunal in assessee's own case (supra) remanded the issue to Ld.AO for fresh consideration. In the remand proceedings, Ld.AO disallowed the claim to the extent that were not supported by any bills and vouchers. 5.2 The Ld.AR submits that similar expenditure was incurred by assessee for year under consideration by holding that these are not incurred wholly and exclusively for purpose....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....CIT(A) dismissed the ground by stating that it was not pressed. 7. We have perused submissions advanced by both sides in light of records placed before us. 7.1 Before us the assessee had submitted that though the nomenclatures used is provision for non-performing asset but actually with the provision has been created for bad and doubtful debts. The deduction is in excess of the provision for bad and doubtful debts which the Ld.AO disallows. Ld.AR placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in case of CIT vs Davangere District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. reported in (2021) 123 Taxmann.com 37 in support of his contention. 7.2 We note that Hon'ble Court in the above decision has observed as under: 7. We....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lar asset is shown as non performing asset then the assumption that it is not yielding any revenue. When an asset is not yielding any revenue, the question of showing that revenue and paying tax would not arise. The contentions, which are sought to be raised by learned counsel for the revenue do not arise for consideration in the context of substantial question of law, which has been framed by this court. The concurrent findings have been recorded by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as tribunal in this regard, which cannot be termed as perverse." In view of preceding analysis, the second substantial question of law is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. In the result, we do not find any merit....