TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 522
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....C of the Act in respect of sale of land on the ground that there is difference between the stamp duly valuation and the sale consideration shown in the agreement without appreciating the explanation given by the appellant and hence, the addition made u/s.50C of the Act of Rs. Rs.21, 73,350/- is unjustified and liable to be deleted. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that as per the provisions of section 50C of the Act, the AO was duty bound to call for the report from the DVO before making the addition of the differential amount and hence, the addition made under section 50C of the Act of Rs.21,73,350/- is without any justification and liable to be deleted. B. Disallowance of compensation paid on Taparies -Rs.42,22,000/- 3. The Ld. C1T(A) has erred in upholding the disallowance made by AO in respect of compensation paid Rs.42,22,000/- to tapries (encroachers) on the ground that the appellant was not required to pay such amount to unauthorized occupiers of land and cannot be allowed as revenue expenditure without considering the fact that hon'ble 1TAT, Jaipur bench has already allowed such compensation paid on tapries in the case of Appellant itself for the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lding the disallowance made by AO to the extent of Rs. 3,00,000/- out of the Rs.l 1,92,222/- in respect of foreign travel expenses incurred at Mumbai office on the ground that that element of personal uses cannot be totally ruled out without appreciating that the foreign travel was undertaken to meet existing customers and explore the market potential of various types of natural stone and also to contact such suppliers so that the stones could be imported and hence, the expenses is incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business of the appellant company and thus, the disallowance of Foreign Traveling Exp. amounting to Rs, 3,00,000/- due to personal use is without any justification and liable to be deleted. F. Addition of undisclosed receipts as per Form 26AS -Rs.54,587/- 11. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the addition made by AO towards undisclosed receipts of the appellant as per Form 26AS without appreciating that no addition could be made merely on the basis of Form 26AS and that there is no such undisclosed receipts in the hands of the appellant and hence, the addition made on the basis of form 26AS is without any justification and liable to be ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....before the Tribunal by way of filing present appeals. 5. We have heard the Ld. Authorised Representatives of the parties to the appeal, perused the orders passed by the Ld. Lower Revenue Authorities and documents available on record in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case and law applicable thereto. Ground No.1 & 2 of ITA No. 2400 & 2401/M/2021 for A.Y. 2011-12 & A.Y. 2012-13 respectively 6. AO noticed from the profit & loss account that assessee has shown profit on sale of assets under the head "other income" amounting to Rs.40,07,800/- & Rs.24,00,023/- for A.Y. 2011-12 & 2012-13 respectively. AO noticed from the details filed by the assessee that there is a difference between the sale value shown in the registered documents vis-à-vis stamp duty value. On failure of the assessee to furnish any supporting evidence that it has only sold land and not land with constructed premises AO made addition of Rs.21,73,350/- & Rs.1,42,400 for A.Y. 2011-12 & 2012-13 being the difference in the sale consideration under section 50C of the Act respectively. 7. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the findings returned by AO by emphasizing the fact that as per sub registrar and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r, the Ld. A.R. for the assessee challenging the impugned findings returned by Ld. CIT(A) contended that this issue is already being decided in favour of the assessee since 2008-09 and even in subsequent years i.e. A.Y. 2017-18 and 2018-19 this issue has been settled in favour of the assessee by the Revenue, vide order dated 14.12.2019 & 26.02.2021 available at page 32 to 43 of the paper book for A.Y. 2011-12, by way of framing assessment under section 143(3) of the Act and relied upon the order passed by the Tribunal in assessee's own case in ITA No.497/JP/2012 order dated 08.01.2016 for A.Y. 2008-09. 12. Ld. D.R. for the Revenue relied upon the orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A). 13. We have perused the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case on the identical issue which is decided in favour of the assessee by returning following findings: "3.1 Assessee is engaged in the business of mining of Kota stone since 1945, having a huge mining area of 9.991 Sq.Km. allotted by The Mines & Geology Department, Government of Rajasthan. The mining leases comprise of own purchase land, government land, Charagah land, agriculture land, wells, alo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4. [(1990) 187 ITR 39 (SC)] - Bikaner Gypsums ltd. v/s. CIT - Held - Where the assessee has an existing right to carry on the business, any expenditure made by it during the course of business for the purpose of removing any restriction / obstruction or disability would be on revenue account, provided the expenditure does not acquire any capital asset. - Revenue Expenditure. 5. [(1994) 210 ITR 222 (Cal)] - CIT v/s Auto Distributors Ltd - Payment made to obtain vacant possession of a building was not capital expenditure but was incurred wholly and exclusively in the course of business and allowable as such. 6. [(1978) 114 ITR 434 (Cal)] - CIT v/s Deluxe Film Distributors Ltd. - Held - Amount paid for clearing title in the course of carrying on of business is for commercial expediency and therefore, allowable." 14. When the issue in question has already been decided in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal vide order dated 08.01.2016 in A.Y. 2008-09 and has not been challenged further and even in subsequent years i.e. 2017-18 & 2018-19 it is further allowed by Rrevenue itself by framing assessment under section 143(3) of the Act, there is no ground for the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r criteria or methodogy and the rate of commission is paid at sweet will of the assessee etc. From the above list, it also appears that assessee had paid commission to some ladies namely, Indu Gupta, kamla Bai, Monica Soni, Rekha Jain, Ritu Gupta, Sangeeta Khandelwal, Shweta Khandelwal, Sunita and Taranjeet Kaur etc. It appears that some family members of these ladies have also been paid commission like Aproova Khandelwal, Promod Kumar Soni, Dalveer Singh etc. Therefore firstly it is not clear as to what kind of services were rendered by the above mentioned ladies for which the commission had been paid to them and secondly it is also not clear whether they were capable of rendering such services like whether they were sufficiently qualified had sufficient expertise or experience so that they could have procured sales orders and could have managed payment of accounts by respective buyers. The assessee had failed to give any satisfactory reply to these questions. The assessee only claims that the commission has been paid to various parties on the basis of sales carried out by them and whosoever bought better sale rates, was given higher commission. However no evidence in this regard ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A) restricted the disallowance on adhoc basis to 10% of the total expenses on vehicles and in the subsequent year also the disallowance was retained at adhoc 10% of the total expenses. 20. Ld. D.R. for the Revenue relied upon the orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A). 21. We are of the considered view that when vehicles in question though registered in the name of CMD but are part of its fixed assets and entire payment has been made through books of accounts which have not been disputed by the AO and keeping in view the rule of consistency as in the earlier years and in the subsequent years adhoc disallowance has been made at 10% of the total expenses on vehicles by considering the personal use of vehicles, the AO is directed to disallow 10% of the expenses claimed by the assessee. The impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) on this ground is accordingly modified. Ground No.10 of ITA No.2400/M/2021 for A.Y. 2011-12, Ground No.10 of ITA No.2401/M/2021 for A.Y. 2012-13, Ground No.4 of ITA No.2402/M/2021 for A.Y. 2013-14 & Ground No.4 of ITA No.2399/M/2021 for A.Y. 2014-15 22. The assessee being in business of mining of kota stones which the assessee claimed to have exp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....every year and there is no change in the rate of tax. In these circumstances, we are of the considered view that when interest income has been duly offered to tax in the subsequent years and TDS has also been claimed in the next years there is no reason to disallow the same. Moreover, the assessee has been paying income tax at the same rate. Identical issue has been dealt with by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. M/s. Vishnu Industrial Gases P. Ltd. and has been decided in favour of the assessee. So we order to delete the addition made by the AO on account of undisclosed receipt as per form 26AS for A.Y. 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. So Ground No.11 of ITA No.2400/M/2021 for A.Y. 2011-12, Ground No.11 of ITA No.2401/M/2021 for A.Y. 2012-13, Ground No.5 of ITA No.2402/M/2021 for A.Y. 2013-14 & Ground No.5 of ITA No.2399/M/2021 for A.Y. 2014-15 are decided in favour of the assessee. Ground No.12 of ITA No.2400/M/2021 for A.Y. 2011-12, Ground No.12 of ITA No.2401/M/2021 for A.Y. 2012-13, Ground No.6 of ITA No.2402/M/2021 for A.Y. 2013-14 & Ground No.6 of ITA No.2399/M/2021 for A.Y. 2014-15 26. The assessee claimed raising and mining expenses on esti....