TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (2) TMI 153
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....prefer an appeal under section 253 of the Act against the order dated January 30, 2018, passed by the CIT(A) under Section 250 of the Act on the following grounds 1. General That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred as AO) and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law in as much as the Hon'ble CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the facts and the law laid down in his regard. 2. Disallowance of business expenditure a. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has grossly erred in upholding the disallowance of loss incurred to the extent of Rs.41,17,498 made by the Ld. AO, on account of illegal siphoning of funds b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... incurred by withholding the dues of Mr. V Balasubramanian without even requiring the Appellant to submit details of amount withheld and appearing in the signed financial statements of the Appellant. 3. That without prejudice, the directions given by CIT(A) for taking necessary remedial action in respect of Assessment Year 2012-13 and 2013-14 are illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction and against the principle of natural justice. 4.That without prejudice, CIT(A) has no jurisdiction to issue directions in respect of Assessment Year 2012-13 and 2013 without giving an notice/opportunity to the assessee. Hence, the said directions are illegal, bad in law, without jurisdiction and against the principle of natural justice. 3. Brief ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ss operation was existing. Also, the said loss pertains to the expenditure already claimed in the past in its books of account. It is not the case of the appellant that the said loss arising out of embezzlement is from its accumulated profit which has already been subjected to tax. In nutshell the loss so claimed is basically expenses booked in the past and current previous year. 5.5 One of the important facts ascertained from the submission of the appellant is that after detection of the alleged embezzlement, the appellant company by passing a special resolution has, removed the said director (Finance) Mr. V. Balasubramaniam from the company and withheld his all dues as recovery measure. It is also noted that the alleged loss of Rs. 134....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....AO is directed to take necessary remedial action in past cases (AY 2012-13 and 2013-14) after affording opportunity to the appellant. The addition of Rs.4117498 out of total addition of Rs.13485555/- is sustained. Accordingly, the appellant gets part relief on this ground of appeal." 5. Against this order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) is totally wrong when he says that the details were filed. He said that the details were dully submitted and the embezzlement by the concerned director was in inflation of expenditure account in different years and only Rs.4117498/- pertains to current Assessment year. We note....