TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (4) TMI 887
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t year 2020-21. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal: "1. Because the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law and against the facts of the case. 2. Because, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in disallowing the claim of Rs. 4,01,002/-which was the entitled salary payable to partners u/s 40(b) of the Act and was duly assessed and allowed in all the preceding years. 3. Because, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in considering the settled position of law that merely quantification of the limit of remuneration to the partners of the firm is sufficient to be eligible for deduction u/s 40(b) of the Act. 4. Because, under the facts and circumstances of the instant case the Appellant has duly quantified the upper lim....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ithout any success. 4. The assessee being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(Appeals) has carried the matter in appeal before me. 5. I have heard the ld. authorized representatives of both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record. 6. Shorn of unnecessary details, controversy involved in the present appeal leading to the impugned disallowance u/s.40(b) of the Act of the assessee's claim for deduction of remuneration paid to partners at Rs.4,01,002/- lies in a narrow compass, i.e., as to whether or not the A.O was right in law and facts of the case in triggering the provisions of Section 40(b)(ii) of the Act for disallowing assessee's claim for duction of remuneration to working partner....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ry, bonus, commission or remuneration which though is debited by the assessee in its profit & loss account but is inadmissible u/ss.40(b)/40(ba) of the Act a/w. computation thereof. I am of the considered view that now when Clause 21(c), inter alia, envisages mentioning of the amount of remuneration that is inadmissible u/s.40(b) of the Act, therefore, no adverse inferences could have been drawn for the reason that the assessee firm had failed to make mention of the amount admissible under the said statutory provision. Although the details referred to in Clause 21(c) does make a reference of both the amounts admissible and inadmissible, but a careful perusal of the same reveals that the said details are sought only as regards the expenses t....