TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (3) TMI 11
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as the „Tribunal‟) in ITA No. 3655/Del/2000, ITA No. 3657/Del/2000 and ITA No. 3656/Del/2000 in respect of assessment years 1993-94, 1995-96 and 1994-95 respectively. 2. In an earlier round the assessee had filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Act against a common judgment of the Tribunal dated 31.01.2005. A Division Bench of this Court by an order dated 19.01.2006 had set aside the judgment of the Tribunal dated 31.01.2005 based on a concession that the Tribunal had disposed of the appeal without affording a fair and reasonable opportunity of being heard. 3. In the present appeal, the assessee is principally aggrieved on account of the fact that the Tribunal has once again failed to apply its mind to the issues raised a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he disallowance of the following amounts claimed as allowances/expenses:- (i) expenses on gifts or expenses on articles gifted which are stated to be in excess of the prescribed limit under Rule 6B of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the „Rules‟); (ii) travelling expenses in excess of limits prescribed under Rule 6D; (iii) payment made towards corporate membership, as well as, towards annual membership fee to New Friends Colony Club; (iv) disallowance of 50% total entertainment expenditure under Section 37(2) of the Act; (v) expenses pertaining to previous year; (vi) disallowance of amounts claimed on account of statutory liability pertaining to provident fund by invoking the provisions of Section 4....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e by the A.O. in the computation of income without any discussion at all. 5.1 Before me the A.R. has stated that the membership of such clubs helps them to cultivate business relationships for latter operations. [The] judgment of CIT V. Hindustan Don Oliver 48 TTJ 552: Reliable Cigarette and Tobacco Inds. 51 TTJ 103, OTIS Elevator CO. 195 ITR 682 (Bom.). have been cited in support of his contentions. 5.2 On a consideration of the facts and the judicial pronouncements there is price in the arguments of the A.R. The addition has been made without appreciating that the expenditure has been incurred wholly and exclusively for the business needs of the company. Hence the addition of Rs. 1,15,073/- is deleted. 7. Ground no.5- The ground ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the statutory liability had been paid beyond the due date. The order is silent about the details. 12. Before me the A.R. has indicated that this ostensibly refers to payment made after the end of the previous year but before filing of the return and the proviso to Section 43B clearly entitles the appellant to claim this deduction. 12.1 In view of this situation, I have to delete the addition upto 50% as not being based on any cogent reasoning or material." 6. Against the aforesaid order of the CIT(A), the Revenue, being aggrieved, preferred an appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal in the first round by an order dated 31.01.2005 had upheld the order of the CIT(A) dated 01.05.2000 with respect to the following:- (i) the disallow....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) in deleting disallowance of Rs.23,94,030/- pertaining to previous year‟s expenses despite the fact that this disallowance was made by the assessee itself in the original and revised return of income. 6) in deleting addition of Rs.5,25,703/- on account of loss on sale of asset 7) in allowing 50% of statutory liability of Rs.111893/- without assigning any reason. 8) in allowing depreciation of Rs.9135433/- on account of exchange rate fluctuation." 10. A perusal would show that the basic ground for preferring an appeal by the Revenue against the order of the CIT(A) was that all such additions or disallowances had been made by the Assessing Officer in view of the fact that the assessee had itself made such disallowances in i....