Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-VI, Lucknow V. M/s. U.P.State Bridge Corporation Ltd., Lucknow

ITA 252/LKW/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 25223714 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-07-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 16-07-2014
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 10-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ALOK MITRAD R
• Assessee Lawyers: B P YADAV
• Keywords: Business expenditure; Revenue expenditure
• Section: 43B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A , LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI S UNIL KUMAR YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 252/LKW/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006 - 07 DCIT - VI LUCKNOW V. M/S U.P. STATE BRIDGE CORPOR ATION LTD. 16, MADAN MOHAN MALVIYA MARG LUCKNOW PAN: AAACU3258K (APP ELL ANT) (RESPONDENT) APP ELL ANT BY: SHRI. ALOK MITRA,D.R. RESPONDENT BY: SHRI. B. P. YADAV, C.A. DATE OF HEARING: 16 0 7 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 21 0 7 2014 O R D E R PER SUN IL KUMAR YADAV: THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON A SOLITARY GROUND , WHICH IS EXTRACTED HEREUNDER: - 1 . THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.9,12,355/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER BY WAY OF DISALLOWANCES OF EXPENSES CLAIMED FOR PAYMENT UNDER HEAD PENSION CONTRIBUTION FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF THE CORPORATION. THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACTS THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE BILLS/VOUCHERS RELATED TO EXPENDITURE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR VERIFICATION AND TO THEREBY SUBSTANTIATE THE CORRECTNESS OF CLAIM. 2 . DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS INVITED OUR ATTENTION THAT THE IMPUGNED ISSUE IS SQUARELY PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 2 - : COVERED BY THE ORD ER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN I.T.A. NOS.142 & 143/LUC/2008 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003 - 04 AND 2004 - 05 . COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS PLACED ON RECORD. OUR ATTENTION WAS ALSO INVITED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE LD . CIT(A) HAS EXAMINED THE IMPUGNED ISSUE IN THE LIGHT OF THE AFORESAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. THE RELEVANT OBSERVATIONS OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS EXTRACTED HEREUNDER: - 6. IN THE GROUND NO. 4 OF THE APPEAL THE APPELLANT HAS CHALLENGED THE ACTION OF THE AO IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.9,12,355/ - . IN THIS REGARD THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED THAT AS PER SCHEDULE - K AN AMOUNT OF RS 10,18,308/ - HAS BEEN DEBITED TO ITS PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT UNDER THE HEAD PENSION CONTRIBUTION. THE APPELLANT GETS EMPLOYEES ON DEPUTATION FROM THE STATE GOVT. AND IT HAS TO MAKE PAYMENT TO THEM FOR THEIR SERVICES. AS PER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE CONCERNED DEPARTMENT OF THE STATE GOVT. THE APPELLANT REIMBURSES EXPENSES SUCH AS SALARY OR PENSION WHICH IS PAID BY THE GOVT. TO THESE EMPLOYEES FOR T HE PERIOD THEY HAVE RENDERED THEIR SERVICES TO THE APPELLANT. IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS 10,18,308/ - DEBITED TO THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT ARE IN THE NATURE OF GENERAL REVENUE EXPENDITURE INCURRED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSES O F THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE AND DO NOT COME UNDER THE PURVIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 43B OF THE ACT. THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO CONTENDED THAT SIMILAR ADDITIONS WERE ALSO MADE IN AYS 2003 - 04 & 2004 - 05, BUT THE ISSUE, INVOLVED WAS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT BY THE HON'BLE ITAT VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 26.02.2008. 6.1. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE APPELLANT. I FIND THAT THE AO HAS MADE THE DISALLOWANCE BY MERELY OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT JUSTIFY THE CLAIM OF EXPENSES ON A CCOUNT OF PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 3 - : PENSION CONTRIBUTION. IT IS SEEN THAT SUCH TYPE OF EXPENSES ARE BEING CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT REGULARLY OVER THE YEARS AND HAVE BEEN ALLOWED AS GENUINE BUSINESS EXPENDITURE ON THE GROUND THAT THESE REPRESENT THE REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES INCURRE D BY THE STATE GOVT. TOWARDS ITS EMPLOYEES WHO ARE WORKING ON DEPUTATION WITH THE APPELLANT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, I DECIDE THIS ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT TREATING THE EXPENSE AS GENUINE BUSINESS EXPENSE. THE APPELLANT GETS RELIEF OF RS.9,12,355/ - 3 . SINCE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ADJUDICATED THE ISSUE IN THE LIGHT OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY WE CONFIRM THE SAME. 4 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE R EVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21.7.2014. SD/ - SD/ - [ A. K. GARODIA ] [ S UNIL KUMAR Y ADAV ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 21 ST JU LY , 2014 JJ: 1607 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT(A) 4 . CIT 5 . DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ )