Addll. CIT, New Delhi V. M/s R.R. Financial Consultants Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 3798/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3741 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-06-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 02-06-2010
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 07-09-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANUSHA KHURANA
• Keywords: Audit objection; Tangible material; Difference of opinion; Assessment record; Change of opinion; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 143(3); 147; 148

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 3798 /DEL/2009 1/10 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI, BENCH F BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A K GARODIA, ACCOUTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 3798/DEL/2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02) ADDL. CIT, VS. M/S. R. R. FINANCIAL RANGE 15, NEW DELHI. CONSULTANTS LTD., 412-422, INDRAPRAKASH BUILDING, 21, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-01 (APPELLANTS) (RESPONDENTS) PAN / GIR NO.AAACR1300B APPELLANT BY: SHRI ANUSHA KHURANA, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY: SHRI AJAY VOHRA, ADV. SHRI ROHIT JAIN, SMT. NEHRA KHEMKA, CA ORDER PER A. K. GARODIA, AM: 1. THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE HAS BEEN FILED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) XVIII, NEW DELHI DATED 01.06.2009 FOR TH E ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02. THE ONLY GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE READS AS UNDER: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O THE CASE A S WELL AS IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN QUASHING THE AS SESSMENT ORDER WITHOUT PROPER APPRECIATION OF THE FACTS OF T HE CASE AND AGAINST THE SPIRIT OF THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE S UPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS PVS BEEDIES LIMITED 237 ITR 13. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT, IN THE PRESEN T CASE, THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON I.T.A. NO. 3798 /DEL/2009 2/10 31.1.2001, WHICH WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) ON 19.06. 2002 AND THEREAFTER, THE CASE WAS FINALLY ASSESSED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 143(3) OF THE I. T. ACT ON 25.05.2004. THE INCOME WAS FINALLY ASSESSED AT RS.81,85,468/- AS AGAINST THE I NCOME DECLARED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME AT RS.78,26,180/-. THEREAFTER, THE A.O. INITIATED THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BY ISSUING NOTICE U/S 148, WHICH WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE CO MPANY ON 28.03.2008. THE REASSESSMENT NOTICE WAS ISSUED ON THIS BASIS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEBITED AN EXCESS AMOUNT OF RS.21,12,786/- IN P & L ACCOUNT UNDER THE HEADS MI SCELLANEOUS EXPENSES AND REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE. THE REASSE SSMENT WAS COMPLETED BY MAKING ADDITION OF THIS AMOUNT OF RS.2 1,12,786/- ALLEGED TO BE EXCESS DEBITED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS P & L ACCOUNT. BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A). BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), T HE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED A PRELIMINARY OBJECTION REGARDING VALIDI TY OF REOPENING AS PER GROUNDS 1 & 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THIS ASPECT IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY FOLLOWING THE JUDGEMENT OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI RENDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS KELVINATOR INDIA LTD. REPORTED IN 256 ITR 01 AND AL SO BY FOLLOWING ANOTHER JUDGEMENT OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT O F DELHI RENDERED IN THE CASE OF KLM ROYAL DUTCH AIRLINES VS ADIT AS REPORTED IN 292 ITR 49. THE BASIS OF THESE DECISIO NS IS THAT NO FRESH MATERIAL HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY THE A.O. AFTER FRAMING THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT AND, THEREFORE, THE ACTION REGA RDING REOPENING IS WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND IS ONA CLEAR CHANGE OF OPINION, WHICH IS PATENTLY ERRONEOUS AND UNTENABLE. NOW, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. I.T.A. NO. 3798 /DEL/2009 3/10 3. THE LD. D.R. SUPPORTED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND IT IS SUBMITTED BY HIM THAT AT THE TIME OF REOPENING, THE SAME WAS BASED ON REASONS RECORDED BY THE A.O. AND HENCE REOPENING IS VALID. RELIANCE WAS PLACED BY HIM ON THE JUDGMENT OF HONB LE APEX COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS PVS BEEDIES LT D. AS REPORTED IN 237 ITR 13. 4. AS AGAINST THIS, THE LD. A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE SUPP ORTED THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). IT IS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THIS ISSUE IS NOW COVERED BY THE JUDGEMENT OF HONBLE APEX COURT REND ERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS KELVINATOR INDIA LTD. AS REPORTE D IN 228 CTR 488. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED T HE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHO RITIES BELOW AND ALSO THE JUDGMENTS CITED BY BOTH THE SIDES. WE FIND THAT THE COPY OF THE REASONS RECORDED BY THE A.O. ON 25.03.2 008 ARE AVAILABLE ON PAGES 51-52 OF THE PAPER BOOK. WE HAV E ALSO GONE THROUGH THE REASONS RECORDED BY THE A.O. AND WE FI ND THAT THE ALLEGATION OF THE A.O. IS THAT, THE ASSESSEE HAD DE BITED TO THE P & L ACCOUNT; MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES OF RS.22,77,831 /- AND REPAIR & MAINTENANCE EXPENSES OF RS.23,21,710/-. I T SIS ALLEGED BY THE A.O. THAT AS PER THE LEDGER ACCOUNTS OF THE MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES AND REPAIR & MAINTENANCE EXPENSES, TOTAL A MOUNT DEBITED TO THESE TWO ACCOUNTS ARE RS.8,21,966/- AND RS.16,64,789/- RESPECTIVELY. IT IS THE ALLEGATION OF THE A.O. THAT IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.21 ,12,786/- WAS EXCESS DEBITED TO THE P & L ACCOUNT, WHICH SHOU LD HAVE BEEN ADDED BACK WHILE COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS ALSO NOTED BY THE A.O. IN THE REAS ONS RECODED BY I.T.A. NO. 3798 /DEL/2009 4/10 HIM THAT THESE FACTS WERE REVEALED AS PER AN AUDIT SCRUTINY. WE FURTHER FIND THAT ON PAGES 48-50 OF THE PAPER BOOK, IS A LETTER OF ASSESSEE DATED 09.09.2005 ADDRESSED TO THE A.O. IN WHICH IT IS STATED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE SUBMISSIONS ARE BEI NG MADE WITH REGARD TO THE NOTICE OF THE A.O. DATED 31.08.2005 R EGARDING PROPOSED RECTIFICATION U/S 154. IN THIS REPLY WE F IND THAT THE ALLEGATION IS REGARDING THE SAME AMOUNT OF RS.22,77 ,831/-, DEBITED TO MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES ACCOUNT WHEREAS D ETAILS AVAILABLE ON RECORD IS ONLY OF RS.8,21,966/- AND AL SO FOR SIMILAR MISTAKE WITH REGARD TO REPAIR & MAINTENANCE ACCOUNT ALSO, FOR WHICH, IT HAS BEEN ALLEGED THAT THE TOTAL AMOUNT DE BITED TO P & L ACCOUNT IS OF RS.23,21,710/- BUT THE DETAILS AVAILA BLE ARE ONLY FOR RS.16,64,789/- IN THE ASSESSMENT FOLDER. THE A SSESSEE HAD GIVEN DETAILED REPLY TO THE A.O. AND IT HAD BEEN SU BMITTED BEFORE THE A.O. THAT A GROUPING OF THESE TWO HEADS OF P & L ACCOUNT ARE BEING ENCLOSED AND THE SAME ARE AVAILAB LE BEFORE US ON PAGES 63 AND 218 OF THE PAPER BOOK. ON PAGE 63 IS THE GROUP SUMMARY OF MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES AND ON PAGE 218 IS THE GROUP SUMMARY OF REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE. BOTH A RE BEING REPRODUCED HEREIN BELOW FOR THE PURPOSE OF READY RE FERENCE: PAGE 63 OF THE PAPER BOOK: R.R. FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS LTD MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES GROUP SUMMARY (1APR 2000 TO 31 MAR 2001) CLOSING BALANCE DEBIT CREDIT AGM EXPN. 48,875.00 BANGALORE MISC. 9,261.50 BOMBAY MISC. 1,03,094.52 CALCUTTA MISC. 10,070.75 CARTAGE EXPN. 34,059.50 CHARITY & DONATION 5,827.00 DIWALI EXPENSES 4,93,150.00 I.T.A. NO. 3798 /DEL/2009 5/10 INSURANCE EXPN. 61,627.74 MEMBERSHIP FEES 3,150.00 MISC. EXPN. 8,21,966.86 PETTY EXP W/O 4,626.00 POOJA EXPENSES 14,378.00 PROPERTY TAX 4,63,792.05 SUBSCRIPTION FEES 1,89,350.00 TRANSICTION CHARGES (DEMAT A/C) 14,602.55 GRAND TOTAL 22,77,831.47 PAGE 218 OF THE PAPER BOOK: R.R. FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS LTD REPAIR & MAINT. A/C GROUP SUMMARY (1APR 2000 TO 31 MAR 2001) CLOSING BALANCE DEBIT CREDIT AHMD. REPAIR & MAINTENANCE EXP. 60,000.00 BANGALORE OFFICE R/M 19,624.75 BOMBAY OFFICE R/M 92,155.00 CALCUTTA OFFICE R/M 9,406.30 EQUIPMENT REPAIR & MAINTENANCE 6,780.00 FURNITURE REPAIR & MAINTENANCE 7,760.00 GENERATOR RUNNING 1,415.00 OFFICE REPAIR & MAINT. 16,64,789.01 REPAIR & MAINT. EXP 4,33,698.50 SCOOTER REPAIR & MAINT 10,969.00 TEMPO RUNNING & MAINTENANCE 15,113.00 GRAND TOTAL 23,21,710.56 6. FROM THE ABOVE GROUP SUMMARY OF BOTH THESE ACCOUNTS I.E. MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES AND REPAIR & MAINTENANCE, WE FIND THAT THE TOTAL AMOUNT DEBITED TO P & L ACCOUNT UNDER THE SE TWO HEADS IS SUM TOTAL OF VARIOUS ACCOUNTS AS DEPICTED IN THESE TWO GROUP SUMMARIES. WE ALSO FIND THAT IT HAS BEEN PRO VIDED IN PART 2 OF SCHEDULE VI TO THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 BY WAY O F PROVISO THAT ANY ITEM UNDER WHICH THE EXPENSES EXCEED 1% OF THE TOTAL REVENUE OF THE COMPANY OR RS.5,000/- WHICHEVER IS H IGHER SHOULD BE SHOWN AS A SEPARATE AND DISTINCT ITEM AGA INST AN I.T.A. NO. 3798 /DEL/2009 6/10 APPROPRIATE ACCOUNT HEAD IN THE P & L ACCOUNT AND S HOULD NOT BE COMBINED WITH ANY OTHER ITEM TO BE SHOWN UNDER MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES. HENCE IF THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF EXPENSES UNDER A PARTICULAR HEAD IS LESS THAN 1% OF THE TOTA L REVENUE OF THE ASSESSEE THEN THE SAME CAN BE COMBINED UNDER TH E HEAD MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES. AS PER THE GROUP SUMMARY O F MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES REPRODUCED BY US ABOVE, WE F IND THAT NONE OF THE ITEMS INCLUDED BY THE ASSESSEE IS IN EX CESS OF 1% OF THE TOTAL REVENUE BECAUSE THE TOTAL REVENUE OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS OF RS.1700.94 LACS AND HENCE 1% OF THE S AME COMES OUT TO RS.17 LACS WHEREAS THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT INCLUD ED UNDER THIS HEAD, I.E. MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES IS RS.8,21,9 66/- ONLY. SIMILARLY, THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT DEBITED UNDER THE HEA D REPAIR & MAINTENANCE ACCOUNT IS OF RS.16,64,789.01 AS CAN BE SEEN IN THE GROUP SUMMARY OF REPAIR & MAINTENANCE ACCOUNT REPRODUCED BY US ABOVE. THIS GROUP SUMMARY OF BOTH THESE ACCOUNT HEADS ALONG WITH LEDGER WERE SUBMITTED BY T HE ASSESSEE TO THE A.O. ALONG WITH A LETTER DATED 09.09.2005 WH ICH WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE A.O. IN CONNEC TION WITH 154 PROCEEDINGS AND IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R . BEFORE US THAT SUCH 154 PROCEEDINGS WERE LATER ON DROPPED BY THE A.O. BE THIS AS IT MAY BUT IT GOES TO SHOW THAT BOTH THE SE GROUP SUMMARIES AND INDIVIDUAL LEDGER ACCOUNT COPIES WERE AVAILABLE ON RECORD AT THE TIME WHEN THE A.O. HAS RECORDED RE ASONS FOR REOPENING, AS ARE AVAILABLE ON PAGES 51-52 OF THE P APER BOOK AND IT IS SEEN THAT THESE REASONS WERE RECORDED ON 25.03,2008 WHEREAS THE REPLY IN 154 PROCEEDINGS WERE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE A.O. ON 09.09.2005. HENCE, AT THE TIME OF I.T.A. NO. 3798 /DEL/2009 7/10 RECORDING THE REASONS, THESE DETAILS WERE VERY MUCH AVAILABLE ON ASSESSMENT RECORD AND HENCE WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERE D OPINION THAT THERE WAS NO MATERIAL BEFORE THE A.O. TO COME TO THIS BELIEF THAT THESE AMOUNTS WERE EXCESS DEBITED TO THE P & L ACCOUNT BY THE ASSESSEE AS HAS BEEN ALLEGED BY THE A.O. IN THE SE REASONS RECORDED BY HIM ON 25.03.2008. AS PER THE INDEX OF THE PAPER BOOK, IT WAS THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT TH ESE DETAILS, AVAILABLE ON PAGES 63-338 OF THE PAPER BOOK WERE FU RNISHED TO THE A.O. DURING PROCEEDINGS U/S 154 OF THE I. T. AC T VIDE LETTER- DATED 09.09.2005. AS PER THE REASONS RECORDED BY T HE A.O., THIS IS THE ONLY ALLEGATION BY THE A.O. THAT AN AMOUNT O F RS.21,12,786/- WAS EXCESS DEBITED TO P & L ACCOUNT IN CONNECTION WITH MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES AND REPAIR & MAINTENANCE EXPENSES. THE BASIS OF THIS ALLEGATION IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEBITED RS.22,77,831/- TO MISCELLANEOU S EXPENSES ACCOUNT AND RS.23,21,710/- TO THE REPAIR & MAINTENA NCE ACCOUNT IN THE P & L ACCOUNT BUT IN THE LEDGER ACCOUNT OF M ISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES AND REPAIR & MAINTENANCE EXPENSES, THE AMO UNT RECORDED IS RS.8,21,966/- AND RS.16,64,789/- RESPEC TIVELY. WHEN WE GO THROUGH THE GROUPING OF THESE TWO HEADS, WHICH ARE AVAILABLE ON PAGES 63 & 218 OF THE PAPER BOOK, WE FIND THAT OUT OF VARIOUS ITEMS INCLUDED IN THE GROUP SUMMARY OF MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES TOTALING RS.22.77 LACS, ONE AMOUNT IS OF RS.8,21,966.86 UNDER THE HEAD MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSE S. SIMILARLY, IN THE GROUP SUMMARY OF REPAIR & MAINTEN ANCE ACCOUNT OF RS.23.21 LACS AS AVAILABLE ON PAGE 218 O F THE PAPER BOOK, ONE AMOUNT IS OF RS.16,64,789/- ON ACCOUNT OF OFFICE REPAIR & MAINTENANCE AND THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER IT EMS OF REPAIR, I.T.A. NO. 3798 /DEL/2009 8/10 WHICH ARE GROUPED UNDER THE HEAD REPAIR & MAINTENAN CE ACCOUNT FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEBITING TO THE P & L AC COUNT. WHEN THESE GROUP SUMMARIES AND COPY OF INDIVIDUAL L EDGER ACCOUNTS WERE AVAILABLE WITH THE A.O. AT THE TIME O F RECORDING THE REASONS ON 25.03.2008, IT CANNOT BE ACCEPTED TH AT THERE WAS MATERIAL AVAILABLE WITH THE A.O. TO ALLEGE THAT EXC ESS AMOUNT HAS BEEN DEBITED BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE P & L ACCOU NT AND HENCE WE ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE NO TICE ISSUED BY THE A.O. U/S 148 IS WITHOUT JURISDICTION. WHILE DOING SO, WE FIND SUPPORT FORM THE JUDGEMENT OF HONBLE APEX COU RT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF KELVINATOR INDIA LTD. AS RE PORTED IN 228 CTR 488 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD BY THE HONBLE APEX COU RT THAT THE A.O. HAS POWERS TO REOPEN AFTER 01.04.1989 PROV IDED THERE IS TANGIBLE MATERIAL TO COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THERE IS ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME FROM ASSESSMENT AND REASONS MU ST HAVE THE LIVE LINK WITH THE FORMATION OF BELIEF. IN THE PRESENT CASE, WE HAVE NOTED THAT IN VIEW OF THESE MATERIAL BEING AVAILABLE ON RECORD REGARDING GROUP SUMMARIES OF THESE TWO EXPEN SES AND THE COPY OF INDIVIDUAL LEDGER ACCOUNT WHICH ARE GRO UPED TOGETHER AS PER THESE TWO GROUP SUMMARIES, IT CANNO T BE SAID THAT TANGIBLE MATERIEL WAS AVAILABLE WITH THE A.O. TO COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THERE IS ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME. 7. IN THE PRESENT CASE, ONE MORE THING IS RELEVANT BEC AUSE IN THE PRESENT CASE THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED BY THE A. O. U/S 143(3) AND THE REOPENING IS AFTER 4 YEARS AND HENCE , THE PROVISO TO SECTION 147 BECOMES APPLICABLE AS PER WHICH NO A CTION SHOULD BE TAKEN U/S 147 AFTER THE EXPIRY OF 4 YEARS FROM THE END OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR UNLESS ANY INCOME C HARGEABLE I.T.A. NO. 3798 /DEL/2009 9/10 TO TAX HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT BY REASONS OF THE FAI LURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRULY AL L MATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR ASSESSMENT. IN THE PRESENT CASE, WE FIND THAT NO SUCH FAILURE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN PINPOINTED BY THE A.O. AND THE ONLY OBJECTION IS THAT EXCESS AMOUNT HAS BEEN D EBITED BY THE ASSESSEE TO P & L ACCOUNT AND THIS OBJECTION IS NOT FOUND TO BE CORRECT AND SUPPORTED BY RELEVANT MATERIAL. IT IS SEEN THAT THE MATERIAL SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE A.O. IN S EP 2005 IN THE COURSE OF 154 PROCEEDINGS SHOWS OTHERWISE AND I T SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED THE GROUP SUMMARY O F BOTH THESE EXPENSES ALONG WITH LEDGER ACCOUNT COPY OF INDIVIDU AL LEDGER GROUPED TOGETHER IN THE GROUP SUMMARY AND AFTER CON SIDERING THESE MATERIAL, IT CANNOT BE ALLEGED BY ANY REASONA BLE PERSON THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEBITED EXCESS AMOUNT TO P & L ACCOUNT. 8. REGARDING THE JUDGEMENT OF HONBLE APEX COURT RENDE RED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS PVS BEEDIES (SUPRA) RELIED UPON BY THE LD. D.R. FOR THE REVENUE AND ALSO REFERRED TO BY THE RE VENUE IN THE GROUNDS RAISED BY IT, WE FIND THAT THIS JUDGEMENT I S OF NO HELP TO THE REVENUE IN THE PRESENT CASE. THIS JUDGEMENT IS HELPFUL IF THE ONLY OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT REOPENING IS BASED ON AUDIT OBJECTION. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THIS IS ONE OF THE OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE BUT THIS IS NOT THE ONLY OBJECTION AND THIS IS NOT THE BASIS OF DECISION OF LD. CIT(A). THE BASIS OF THE DECISION OF CIT(A) IS THAT THE REOPENING IS ON THE BASIS OF A C LEAR CHANGE OF OPINION AND IT IS ALSO NOTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) THA T THE A.O. HAS IN THE COURSE OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS KED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH DETAILS ABOUT MISCELLANEOUS EXP ENSES. WE ALSO FIND THAT AS PER LETTER DATED 27.01.2004 AS AV AILABLE ON I.T.A. NO. 3798 /DEL/2009 10/10 PAGES 20-45 OF THE PAPER BOOK THAT DETAILS FOR THES E TWO EXPENSES WERE SUBMITTED TO THE A.O. ON HIS ASKING A ND REPAIR & MAINTENANCE EXPENSES AND HENCE IT CANNOT BE SAID TH AT SUCH EXPENSES HAVE BEEN ALLOWED BY THE A.O. WITHOUT NOTI CING THESE EXPENSES AND THERE IS DEFAULT O THE ASSESSEE OF NOT FURNISHING /DISCLOSING FULL & TRUE MATERIAL FACTS. WE HAVE ALS O SEEN THAT COMPLETE DETAILS ALONG WITH GROUP SUMMARIES OF BOTH THESE EXPENSES ALONG WITH INDIVIDUAL LEDGER ACCOUNT HAVE BEEN MADE AVAILABLE WITH THE A.O. AND HENCE THE REASONS RECOR DED BY THE A.O. IS WITHOUT ANY TANGIBLE MATERIAL ON RECORD TO SUGGEST THAT ANY EXCESS AMOUNT HAS BEEN DEBITED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER THESE TWO HEADS. IN VIEW OF THIS. THIS JUDGEMENT OF HON BLE APEX COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS PVS BEEDIS (SU PRA), IS OF NO HELP TO THE REVENUE IN THE PRESENT CASE BECAUSE IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE REOPENING IS NOT HELD TO BE INVALID FOR T HIS OBJECTION THAT IT IS ON THE BASIS OF AUDIT OBJECTION. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISS ED. 10. THIS DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 8 TH JUNE 2010. SD./- SD./- (RAJPAL YADAV) (A K GARODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:18 TH JUNE, 2010 SP. COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT TRUE COPY: BY ORDER 4. CIT(A) 5. DR DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI