ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Urbane The Design Workshop, New Delhi

ITA 4330/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4007 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-08-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 05-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S S RANA
• Keywords: Depreciation; Audit objection; Retrospective amendment; Tax effect
• Section: 115JB; 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, AM AND SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA , JM IT A NO. 4330 /DEL/201 6 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2012 - 13 ACIT, CIRCLE - 61(1 ), NEW DELHI VS URBANE THE DESIGN WORKSHOP, 5, SOUTH APPTS MIS FLATS, 1 ST FLOOR, SRI AUROBINDO MARG, NEW DELHI - 110016 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. A A BFU7451L CO NO. 303/DEL/2016 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2012 - 13 URBANE THE DESIGN WORKSHOP, 5, SOUTH APPTS MIS FLATS, 1 ST FLOOR, SRI AUROBINDO MARG, NEW DELHI - 110016 VS ACIT, CIRCLE - 61(1), NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AABFU7451L ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SH. S. S. RANA, CIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 31 .0 7 .201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCE MENT : 13 .08 .201 8 ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM : THE APPEAL BY THE DEPARTMENT AND THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17.05.2016 OF LD. CIT(A) - 20 , NEW DELHI . 2 . NOBODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR AN ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT. WE, THEREFORE, PROC EEDED EX - PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE AND THE APPEAL ALONGWITH THE CROSS OBJECTION ARE DECIDED AFTER HEARING THE LD. CIT DR ON MERIT. IT IS NOT ICED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS LESS THAN RS.20,00,000/ - . ITA NO . 4330 /DE L/201 6 CO NO . 303/DEL/2016 URBANE THE DESIGN WORKSHOP 2 T HE LD. D.R., ALTHOUGH SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, BUT COULD NOT CONTROVERT THIS FACT THAT TAX EFFECT IN THIS APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.2 0,00,000/ - . 3 . AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. D.R. AND THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, IT IS NOTICED THAT SECTION 268A HAS BEEN INSERTED BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2008 WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 01/04/99. THE SAI D SECTION 268 OF THE ACT PROVIDES THAT THE BOARD MAY ISSUE INSTRUCTION OR DIRECTIONS TO THE OTHER INCOME - TAX AUTHORITIES FIXING MONETARY LIMITS FOR NOT FILING THE APPEALS BEFORE THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OR THE COURTS, SAID INSTRUCTIONS/DIRECTION S ARE BINDING ON THE INCOME TAX AUTHORITIES. 4 . IT IS NOTICED THAT TH E CBDT HAS ISSUED CIRCULAR NO. 3 OF 2018 DATED 11.07.2018 , VIDE WHICH IT HAS REVISED THE MONETARY LIMIT TO RS.2 0,00,000/ - FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL , THE SAID CIRCULA R READS AS UNDER: SUBJECT: REVISION OF MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING OF APPEALS BY THE DEPARTMENT BEFORE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, HIGH COURTS AND SLPS/APPEALS BEFORE SUPREME COURT - MEASURES FOR REDUCING LITIGATION - REG. REFERENCE IS INVITED TO BOARD S C IRCULAR NO. 21 OF 2015 DATED 10.12.2015 WHEREIN MONETARY LIMITS AND OTHER CONDITIONS FOR FILING DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS (IN INCOME - TAX MATTERS) BEFORE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, HIGH COURTS AND SLPS/ APPEALS BEFORE SUPREME COURT WERE SPECIFIED. 2. IN SUP ERSESSION OF THE ABOVE CIRCULAR, IT HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE BOARD THAT DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS MAY BE FILED ON MERITS BEFORE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND HIGH COURTS AND SLPS/ APPEALS BEFORE SUPREME COURT KEEPING IN VIEW THE MONETARY LIMITS AND CONDITION S SPECIFIED BELOW. ITA NO . 4330 /DE L/201 6 CO NO . 303/DEL/2016 URBANE THE DESIGN WORKSHOP 3 3. HENCEFORTH, APPEALS/ SLPS SHALL NOT BE FILED IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMITS GIVEN HEREUNDER: S NO APPEALS/SLPS IN INCOME - TAX MATTERS MONETARY LIMIT (IN RS) 1 BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 20,00,000/ - 2 BEFORE HIGH COURT 50,00,000/ - 3 BEFORE SUPREME COURT 1,00,00,000/ - IT IS CLARIFIED THAT AN APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE FILED MERELY BECAUSE THE TAX EFFECT IN A CASE EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMITS PRESCRIBED ABOVE. FILING OF APPEAL IN SUCH CASES IS TO BE DECID ED ON MERITS OF THE CASE. 4. FOR THIS PURPOSE, TAX EFFECT MEANS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AND THE TAX THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGEABLE HAD SUCH TOTAL INCOME BEEN REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT OF INCOME IN RESPECT OF THE ISSUES A GAINST WHICH APPEAL IS INTENDED TO BE FILED (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS DISPUTED ISSUES). FURTHER, TAX EFFECT SHALL BE TAX INCLUDING APPLICABLE SURCHARGE AND CESS. HOWEVER, THE TAX WILL NOT INCLUDE ANY INTEREST THEREON, EXCEPT WHERE CHARGEABILITY OF INT EREST ITSELF IS IN DISPUTE. IN CASE THE CHARGEABILITY OF INTEREST IS THE ISSUE UNDER DISPUTE, THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST SHALL BE THE TAX EFFECT. IN CASES WHERE RETURNED LOSS IS REDUCED OR ASSESSED AS INCOME, THE TAX EFFECT WOULD INCLUDE NOTIONAL TAX ON DISPUT ED ADDITIONS. IN CASE OF PENALTY ORDERS, THE TAX EFFECT WILL MEAN QUANTUM OF PENALTY DELETED OR REDUCED IN THE ORDER TO BE APPEALED AGAINST. 5. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL CALCULATE THE TAX EFFECT SEPARATELY FOR EVERY ASSESSMENT YEAR IN RESPECT OF THE DIS PUTED ISSUES IN THE CASE OF EVERY ASSESSEE. IF, IN THE CASE OF AN ASSESSEE, THE DISPUTED ISSUES ARISE IN MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR, APPEAL CAN BE FILED IN RESPECT OF SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUE S EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN PARA 3. NO APPEAL SHALL BE FILED IN RESPECT OF AN ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN PARA 3. IN OTHER WORDS, HENCEFORTH, APPEALS ITA NO . 4330 /DE L/201 6 CO NO . 303/DEL/2016 URBANE THE DESIGN WORKSHOP 4 CAN BE FILED ONLY WITH REF ERENCE TO THE TAX EFFECT IN THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. HOWEVER, IN CASE OF A COMPOSITE ORDER OF ANY HIGH COURT OR APPELLATE AUTHORITY, WHICH INVOLVES MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR AND COMMON ISSUES IN MORE THAN ONE ASSESSMENT YEAR, APPEALS SHALL BE FILE D IN RESPECT OF ALL SUCH ASSESSMENT YEARS EVEN IF THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE PRESCRIBED MONETARY LIMITS IN ANY OF THE YEAR(S), IF IT IS DECIDED TO FILE APPEAL IN RESPECT OF THE YEAR(S) IN WHICH TAX EFFECT EXCEEDS THE MONETARY LIMIT PRESCRIBED. IN CASE WHERE A COMPOSITE ORDER/JUDGEMENT INVOLVES MORE THAN ONE ASSESSEE, EACH ASSESSEE SHALL BE DEALT WITH SEPARATELY. 6. FURTHER, WHERE INCOME IS COMPUTED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 115JB OR SECTION 115JC, FOR THE PURPOSES OF DETERMINATION OF TAX EFFECT , TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED SHALL BE COMPUTED AS PER THE FOLLOWING FORMULA - (A B) + (C D) WHERE, A = THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AS PER THE PROVISIONS OTHER THAN THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 115JB OR SECTION 115JC (HEREIN CALLED GENERAL PROVISIONS); B = THE TOTAL INCOME THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGEABLE HAD THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AS PER THE GENERAL PROVISIONS BEEN REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT OF THE DISPUTED ISSUES UNDER GENERAL PROVISIONS; C = THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AS PER THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 115JB OR SECTION 115JC; D = THE TOTAL INCOME THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGEABLE HAD THE TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED AS PER THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 115JB OR SECTION 1I5 J CWAS REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT OF DISPUTED ISSUES UNDER THE SAID PR OVISIONS: HOWEVER, WHERE THE AMOUNT OF DISPUTED ISSUES IS CONSIDERED BOTH UNDER THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 115JB OR SECTION 115JC AND UNDER GENERAL PROVISIONS, SUCH AMOUNT SHALL NOT BE REDUCED FROM TOTAL INCOME ASSESSED WHILE DETERMINING THE AMOU NT UNDER ITEM D. ITA NO . 4330 /DE L/201 6 CO NO . 303/DEL/2016 URBANE THE DESIGN WORKSHOP 5 7. IN A CASE WHERE APPEAL BEFORE A TRIBUNAL OR A COURT IS NOT FILED ONLY ON ACCOUNT OF THE TAX EFFECT BEING LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED ABOVE, THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX/ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX SHALL SPECIFICALLY R ECORD THAT EVEN THOUGH THE DECISION IS NOT ACCEPTABLE, APPEAL IS NOT BEING FILED ONLY ON THE CONSIDERATION THAT THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMIT SPECIFIED IN THIS CIRCULAR . FURTHER, IN SUCH CASES, THERE WILL BE NO PRESUMPTION THAT THE INCOM E - TAX DEPARTMENT HAS ACQUIESCED IN THE DECISION ON THE DISPUTED ISSUES. THE INCOME - TAX DEPARTMENT SHALL NOT BE PRECLUDED FROM FILING AN APPEAL AGAINST THE DISPUTED ISSUES IN THE CASE OF THE SAME ASSESSEE FOR ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR, OR IN THE CASE OF ANY OTHER ASSESSEE FOR THE SAME OR ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR, IF THE TAX EFFECT EXCEEDS THE SPECIFIED MONETARY LIMITS. 8. IN THE PAST, A NUMBER OF INSTANCES HAVE COME TO THE NOTICE OF THE BOARD, WHEREBY AN ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED RELIEF FROM THE TRIBUNAL OR TH E COURT ONLY ON THE GROUND THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAS IMPLICITLY ACCEPTED THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL OR COURT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR OR IN THE CASE OF ANY OTHER ASSESSEE FOR THE SAME OR ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YEAR, BY NOT FI LING AN APPEAL ON THE SAME DISPUTED ISSUES. THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVES/COUNSELS MUST MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO BRING TO THE NOTICE OF THE TRIBUNAL OR THE COURT THAT THE APPEAL IN SUCH CASES WAS NOT FILED OR NOT ADMITTED ONLY FOR THE REASON OF THE TAX EFFE CT BEING LESS THAN THE SPECIFIED MONETARY LIMIT AND, THEREFORE, NO INFERENCE SHOULD BE DRAWN THAT THE DECISIONS RENDERED THEREIN WERE ACCEPTABLE TO THE DEPARTMENT. ACCORDINGLY, THEY SHOULD IMPRESS UPON THE TRIBUNAL OR THE COURT THAT SUCH CASES DO NOT HAVE ANY PRECEDENT VALUE AND ALSO BRING TO THE NOTICE OF THE TRIBUNAL/ COURT THE PROVISIONS OF SUB SECTION (4) OF SECTION 268A OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 WHICH READ AS UNDER : (4) THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OR COURT, HEARING SUCH APPEAL OR REFERENCE, SHALL HAVE REGARD TO THE ORDERS, INSTRUCTIONS OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED UNDER SUB - SECTION (1) AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH SUCH APPEAL OR APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE WAS FILED OR NOT FILED IN RESPECT OF ANY CASE. ITA NO . 4330 /DE L/201 6 CO NO . 303/DEL/2016 URBANE THE DESIGN WORKSHOP 6 9. AS THE EVIDENCE OF NOT FILING APPEAL DUE TO THIS C IRCULAR MAY HAVE TO BE PRODUCED IN COURTS, THE JUDICIAL FOLDERS IN THE OFFICE OF PR. CSIT/ CSIT MUST BE MAINTAINED IN A SYSTEMIC MANNER FOR EASY RETRIEVAL. 10. ADVERSE JUDGMENTS RELATING TO THE FOLLOWING ISSUES SHOULD BE CONTESTED ON MERITS NOTWITHSTANDING THAT THE TAX EFFECT ENTAILED IS LESS THAN THE MONETARY LIMITS SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 ABOVE OR THERE IS NO TAX EFFECT: (A) WHERE THE CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF THE PROVISIONS OF AN ACT OR RULE IS UNDER CHALLENGE, OR (B) WHERE BOARD S ORDER, NOTIFICATION, IN STRUCTION OR CIRCULAR HAS BEEN HELD TO BE ILLEGAL OR ULTRA FIRES, OR (C) WHERE REVENUE AUDIT OBJECTION IN THE CASE HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT, OR (D) WHERE THE ADDITION RELATES TO UNDISCLOSED FOREIGN ASSETS/ BANK ACCOUNTS. 11. THE MONETARY LIMI TS SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 ABOVE SHALL NOT APPLY TO WRIT MATTERS AND DIRECT TAX MATTERS OTHER THAN INCOME TAX. FILING OF APPEALS IN OTHER DIRECT TAX MATTERS SHALL CONTINUE TO BE GOVERNED BY RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF STATUTE AND RULES. FURTHER, IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT IS NOT QUANTIFIABLE OR NOT INVOLVED, SUCH AS THE CASE OF REGISTRATION OF TRUSTS OR INSTITUTIONS UNDER SECTION 12A/ 12AA OF THE IT ACT, 1961 ETC., FILING OF APPEAL SHALL NOT BE GOVERNED BY THE LIMITS SPECIFIED IN PARA 3 ABOVE AND DECISION TO FILE APPEALS IN SUCH CASES MAY BE TAKEN ON MERITS OF A PARTICULAR CASE. 12. IT IS CLARIFIED THAT THE MONETARY LIMIT OF RS. 20 LAKHS FOR FILING APPEALS BEFORE THE ITAT WOULD APPLY EQUALLY TO CROSS OBJECTIONS UNDER SECTION 253(4) OF THE ACT. CROSS OBJECTIONS BE LOW THIS MONETARY LIMIT, ALREADY FILED, SHOULD BE PURSUED FOR DISMISSAL AS WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED. FILING OF CROSS OBJECTIONS BELOW THE MONETARY LIMIT MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED HENCEFORTH. SIMILARLY, REFERENCES TO HIGH COURTS AND SLPS/ ITA NO . 4330 /DE L/201 6 CO NO . 303/DEL/2016 URBANE THE DESIGN WORKSHOP 7 APPEALS BEFORE SUPREME C OURT BELOW THE MONETARY LIMIT OF RS. 50 LAKHS AND RS. 1 CRORE RESPECTIVELY SHOULD BE PURSUED FOR DISMISSAL AS WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED. REFERENCES BEFORE HIGH COURT AND SLPS/ APPEALS BELOW THESE LIMITS MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED HENCEFORTH. 13. THIS CIRCULAR WI LL APPLY TO SLPS/ APPEALS/ CROSS OBJECTIONS/ REFERENCES TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN SC/HCS/TRIBUNAL AND IT SHALL ALSO APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO PENDING SLPS/ APPEALS/ CROSS OBJECTIONS/REFERENCES. PENDING APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS IN PARE 3 ABOVE MAY BE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED. 14. THE ABOVE MAY BE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF ALL CONCERNED. 15. THIS ISSUES UNDER SECTION 268A OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT 1961. 5 . FROM CLAUSE 12 & 13 OF THE ABOVE SAID CIRCULAR IT IS CLEAR THAT THESE INSTRUCTIONS ARE APPLICA BLE TO THE PENDING APPEALS ALSO AND AS PER CLAUSE 1 3, THERE IS CLEAR CUT INSTRUCTION TO THE DEPARTMENT TO WITHDRAW OR NOT TO PRESS THE APPEALS FILED BEFORE THE ITAT WHER EIN TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN RS.2 0,00,000/ - . THESE INSTRUCTIONS ARE OPERATIVE RETROSPECT IVELY TO THE PENDING APPEALS. 6 . KEEPIN G IN VIEW THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 3 OF 201 8 DATED 11.07.2018 AND ALSO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 268A OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE REVENUE SHOULD NOT HAVE FILED THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIB UNAL. 7. IN THE CROSS OBJECTION, THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO THE CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION OF RS.43,376/ - MADE BY THE AO BY DISALLOWING THE 10% CAR RUNNING AND OTHER EXPENSES , ON ESTIMATE BASIS. ITA NO . 4330 /DE L/201 6 CO NO . 303/DEL/2016 URBANE THE DESIGN WORKSHOP 8 8. THE FACTS RELATED TO THIS ISSUE IN BR IEF ARE THAT THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DEBITED RS. 1,62,414/ - UNDER THE HEAD CAR RUNNING & MAINTENANCE EXPENSES, RS.1,71,153/ - UNDER THE HEAD DEPRECIATION ON CAR , RS.71,062/ - UNDER THE HEAD INTERES T ON CAR LOAN AND RS.29,110/ - UNDER THE HEAD CAR INSURANCE TOTALING TO RS.4,33,739/ - . THE AO DISALLOWED 10% OF THE ABOVE EXPENSES BY OBSERVING THAT THE PERSONAL ELEMENTS OF THESE EXPENSES CANNOT BE RULED OUT. 9. BEING AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CARRIED TH E MATTER TO THE LD. CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THAT THE AD - HOC DISALLOWANCE HAD BEEN MADE WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE NATURE& VOLUME OF THE BUSINESS. IT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ACHIEVED A COMBINED TURNOVER OF RS.5.60 CRORES. 10. THE LD. CIT(A) AFT ER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE SUSTAINED THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING THAT THE PERSONAL ELEMENTS OF EXPENDITURE ON THE USAGE OF CARS & TELEPHONES AND FAX CANNOT BE RULED OUT AS NO DETAILS OF EXPENSES LIKE LOG BOOKS AND CALL REGISTERS WERE MAIN TAINED. 11. NOW THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE CROSS OBJECTION. THE LD. CIT DR SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 12. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. CIT DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) CATEGORICALLY STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT ITA NO . 4330 /DE L/201 6 CO NO . 303/DEL/2016 URBANE THE DESIGN WORKSHOP 9 FURNISHED DETAILS, LOG BOOKS AND CAR REGISTER WHEREIN THE DETAILS OF THE EXPENSES WERE MAINTAINED. THEREFORE, THE PERSONAL ELEMENTS OF EXPENDITURE CANNOT BE RULED OUT. IN OUR OPINION, THE PER SONAL U SE IN DEPRECIATION, INSURANCE AND INTEREST ON CAR LOAN, CANNOT BE ESTABLISHED AND IT IS NOT THE CASE OF THE AO THAT THE CAR WAS NOT USED FOR THE BUSINESS PURPOSE. HOWEVER, IN CAR RUNNING AND MAINTENANCE EXPENSES, PERSONAL ELEMENTS CANNOT BE RULED OUT. THER EFORE, WE MODIFY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND DIRECT THE AO NOT TO MAKE ANY DISALLOWANCE OUT OF INTEREST ON CAR LOAN , CAR INSURANCE AND DEPRECIATION ON CAR. THE REMAINING DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO AND SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ON ACCOUNT OF PERSONAL ELEMENT OF EXPENDITURE ARE CONFIRMED. 13 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS DISMISSED AND CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED . ( ORDER PRON OUNCED IN THE COURT ON 13 /0 8 / 201 8 ) SD/ - SD/ - ( SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA ) (N. K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 13 /08 /2018 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT(APPEALS) 5 . DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR