SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

A.D.JAIN, R.P.GARG
I. Kay Holding Co. (P. ) Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Spl. Range 8, New Delhi – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Anil Jain,A.K. Sinha

ORDER

A.D. Jain, Judicial Member. - This is assessee’s appeal for assessment year 1998-99. The concise grounds are as under :—

"1.The ld. CIT(A) grossly erred, both on facts and in law, in sustaining the disallowance of SEBI turnover fees of Rs. 22,91,000 under section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In doing so, the ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that provisions of section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 are not applicable to SEBI turnover fees and, hence, the same is allowable on accrual basis.

2.The ld. CIT(A) grossly erred, both on facts and in law, in sustaining the addition of Rs. 24,043 out of telephone expenses and Rs. 22,383 out of car expenses. In doing so, the ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that no disallowance can be made by attributing any part of the expenditure to personal expenses in case of the companies which have a separate legal entity in the eyes of law. A company is an artificial juridical person and, therefore, it would be totally imaginative to attribute any part of the expenses of the company for personal expenses.

3.Without prejudice to above, the proportion of disallowance sustained by the ld. CIT(A) on account of personal usage is too high and the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top