Taxcharcha
Income TaxLatestRecent Case Laws

the provisions of Sec.2(22)(e) were not applicable since the payment was mere reimbursement of expenditure by M/s PHL – ITAT Mumbai

M/S ADMACH AUTO LIMITED, ITA NO. 9543/DEL/2019

The provisions of Sec.2(22)(e) were not applicable since the payment was mere reimbursement of expenditure by M/s PHL. However, Ld. CIT(A) proceeded on wrong footing that the same would be personal expenditure and hence, disallowable completely overlooking the fact that the said expenditure has never been claimed by the assessee anywhere while computing his income.

The said expenditure was booked as  business expenditure by M/s PHL. Therefore, the impugned additions could not be sustained. By deleting the same,  ITAT allow the appeal.

Rajesh Rajkumar Nagpal ITA no. 261
Rajesh Rajkumar Nagpal ITA no. 261

Related posts

Notification No. 42/2020-Central Tax – Extend the due date for furnishing FORM GSTR-3B, Jan-March, 2020 returns for the taxpayers registered in Ladakh.

Team Taxcharcha

Mentioning of wrong section and wrong facts in the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment u/s 148 made the reassessment liable to be quashed – ITAT Delhi

Team Taxcharcha

Extension of due date of filing of GSTR3B of July 2025 for selected regions of Maharashtra

CA Saurabh Khullar