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. 11/2019-Central Tax – Seeks to prescribe the due dates for furnishing of FORM GSTR-1 for those taxpayers with aggregate turnover upto Rs. 1.5 crores for the months of April, May and June, 2019.

Team Taxcharcha

Circular No. 136/06/2020 – Clarification in respect of various measures announced by the Government for providing relief to the taxpayers in view of spread of Novel Corona Virus (COVID-19)

Team Taxcharcha

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act 2021

Team Taxcharcha