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. 28/2019-Central tax – Due date of GSTR 1 of registered persons having aggregate turnover of more than Rs. 1.5 Crores for July – September 2019 is 11th of the following months

Team Taxcharcha

EXTENSIONS OF DUE DATES UNDER INCOME TAX

Team Taxcharcha

ICAI has issued Exposure Draft for Accounting Standard (AS) – 17 Leases

Team Taxcharcha