VS, 2008 PTD-INCOME-TAX-APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL-PAKISTAN 1477 (2008)

Income Tax Ordinance (XXXI of 1979)---

----S.23---Deduction---Profit and Loss expenses---Disallowances were made by using stock phrases like "unverifiable element of personal nature"---First Appellate Authority confirmed the same without any cogent reasons---No relief was allowed in respect of travelling and it was not acceptable that no expense had been incurred under the head travelling---Disallowance under the head travelling was reduced and no indulgence of Appellate Tribunal was called for in respect of remaining add-backs being reasonably made.

A.D. Asghar for Appellant.

Shaban Bhatti D.R. for Respondent.

ORDER

SYED NADEEM SAQLAIN (JUDICIAL MEMBER).---Through the titled appeal, the assessee has challenged the impugned order, dated 31-8-2007, passed by the learned CIT(A) Zone-1, Lahore. It is the contention of the assessee that the learned First Appellate authority was not justified in confirming the disallowances made in the P&L account.

2. The appellant in the present case is an individual deriving professional fee for services from Messrs ABB Company Limited. The assessee claimed expenses under the heads utilities, Travelling and Salaries at Rs.60,000, Rs.40,000 and Rs.78,000 respectively. The Taxation Officer disallowed the same at Rs.13,396, Rs.40,000 and Rs.39,000 respectively under the three heads. The assessee failed at the first appellate level, hence the instant appeal.

3. Both the parties have been heard and relevant orders perused. Bare perusal of the assessment order reveals that the disallowances under the above heads were made by using stock phrases like unverifiable, element of personal nature etc. The learned CIT(A) also confirmed the same without any cogent reasons. It is worth-noting that no relief was allowed in respect of travelling. It is not acceptable that no expense had been incurred under the head travelling. Keeping in view this fact, the disallowance under the head travelling is reduced to Rs.20,000. The remaining add-backs are reasonable, calls for no indulgence.

4. Appeal of the assessee succeeds.

C.M.A./44/Tax(Trib.)Appeal accepted.