Kec-Varaha-Khazana (Jv), Gurugram vs Ito, Ward-2(3), Gurugram on 5 May, 2020
"8 I have considered the submissions of both the
parties and carefully gone through the material
available on the record. In the present case, it is an
admitted position that the AO made the addition by
invoking the provisions of Section 40A(2)(b) of the Act
which are applicable to the expenses considered to be
excessive or unreasonable having regard to the fair
market value of the goods/services or facilities for
which the payment is made. However, in the instant
case, the AO estimated the profit of the assessee and
determined the income, nowhere he .doubted the
expenses incurred by the assessee. Therefore, I am of
the confirmed view that the AO was not justified in
making th~ addition by invoking the provisions of
Section 40A(2)(b) of the Act which are applicable to the
expenditure and not to the receipts and the ld. CIT(A)
rightly deleted the same. A similar issue having
identical facts has already been adjudicated by the
ITAT Delhi Bench "SMC", New Delhi vide order dated
21.11.2016 in ITA No. 2326/Del/2016 for the
assessment year 2011-12 in the case of ITO, Ward-2(2),
Gurgaon Vs KEC-Asiakom VB (JV), Gurgaon wherein
the relevant findings are given in paras 5 & 6 of the
order dated 21.11.2016 which read as under: