Dcit, Cir-1(1), Kolkata, Kolkata vs M/S Landis + Gyr Ltd., Kolkata on 13 September, 2017
5. We have heard rival pleadings against and in support of the impugned
disallowance. The assessee's case that its packed tea damages claim in question has
ITA No.803/Kol/2018 Assessment Year 2011-12
Duncans Tea. Ltd. Vs ACIT, Cir-4(1) Kol. Page 5
been worked out to the tune of 0.01% of the total turnover only which is allowable as
normal business expenditure. The Revenue on the other hand quotes lower authorities'
findings that the impugned disallowance has been rightly made on account of
assessee's failure in filing exact corresponding details. After giving our thoughtful
consideration to rival pleadings, we observe that neither parties submission deserve to
be accepted in entirety. The fact remains that assessee has not placed on record all the
necessary details in either of the lower proceedings and the Revenue also fails to
dispute that such a loss of packed tea cannot be altogether ruled out in regular
business activity. We therefore conclude that a lump sum disallowance of ₹20,000/-
only would meet the ends of justice with a rider that same shall not be treated as a
precedent in any other assessment year. The assessee's latter substantive grievance is
partly accepted.