KANHAIALAL JANGID Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal was admitted on 15th Oct., 2001. The substantial question of law that arises for consideration of this appeal were not framed at the time of admission. The assessee appellant in his memo of appeal has raised following questions as substantial questions of law:

(2.) WHETHER , the learned Tribunal was justified in upholding of addition to the extent of 1/4th of depreciation and Rs. 1,000 on account of expenditure on books and periodicals ?

(3.) SINCE it is a case in which the verification of explanation of expenses actually incurred was not available and the disallowance of the claim led by the assessee was made on the estimated basis because of the want of relevant material to sustain actual expenditure incurred on aforesaid items, in our opinion it does not give to any question of law much less substantial questions of law. In the absence of verification of material expenses claimed as deduction as expenses actually incurred or laid out wholly and exclusively for the purposes of assessee, the reasonable estimation is permissible in law and (some) guesswork is inherently invoked in such estimation. Hence the extent to which claim of the assessee has been sustained remains ordinarily a finding of fact. In the facts and circumstances where in the absence of proper material if the AO has resorted to estimate and on estimated basis the Tribunal has sustained the certain amount of claim only, it cannot be said to be that disallowance of the claim is founded on no material or irrelevant consideration. Therefore, the finding on that account does not call for interference.