9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (12) TMI 73 - AT - Income TaxAddition u/s 68 - identity of the lender, genuineness of the transaction and creditworthiness of the lender - matter remanded back to AO to reconsider the issue. Personal use - addition of Rs.13,786/- being 20% of vehicle expenses and depreciation of Rs.68,931/-. - Held that - The ld. CIT (A) has reduced the disallowance to 10% of the total expenses. We, however, feel that this addition to be restricted to 5% of the total expenses. This ground is partly allowed.
Issues:
1. Addition of Rs.13,77,000 under section 68 of the IT Act. 2. Disallowance of 20% of vehicle expenses and depreciation. Analysis: Issue 1: Addition of Rs.13,77,000 under section 68 of the IT Act The primary contention in this appeal was the addition of Rs.13,77,000 under section 68 of the IT Act. The Assessing Officer (AO) required the assessee to establish the identity of the lender, genuineness of the transaction, and creditworthiness of the lender regarding a loan shown in the name of Shri Madanlal J. Panjabi. The assessee could only provide the death certificate of Mr. Panjabi, failing to submit further evidence, including from legal heirs. Consequently, the AO made the addition under section 68. The ld. CIT (A) upheld this decision due to the lack of additional details from the assessee. Upon appeal, the Tribunal granted the assessee another opportunity to substantiate the credit claim from Mr. Panjabi, remanding the matter back to the AO for fresh adjudication after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity to present their case. Issue 2: Disallowance of 20% of vehicle expenses and depreciation The second ground of appeal concerned the disallowance of Rs.13,786, representing 20% of vehicle expenses, and depreciation of Rs.68,931 by the AO, citing the possibility of personal use of the vehicles. The ld. CIT (A) reduced the disallowance to 10% of the total expenses. However, the Tribunal decided to further restrict the addition to 5% of the total expenses, differing from the CIT (A)'s decision. Consequently, this ground was partly allowed by the Tribunal. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the assessee was partly allowed for statistical purposes, with the Tribunal providing specific directions regarding both the addition under section 68 of the IT Act and the disallowance of vehicle expenses and depreciation.
|
