2013 (4) TMI 64 - AT - Income Tax

Addition u/s 41(1) - cessation of liabilities - Held that - The liability pertains to the preceding year where copies of accounts of all sundry creditors are placed on record and were available before both the authorities below. The said balances are outstanding in the following years as well is a matter of record and there is no dispute to the said fact. The assessee has not obtained any benefit out of such liability which is not ceased to be a liability and the assessee has not written back such liability unilaterally in its books of account. Therefore, such liability cannot be a subject matter of section 41(1) of the Act. Even if confirmation copies of accounts and books of account are not produced, the copies of audited accounts for the impugned year and the assessment record of preceding year was available with the A.O. The AO cannot make the assessment on conjectures, surmises or on the basis of suspicion. - Additions made u/s 41(1) directed to be deleted. Addition of family loans - Held that - The arrangements made by the DR has no substance in the matter in this regard. The assessee having proved the identity, capacity and creditworthiness of said persons and therefore, cannot be subject matter of addition. Thus, additions have wrongly been confirmed by the CIT(A) and the same are directed tobe deleted. Disallowance of car expenditure and car depreciation - Held that - As the AO has not made any discussion in the body of the order and has simply disallowed expenses without application of mind, which has been confirmed by the CIT(A). No such disallowance can be made without passing areasoned order. Therefore, such addition made, is directed to be deleted.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Dismissal of appeal by CIT(A) due to non-pursuance and short notice.
2. Confirmation of addition of Rs. 14,74,763 on account of cessation of liabilities under Section 41(1) of the Act.
3. Confirmation of addition of Rs. 26,30,038 on account of so-called creditors for advances against supply of machinery.
4. Disallowance of car expenses, car depreciation, and telephone expenses.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Dismissal of Appeal by CIT(A):
The assessee contended that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without appreciating the facts, including the short notice period and the illness of a partner. The Tribunal noted that grounds No. 1 to 7 were not pursued by the assessee and were dismissed accordingly. Ground No. 12 was deemed general and required no adjudication.

2. Addition of Rs. 14,74,763 on Account of Cessation of Liabilities:
The assessee argued that the liabilities were existing and had not ceased. The Tribunal observed that the assessee had submitted copies of accounts showing the balances as outstanding from the preceding year. The Tribunal found that the AO made the addition on the assumption that the liabilities were fictitious, without proving them as false or fraudulent. The Tribunal held that the liabilities could not be considered ceased under Section 41(1) as the assessee had not obtained any benefit during the year. Therefore, the addition was directed to be deleted.

3. Addition of Rs. 26,30,038 on Account of Creditors for Advances Against Supply of Machinery:
The assessee submitted that these were genuine old family loans with confirmed copies of accounts and PAN details. The Tribunal noted that the balances were outstanding for many years and the creditors were assessed to tax. The Tribunal found that the AO and CIT(A) failed to establish that the loans were not genuine. The assessee had proved the identity, capacity, and creditworthiness of the creditors. Consequently, the addition was directed to be deleted.

4. Disallowance of Car Expenses, Car Depreciation, and Telephone Expenses:
The AO disallowed 30% of car expenses, car depreciation, and telephone expenses without providing a reasoned order. The Tribunal noted that the AO did not discuss these disallowances in detail and simply disallowed the expenses. The Tribunal held that such disallowances could not be made without proper reasoning and directed the deletion of these additions.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal allowed the appeal partly, directing the deletion of the additions of Rs. 14,74,763 and Rs. 26,30,038 and the disallowance of car expenses, car depreciation, and telephone expenses. The grounds related to the dismissal of the appeal by CIT(A) were not pursued and dismissed.