2013 (11) TMI 1484 - AT - Income Tax

Under reporting of gross receipts Held that - Assessee is doing advertisement business in his individual capacity as well as in HUF capacity - Assessee has given the PAN, obtained in an individual capacity to work done in HUF capacity - This has been said to be the reason for the difference in receipt as shown by the assessee and that as reflected in the Form No. 26AS The ld. CIT(A) has noted that in the appeal proceedings, assessee has duly established that the difference was properly explained - Ld. CIT(A) has also accepted that return of HUF purportedly filed by the assessee in HUF capacity when the appellant submitted that as it was not filed by him as it does not have his signatures - Ld. CIT(A) has also referred to the reconciliation made which he has found to be satisfactory The issue was restored for fresh adjudication. Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) Held that - If the TDS has been deposited before the date of filing of the return, the disallowance is not sustainable - As per the provisions of section 40(ia) for the relevant period TDS was not deductible if the turnover of the previous year was less than Rs. 40 lacs The issue was restored for fresh adjudication. Capital from undisclosed sources Held that - The amount was outstanding balance of the HDFC bank in the name of the assessee and the said account was transferred to the capital account of the assessee by debiting the same to the HDFC bank - The issue was restored for fresh adjudication. Low household drawings Held that - The household expenses have been incurred out of the assessee s own capital account from which he has also contributed to investment u/s 80C The expenses incurred by the HUF were granted as relief Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Deletion of addition of Rs. 67,97,201 on account of under reporting of gross receipts.
2. Deletion of addition of Rs. 2,71,480 made under section 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act.
3. Deletion of addition of Rs. 94,259 on account of accretion in capital from undisclosed sources.
4. Deletion of addition of Rs. 30,000 out of Rs. 116,193 made on account of low household drawings.

Deletion of addition of Rs. 67,97,201:
The appellant, engaged in advertisement business, faced an addition to income due to a variance in receipts reported in the return and Form 26AS. The AO added the difference amount to the income. However, the CIT(A) found discrepancies due to separate business entities and accepted the appellant's explanations. The tribunal remitted the issue to the AO for further examination.

Deletion of addition of Rs. 2,71,480:
The AO disallowed TDS under section 40(a)(ia) for late deposit. The CIT(A) allowed the issue, considering timely deposit and turnover criteria. The tribunal remitted the matter to the AO for factual examination.

Deletion of addition of Rs. 94,259:
The AO treated cash introduction in the capital account as undisclosed income. The CIT(A) accepted the explanation of the amount being transferred from the bank account, supported by transfer vouchers. The tribunal remitted the issue for fresh examination by the AO.

Deletion of addition of Rs. 30,000:
The AO made an addition for low household drawings, which the CIT(A) partially allowed, considering HUF withdrawals. The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision on this issue.

In conclusion, the tribunal partly allowed the Revenue's appeal for statistical purposes, remitting certain issues back to the AO for further examination.