9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (9) TMI 172X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 55,597 in all as against the claim of Rs. 22,500 in the preceding year. The claim of the assessee was that the assessee engaged large number or Karigars for the manufacturing activities but there was a search on 22nd Jan., 1983, the assessee could not make use of those Karigars satisfactorily. But at the same time, the assessee did not want to dispense with those Karigars which were not easily available. Therefore, he had paid the salary to all the old and new Karigars employed at the beginning of the accounting year relevant to the assessment year under consideration. The claim of the assessee was not allowed by the ITO. He reproduced the Gadai charges from 1980-81 to 1984-85 and on the basis of past history, he disallowed the expenses amounting to Rs. 30,000. 6. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) has referred to the manufacturing receipts and payment of salary from February to November and he was of the view that the disallowance of Rs. 30,000 on account of salary claim is reasonable. He also stated in his order that in case of Rs. 30,000 is deleted by the higher authorities, then he proposed the addition on account of job works charg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 80-81 60,074 22,325 1981-82 58,884 25,725 1982-83 79,127 22,500 1983-84 76,943 22,500 1984-85 71,646 55,507 Now taking the past history regarding this issue of the assessee as well as taking into account the disturbance in the assessee s mind and the business on account of search on 22nd Jan., 1983, we confirm the addition of Rs. 25,000 as against addition of Rs. 30,000 made by the CIT(A). 10. The next issue for consideration in the appeal is whether the CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 95,700 on account of unexplained stock of silver of 33.375 kg. 11. The relevant facts are that at the time of search at the assessee s premises, silver and silver utensils of 165.304 kg. were found and the assessee has explained that 52.896 kg. carried forward from old stock as on Diwali, 1982, 9.533 kg. belongs to Haryana Abhushan Bhandar, 25,530 kg. belongs to P. Chandrakant Co., 70 kg. belongs to Subhakaran Shyamsunder and 7 kg. on account of mixing of alloy etc. In order under s. 132(5), the ITO has accepted the silver of 52.896 kg. coming out of old stock. The ITO did not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r any addition on the basis of entries found on 3rd Dec., 1982. On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative Shri Bolia submitted that order under s. 132(12) of CIT is not binding on the ITO and when the ITO has examined the books seized, he can add on the basis of entries found in the seized books. Therefore, addition was justified. 13. We have heard the rival submissions on this issue. The fact are not in dispute that on the date of search 165.304 kg. of silver was found in the possession of the assessee On the date of search, no unexplained stock was found by the ITO in order under s. 143(3) nor by the CIT under s. 132(12), though the CIT has passed the order under s. 132(12) which is not binding on the ITO, that is a finding of superior officer. Therefore, cannot be ignored into. But basically in our view, that is not the dispute that no unaccounted silver was found on the date of search and no addition is made by the ITO on the basis of silver found on 22nd Jan., 1983. What the ITO has done is that he enquired and examined the entries found in the Udrat Bahi and he was of the view that there is a great discrepancy in the silver on 3rd Dec., 1982 as per s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee Shri Ranka submitted that it is paid for the purpose of business. Shri Shyam Sunder has attended the income-tax matters for assessee and, he also looks after the assessee s business. Therefore, the payment of Rs. 10,000 to Shyamsunder is for the purpose of business and that should be allowed as deduction. 16. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative submitted that salary was paid for attending the income-tax matter. Therefore, the question of doing business does not arise. At the most a part of it can be allowed under s. 80VV if no claim has been made or allowed. 17. After hearing the rival submissions, we agree with the learned Departmental Representative and direct the ITO to see whether deduction under s. 80VV is allowed or not. If full deduction was not allowed under s. 80VV, then the ITO is directed to give full benefit under the aforesaid section out of the amount of Rs. 10,000 paid to Shri Shyamsunder by the assessee for attending the income-tax matters. 18. Now the last issue relates to the addition of Rs. 50,000 for job work receipts. This issue relates to the issue raised by the Revenue in its appeal that the CIT(A) has wrongly reduced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
