9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (10) TMI 245X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, vide our order dt. 1st Aug., 2005. The assessment year involved is 1996-97 and the first appellate order, which has been challenged, is dt. 7th March, 2001. 2. The assessee is a partner in the firm M/s Anand Medical Agencies, Bhilwara, and his only source of income is from remuneration and interest from the above partnership firm. He filed his returns declaring total income of Rs. 39,150 on 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plained, the reasons for keeping the cash in home for 2/3 months not properly explained, why this money was not deposited in the bank or in the firm, immediately. The learned AO, therefore, added this sum of Rs. 25,000 as unexplained. To support his finding, the learned AO elaborately discussed in his order the household expenses and opined that this amount may have been spent towards these daily ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gued that the addition in question is uncalled for. When the assessee has explained that Rs. 15,000 and Rs. 10.000 were withdrawn from his capital account in the books of the firm on 13th Nov., 1995 and 10th Dec., 1995, respectively, and there is no evidence with the Department that this amount had been spent somewhere else, therefore, in the light of the facts that the assessee has no other sourc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase to justify more expenses, but without proof, no legal authority would be permitted to make ad hoc and baseless additions. 9. It is the categorical finding of the learned AO despite he made in-depth investigation, that he did not have any proof to pinpoint exact source of the amount so deposited, but even then he went on making this addition. No law would permit such an action. He may be corr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
