9911796707
TMI Blog1978 (7) TMI 182X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e computing the income under s. 41(2) of the IT Act, (2) the deletion by the AAC of the credit of Rs. 5,000 in the name of Joseph Kunju, (3) the deletion by the AAC of addition by way of unexplained cash credit to the extent of Rs. 9,000 in the name of Thirunavukarasu Chettiar. 2. The assessee is a transport operator in Madurai. The assessment was made for the asst. yr 1974-75 under s. 144 of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (2) of the IT Act is not an admissible deduction. The learned counsel for the assessee urged before us that the vehicles of the assessee being business assets and as these sales were in the course of the business, the brokerage payment could be allowed as business expenditure. There is much force in this contention. The brokerage even though is not admissible as deduction while computing income un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... account on 31st March, 1973. 5. The learned Departmental Representative on perusal of material available before him, pointed out that there is no credit in the name of Joseph Kunju of Rs. 5,000 on 31st March, 1973. Since, the credit entered of Rs. 5,000 is not true, there is no question of it being not bogus. The deletion of Rs. 5,000 is confirmed though for some other reasons. 6. The third i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing credit of Rs. 12,000 and that was debited in Dec., 1972 of Rs. 3,000. At the most, the assessee had failed to explain the credit to the extent of Rs. 6,000, in as much as, after deducting a sum of Rs. 6,000 in Dec., 1972 there was a credit of Rs. 3,000 in April, 1973. As such, we sustain an addition to the extent of Rs. 6,000. The learned counsel for the assessee has not been able to explain t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
