Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1981 (3) TMI 155

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... efore the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) deleted the additional profit taken by the ITO at Rs.2,000 but he maintained the disallowance of loss of Rs.763 in garlic account. 3. The assessee disclosed the loss of Rs.763 in garlic account. The trading account in the Head Office had been accepted, the CIT(A) had deleted the additional profit of Rs.2,000 taken by the ITO in potato, onion etc. Under the above circumstances, there is no justification of disallowance of loss of Rs. 763 which is allowed. 4. The next objection of the assessee is about the maintenance of addition of Rs.2,000 in wheat account in M/s Gyandeo Pd. Pannalal. The assessee in M/s Gyandeo Pd. Pannalal. disclosed the turnover of Rs. 5,07,807 and gross profit of Rs. 7,470 which worke .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dditional profit of Rs. 1,500. 8. The assessee came in appeal before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) had deleted the additional profit taken by the ITO at Rs. 1,500 but he has confirmed the disallowance of loss of Rs. 4,892. 9. The assessee, no doubt, had indicated that the market was not favourable in Dec., 1974 and March, 1975, but, however it was not able to prove the loss of Rs. 4,892. Consequently, the disallowance of loss of Rs. 4,892 by the CIT(A) is fair and the same is confirmed. 10. The next objection of the assessee is about the disallowance of Rs. 1,000 out of shop expenses. The ITO disallowed Rs. 1,500 out of shop expenses on the ground that the shop expenses claimed by the assessee were not verifiable. The CIT(A) after allowin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e allowed by the Tribunal, it is necessary to discuss the addition of Rs. 15,000 in the name of Shri Gyandeo Prasad. He stated that Shri Gyandeo Prasad is an income-tax assessee. His file No. had been given before the ITO. The ITO had himself accepted not only the identity but also the capacity of Shri Gyandeo Prasad and he only determined Rs. 15,000 as unexplained investment. Under the above circumstances, there could not be any justification for addition of Rs. 15,000 in the hands of the assessee. Shri Prasad, the senior Deptl. Rep., on the other hand, supported the order of the ITO and urged that the ITO has considered the income of Shri Gyandeo Prasad and, therefore, he has come to the conclusion that Shri Gyandeo Prasad was in a positi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e taken as unexplained. Consequently, even if the additions in the trading account are deleted, no addition could be made for the amount deposited by Shri Gyandeo Prasad. 16. The last objection of the assessee is for the interest charged by the ITO under ss. 139 and 217 of the Act. The assessee pleaded that the ITO has not indicated any intention of his charging interest under ss. 139 and 217 in the assessment order. This fact is also not borne out from the order sheet of the ITO. However, the assessee received the demand notice in which the interest was included under ss. 139 and 217 of the Act. The assessee took a ground before the CIT(A), but the CIT(A) has failed to give his finding. He urged that the assessee denies the total liabili .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... (A) failed to give a finding on that issue. Under the above circumstances, the issue is alive and, therefore, the assessee could argue on that issue. The other argument taken by the Deptl. Rep. was that in view of the decisions in (1980) 15 CTR (All) 67 : (1980) 121 ITR 708 (All) and (1980) 122 ITR 451 (All) the assessee has got no right of appeal on this issue. This plea of the Deptl. Rep. also cannot be accepted on the ground that the assessee has denied the total liability of interest under ss. 139 and 217 of the Act. The assessee had come in appeal on several grounds which arose out of the assessment order made by the ITO. The charging of interest under ss. 139 and 217 is also arising from the same order. Under the above circumstances, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates