9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (7) TMI 100X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the income of the assessee. Business expenditure - tractor hire charges, labour purchase and salary expenses - dis-allowance - Held that:- Since assessee failed to produce supporting evidence for incurring impugned expenses for business purposes, hence CIT(A) was justified in restricting dis-allowance to Rs 1 lac. Appeal of assessee dismissed. - I.T.A. No.2526/Ahd/2010 - - - Dated:- 31-5-2012 - Shri D.K. Tyagi, Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, JJ. Department by : Shri S.P. Talati, Sr. D.R. Assessee by : Shri Anil R. Shah ORDER PER : D.K. TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER This is assessee s appeal against the order of ld. CIT(A)-V, Baroda dated 08.06.2010, passed in appeal No.CAB(A)/V/15/09-10. 2. The assessee has tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , therefore, restricted these disallowances to Rs.1,00,000/- to cover up unverified portion out of cash payment through vouchers. 4. After hearing both the parties and perusing the record we find the order passed by ld. CIT(A) to be quite reasonable in restricting this addition to Rs.1,00,000/- for want of supporting evidence for incurring these expenses for business purposes and the same is hereby upheld. This ground of the assessee is dismissed. 5. Second ground relates to addition of Rs.3,75,695/- u/s 68 of the I.T. Act. During the assessment proceedings the A.O. noticed that assessee had shown unsecured loan of Rs.3,45,000/- from Shri Rajendra C. Shah. On verification of his bank account it was found that this amount shows credit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the copy of return of the creditor and the pass book of the creditor to the A.O. For making this submission reliance was placed on the decision in the case of CIT Vs. Kishorilal 216 ITR 9. The assessee also took alternative plea before ld. CIT(A) stating that in ground No.1 expense of Rs.3,57,585/- was disallowed by the A.O. and here again a sum of Rs.3,75,695/- was added u/s 68 and that both the additions cannot be made and that the benefit of telescoping be allowed. Ld. CIT(A), however, after taking into consideration the submission of the assessee, confirmed the action of the A.O. Further aggrieved, now the assessee is in appeal before us. 10. At the time of hearing ld. counsel of the assessee reiterated the submissions made before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
