9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 456X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion made on account of low withdrawal - Held that:- No dispute that the A.O., without providing any opportunity to the assessee in respect of the Inspector’s report, estimated the household expenses as Rs. 1,20,000/- per year and has not considered the fact that the assessee got married on 18-11-2005 it fair and reasonable that the matter should go back to the file of the A.O. to decide the same afresh - in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. - ITA No. 1312/MUM/2010 - - - Dated:- 29-6-2012 - SHRI DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA JJ. Appellant by : Shri Prakash Pandit Respondent by: Shri D.S. Sunder Singh O R D E R PER DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL, J.M. This appeal preferred by the assessee is directed again ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... usiness income derived by the assessee. For instance, the total income disclosed during the year is Rs. 1,89,000/-, out of that the assessee has left with Rs. 31,200/- only considering the payment of tax, payment of LIC etc. He further observed that to save around Rs. 3,00,000/- assessee needs minimum 10 year of business which is not the fact considering the age of the assessee born in 1976 and accordingly he treated the investment made as undisclosed investment within the meaning of section 69-C of the Act and added the same to the total income of the assessee. On appeal the ld. CIT(A) while agreeing with the views of the A.O. confirmed the addition made by the A.O. 6. At the time of hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee has come forward with a new plea that the assessee and his family are having agriculture income to prove the source of investment in the flat of Rs. 3,01,000/- which was not produced before the A.O. and the ld. CIT(A), therefore, the additional evidence produced by the assessee without showing any reasonable cause should not be admitted. He therefore submits that in view of the findings recorded by the A.O. and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A), the addition of Rs. 3,01,000/- made by the A.O. and sustained by the ld. CIT(A) be upheld. 8. We have carefully considered the submissions of the rival parties and perused the material available on record. We find that it is not in dispute that the assessee has filed copy of bank statement before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Briefly stated facts of the above issue are that during the course of assessment proceeding it was inter alia observed by the A.O. that the assessee has shown withdrawal of Rs. 36,000/- which included payment of rent, household electricity telephone bills, society charges and personal expenses of self and wife and son etc. The assessee was asked to substantiate the withdrawal for these activities which was not furnished by the assessee. He further observed that an independent enquiry from the Inspector of this charge shows that the wife of the assessee is not an earning member of the family. It was stated that expenses towards rent, electricity and society charges are in the range of Rs. 80,000/- and accordingly the A.O. estimated house ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
