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

2012 (11) TMI 53

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e household expenditure - it cannot be presumed that assessee was not incurring any household expenses - CO of the assessee is dismissed - ITA No.2609/Ahd/2011 - - - Dated:- 24-5-2012 - Shri, A.K.Garodia, Shri Kul Bharat, JJ. By Assessee None (Written Submission) By Revenue Shri B.L. Yadav, SR-DR O R D E R PER Kul Bharat, Judicial Member:- The Revenue has filed present appeal and the assessee has filed Cross Objection (CO) both are directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-XV, Ahmedabad dated 29-08-2011 for the assessment year 2008-09. The notice of hearing was served upon the assessee through Registered post with acknowledgement due (RPAD for short) on 18-04-2012. However, on the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 9,90,142/- being the fresh capital introduced and an addition of Rs.48,90,823/- on account of unsecured loan and both these additions were made u/s. 68 of the Act. The assessee feeling aggrieved by the assessment order filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). 4. The assessee made submission dated 30-05-2011 before Ld. CIT(A) , wherein it was stated that assessee did not maintain regular books of account during the year under consideration and for the limited purpose of filing return profit and loss account and balance-sheet were compiled and filed. It was also stated that from the compiled capital account, it can be seen that the opening balance in the capital account is Rs.27,15,719/- as on 01-04-2007. Therefore, Section 68 of the Act was not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er, both the authorities have considered only 9 years. Further the appellant is assessed since last so many years and filing his return of income U/s. 44AD. The opening capital balance shown by the appellant is totally acceptable considering the length of period from which the appellant is doing business and filing return of income. 3. It is clearly mentioned that the assessee is doing business since more than 12 years and filing return of income which proves beyond doubt that capital balance of appellant is fully justified. The learned A.O is having record of the appellant, however, in remand report he has not covered 3 years and considering this aspect also the addition retained by learned CIT(A) amounting to Rs.7,15,719/- mentioned in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... le to the capital. The submission of the appellant and also the ledger account copy of the capital account furnished through page number 7 of the paper book (enclose as Annexure-1 of this order) were sent to the AO for remand report. 5. Vide letter dated 5.7.2011 (remand report enclosed as Aannexuire-2 of this order) the AO in his report informed that he asked the appellant to file necessary proofs, cash flow statement, bank account, confirmation etc. in support of the opening capital shown. But the appellant did not furnish any detail to the Assessing Officer, therefore the AO prepared a table of the income declared in the returns of last 10- years and found that as per income declared each year then too the credit balance in the capit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssessee s CO No.02/Ahd/2012. 8. The grounds taken in CO reproduced as under:- 1. That the learned A.O has field appeal against the order of the learned CIT(A) for deleting Rs.22,74,423/- instead of Rs.20,00,000/- holding it as unexplained cash credit and unexplained introduction of capital during the year under section 68 of the I.T.Act. 1961. 2. On the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case of the appellant, the learned CIT(A) is unjustified in retaining Rs.7,15,719/- out of total additions of Rs.27,15,719/- from opening capital balance. 3. That the appellant is filing its return of income U/s 44AD since years together and considering the income declared, the opening capital balance shown at Rs.27,15,719/- is wholly justifie .....

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