9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 420X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal by the Revenue raises the following grounds. "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in deleting the addition of Rs.2,00,000/- made by the AO on account of unexplained expenditure by the assessee. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in deleting the addition of Rs.16,62,705/- made by the AO on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... both the grounds raised by the Revenue before us. "2.1. The appellant explains that the loan of Rs.1 lac was given to MIs. Pal Regency (P) Ltd. by the appellant from his capital account in M/s. Pal Constructions on dt.1.9.2006 by cheque No.816121 on Andhra Bank. This loan was repaid by M/s. Pal Regency (P) Ltd. in the subsequent financial year on dt.12.10.2007 on Andhra Bank. However, instead of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of Rs.1 lac against MIs. Pal Regency (P) Ltd. and also show asset of Rs.1 lac through drawings account. The bank ledger in the books of M/s. Pal Regency (P) Ltd. shows that an amount of Rs.1 lac paid to M/s. Pal Constructions by cheque No.830072 on dt.12.10.2007 towards a refund of loan. Accordingly, there is no doubt that the loan given earlier by the appellant from his proprietorship concern t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n disclosed in the P&L account and income offered to tax. The copies of the P&L accounts are also furnished. The P&L accounts which has been audited shows that the amount of Rs.16,62,705/- has been credited to the P&L account as bills received, hence has been offered to tax as income. The said old bills did not relate to expenditure. Accordingly, the AO has misunderstood that the old bills relate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o tax by the assessee could not be considered for finding as no expenditure had been incurred on the same to be taxed again. This again is an absurdity noted by the Assessing Officer which has been properly dealt with by the learned CIT(A). We uphold the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the Revenue. The Cross objection filed by the assessee in support of the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
