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

2013 (11) TMI 1484

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ross receipts by ignoring the facts discussed in detail in the assessment order. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,71,480/- made by AO on account of disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of I.T. Act, by admitting the additional evidence without allowing a reasonable opportunity to AO. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 94,259/- made by AO on account of accretion in capital from undisclosed sources by admitting the additional evidence without allowing a reasonable opportunity to AO. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT( .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... wed. Admittedly, the appellant has been doing advertisement business in the name of M/ s Vision Outdoors. It is not in dispute that he has also been doing the same business in HUF capacity in the name of M/s Outdoor Solutions which is evident from separate contracts entered with Municipal Authorities, separate books of accounts, separate bank accounts etc. Admittedly, the appellant give the PAN of the individual to that of the HUF since the HUF was not having PAN at that time for the contracts awarded without realizing the implications of the same. The appellant explained the difference in turnover admitted in the return w.r.t. that of Form 26AS during the assessment proceedings. It was also explained in clear terms in the appeal proceeding .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... AO came to the conclusion that the receipts of the proprietary concern of HUF were the receipts of the appellant, he could not have made the addition on gross receipt basis discarding the expenditure incurred. He could at best have made an addition of Rs. 1,05,352/ -, as declared in the return of HUF." 5. Against the above order the Revenue is in appeal before us. 6. We have heard both the counsel and perused the records. We find that the assessee's claim is that assessee is doing advertisement business in his individual capacity as well as in HUF capacity. Assessee has given the PAN, obtained in an individual capacity to work done in HUF capacity. This has been said to be the reason for the difference in receipt as shown by the assessee .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... wed the same u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Amount paid /credited Date of payment/ Date on which tax (Rs.) credit deposited 40000 31.10.2007 29.5.2008 200000 31.10.2007 29.5.2008 16480 31.01.2008 29.5.2008 15000 28.02.2008 29.5.2008 271480 (Total) 8. Before the Ld. CIT(A) assessee submitted that the TDS has been deposited before the due date of filing of the return and therefore, disallowance is not sustainable. Furthermore, it was submitted that the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act are not applicable in this case of the assessee as he was not required to deduct the tax, since the turnover was less than Rs. 40 lacs in the earlier year. Considering the above submissions, Ld. CIT(A) allowed the issue in favour of the assessee. 9. Aga .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... not valid. 13. Against the above order the Revenue is in appeal before us. 14. We have heard both the counsel and perused the records. We find that Ld. CIT(A) has granted the relief to the assessee by considering certain facts and figures which were not before the Ld. AO. In our considered opinion, interest of justice will be served if the matter is remitted to the file of the AO to examine the issue afresh. We hold and direct accordingly. 15. Apropos deletion of addition of Rs. 30,000/- 30,000/- On this issue Ld. AO noted that assessee has shown household withdrawals of Rs. 72000/- whereas investments u/s 80C alone came to Rs. 67114/-. In response to the query in this regard, assessee submitted that he resides in his own house and has .....

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