9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1484X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as it does not have his signatures - Ld. CIT(A) has also referred to the reconciliation made which he has found to be satisfactory – The issue was restored for fresh adjudication. Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) – Held that:- If the TDS has been deposited before the date of filing of the return, the disallowance is not sustainable - As per the provisions of section 40(ia) for the relevant period TDS was not deductible if the turnover of the previous year was less than Rs. 40 lacs – The issue was restored for fresh adjudication. Capital from undisclosed sources – Held that:- The amount was outstanding balance of the HDFC bank in the name of the assessee and the said account was transferred to the capital account of the assessee by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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(A) has erred in law and in facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 30000/- out of Rs. 116193/- made by on account of low household drawings by ignoring the facts discussed in detail in the assessment order. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, delete or amend any ground or grounds of appeal at the time of hearing. 3. Apropos deletion of addition of Rs. 67,97,201/- The assessee, Proprietor of M/s Vision Outdoors, is engaged in the business of advertisement by putting hoardings etc. and returned total i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 proceedings as noted above in the preceeding paras. Reconciliation of the difference, if any, has also been made before the AO. 6.1 Reliance of the AO on the return of HUF purportedly filed by the appellant in HUF capacity on 5.12.2008 when the appellant submitted that it was not filed by him as it does not have the signature is misplaced. When the return of income admitting their turnover and TDS credit dated 30.9.2008 based on the audited books and audit report is available, there is no justification for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 and that as reflected in the Form No. 26AS. In this regard, we note that ld. CIT(A) has noted that in the appeal proceedings, assessee has duly established that the difference was properly explained. In this regard, he has held that necessary reconciliation was also given. Ld. CIT(A) has also accepted the assessees's submissions that return of HUF purportedly filed by the assessee in HUF capacity on 5.12.2008 when the appellant submitted that as it was not filed by him as it does not have his sig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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. Against the above order the Revenue is in appeal before us. 10. We have heard both the counsel and perused the records. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has granted the relief to the assessee by considering the factual submissions made by the assessee before him. Principally we agree with the position that if the TDS has been deposited before the date of filing of the return, the disallowance is not sustainable. Furthermore, as per the provisions of section 40(ia) for the relevant period TDS was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 withdrawn Rs. 1,30,921/- from his capital out of which investment u/s. 80C of Rs. 67114/- was made and the balance amount of Rs. 63807/- was used for household expenses. Ld. AO estimated the assessee's household expense at Rs. 15,000/- per month and made the addition of Rs. 116193/-. 16. Before the Ld. CIT(A) assessee submitted that the Ld. AO has ignored the withdrawals made by the HUF of Rs. 30,000/-. Ld. CIT(A) granted the relief of this amount and restricted the addition in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
