9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 769X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the order of the CIT(A)-26, Mumbai, dated 5-12-2011, pertaining to Assessment Year 2007-2008. 2. The sum and substance of the grievance of the re venue is that the CIT(A) erred in deleting the suo motu addition of Rs.22,11,000/- made by the assessee on account of disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 3. The concise facts of the case are that the assessee is a painter and sold ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat this was brought to the notice of the AO vide letter dated 19-110-2009, which has not been considered by the AO nor any mention in the assessment order. The assessee reiterated its point of view before the CIT(A) that the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) made by the assessee suo motu was inadvertent as the provisions of Section 194J do not apply in the case of the assessee. The CIT(A) call ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt of disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) and directed the AO to delete the suo motu addition of Rs.22,11,000/-. Aggrieved by this, the revenue is in appeal here before us. 5. Learned DR strongly supported the findings of the AO. It is the say of the DR that the assessee is a painter and sells the painting and art works. Hence, he is engaged in a profession. Therefore, the tax audit limit appli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s.40 lakhs and since this is the 1st year of tax audit, the provisions of Section 194J read with its Proviso do not apply in the case of assessee. The assessee has erroneously disallowed a sum of Rs.22,11,000/- and the CIT(A) has rightly directed the AO to delete the said disallowance. 7. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused order of the lower authorities. It is not in d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
