9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 656X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ociation Ltd. - from the entry known as “To DD Rs.6,12,500/-“, it is not ascertainable as to in which name the DD has been issued and encashed by whom - if the assessee is able to make payment in cash, or deliver a DD, it is certain that it would definitely know the address of the party, however the same is not furnished - the assessee has not proved that the liability has remained during the year under consideration - there was no reason to interfere with the decision of the CIT(A) confirming the action of AO in taxing the amount u/s 41(1) – Decided against Assessee. - ITA No. 8596/Mum/2011 - - - Dated:- 9-5-2014 - Shri P. M. Jagtap And Dr. S. T. M. Pavalan,JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri Jayesh Dadia For the Respondent : Sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y. However, vide letter dated 30th November, 2010 the assessee merely reiterated that the liability still existed. Subsequently, the assessee submitted the address of the said party and a notice u/s 133(6) was sent by the AO to the said party. However, the same was returned unserved with the remark not known. Thus, the AO added the amount of Rs.15,18,077/- u/s 41(1) of the Act, as the assessee did not confirm that the liability still exists and as per the Limitation Act, the liability is more than 5-6 years old it could not be enforced. 4. On appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee submitted that mere fact that liability remained unpaid cannot lead to conclusion that the same was no more payable or ceased. The assessee further relied o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o seven years as observed by the authorities below. It is noted that the assessee has not filed any confirmation from the concerned party to the effect that the liability remains outstanding and due from the assessee. Notice issued to the party at the address furnished by the assessee also has been returned back unserved and also no suit/claim has been made by the party against the assessee. It is further observed that the assessee has not produced any documentation to show that the said company has been claiming its money back. As regards the contention of the assessee that it has assigned the said liability to one of the Partner, Mr. Sudhir Chaddha and as far as the assessee firm is concerned, the said liability has been paid, it is perti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
