9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 137X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal. In view of these facts, we find no fault in the order of the CIT (A)- Decided in favour of assessee. Purchase of Retinal Camera - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- The assessee filed the evidence that M/s. Eye Tech Industries has not received the payment against the camera and the e-message has been submitted in this regard. The revenue is not able to prove that emessage received from M/s. Eye Tech Industries was not genuine. The revenue is also failed to prove that the apparent is not the real and the onus is on the party who claims it to be so.Find no fault in the order of the CIT (A)- Decided in favour of assessee. Addition to income - rejecting the books of account on the basis of the seized documents - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- The documents are not having any heading and it do not mention any period for which it pertains to. The revenue has not related the name of the person for whom the various figures appearing therein, therefore, no addition can be made on the basis of such bald and cryptic document. The Assessing Officer has gone to reject the books of account as he cannot accept the results declared by the assessee but, in our cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment year 2005-06. 2. The assessee is a proprietress of M/s. Agarwal Eye Hospital, Shivaji Road, Meerut. A search was conducted at residential and business premises of the assessee. A notice u/s 153A was served. The Assessing Officer made certain additions. The CIT (A) has deleted. Now, the assessee is in appeal by taking the following grounds of appeal :- 1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in not considering the merits of the case and in deleting the addition made by the AO after disallowing interest of ₹ 66,000/- paid to others, ignoring the specific finding of the AO based on the copies of accounts furnished by the assessee before him wherein no interest has been shown in the respective accounts. 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in reducing the addition of ₹ 43,301/- to ₹ 22,460/- made by the AO 1/4th of the expenses claimed under the head electricity expenses, generator expenses, repair and maintenance without appreciating that the assessee is staying in the same premises where business activities are being carried out. 3. Whether in the facts and circumstanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amily was both residing in the same premises, therefore, he disallowed 1/4th of expenses claimed on account of electricity, generator, repair and maintenance for personal use. 8. We have heard both the sides on the issue. We find that there are separate meters for residential portion and the Eye Hospital portion. Therefore, there was no scope for any disallowance out of the electricity expenses. Further, in respect of generator expenses, repair and maintenance expenses, we find that the CIT (A) has sustained 1/4th of the addition for which assessee is not in appeal. In view of these facts, we find no fault in the order of the CIT (A) on this issue and the ground is rejected. 9. In the ground no.3, the issue involved id deleting the addition of ₹ 7,70,000/- made on account of purchase of Retinal Camera. 10. Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and submitted that CIT (A) was not justified in deleting this addition. He submitted that the CIT (A) has not appreciated the specific and documentary evidences and finding of the Assessing Officer. He submitted that the assessee has purchased one Topcon Retinal Camera from undisclosed source of income. On the oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any adjudication. 15. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue being ITA No.4815/Del/2010 stands dismissed. ITA No.4816/Del/2010 16. This appeal filed by the revenue emanates from the order of CIT (A), Meerut dated 18.03.2010 for the assessment year 2006-07. 17. In the ground no.1, the issue involved is against the deletion of addition of interest of ₹ 78,500/- paid to others. 18. We have heard both the sides on the issue. We find that the loans and interest appearing in the liability as on 31.03.2006 at ₹ 12,50,000/- in the books of assessee. The interest paid has been shown in the profit and loss account as ₹ 1,62,500/- which stands tallied with the bank accounts, therefore, in our considered view, there is no merit in this ground of revenue s appeal and the same is dismissed. 19. In the ground no.2, the issue involved is deleting the addition of ₹ 30,00,000/- made on account of purchase of property as claimed by Shri T.P. Agarwal in his statement. 20. We have heard both the sides on the issue. After hearing, we find that there was no evidence found during the search operation which could suggest that the property in question wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that some cash was also received from Shri Dal Chand, father and uncle, Shri Pyare Lal and confirmation in this regard duly signed by these people was filed. A copy of Will dated 17.08.1982 of his uncle, Shri Pyare Lal was also produced. All these facts show that the corpus of Trilok Prakash Agarwal HUF came to be in existence in 1982 itself. Therefore, it is justified to be assessed income of Trilok Prakash Agarwal HUF. As far as, the source of investment of ₹ 10,90,000/- is concerned, we find that investment in KVPs/NSCs were made as early as in 1998 as these were renewed regularly thereafter. The bank accounts with Indraprastha Bank Limited was found during the search and these accounts were pertained to Trilok Prakash Agarwal HUF. The investments were made in the name of coparceners and the members of HUF. The source of investment of KVPs for the financial year 2004-05 was out of maturity and re-maturity of earlier investments. The assessee submitted a fund flow chart and the revenue could not controvert the facts of fund flow chart. The assessee has able to demonstrate that he was having ₹ 10,70,000/- with him which was invested during the year. In view of these f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
