9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 291X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed CIT(A) has erred in allowing relief to the extent impugned in the grounds of enumerated below: 1. "On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in taking only 8% of undisclosed receipts of Rs. 19,82,630/- as income when the assessee had neither claimed to have incurred any expenditure in addition to what was already debited in the Profit & Loss Account, nor produce any evidence of having actually incurred any expenses which are not already debited." 2. The appellant prays that the order of Ld. CIT(A) on the above ground be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored." Grounds of Assessee's Appeal in ITA No.2067/Mum/2012: 1.10 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng & Stationary 66,429.00 To Salary & Wages 1,050,000.00 To Sundry Expenses 99,754.50 To Telephone Charges 89,680.00 To Transportation charges 6,005,000.00 To Net Profit C/D 287,423.33 7,985,370.00 7,985,370.00 2.1 In the assessee's appeal the amount mentioned as Rs. 31,65,000/- has been disallowed by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) r.w.s 194C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) and it is part and parcel of an aggregate sum of Rs. 60,05,000/- ,claimed in the aforementioned profit and loss account on account of transportation charges. The disallowance has been upheld by Ld. CIT(A) on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so filed in the paper book. However, for the sake of brevity all of them are not referred. 3. It may also be mentioned here that Ground No.1 was not pressed by Ld. AR and it was submitted that Ground No.2 to 4 essentially raised one issue i.e. disallowance sustained by Ld. CIT(A) of a sum of Rs. 35,65,500/- under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and in view of aforementioned submission, as no part of the sum was payable as at the end of the relevant previous year, the decision of sustaining disallowance by Ld. CIT(A) is incorrect. 4. On the other hand, it is the case of Ld. DR that in view of suspension of Special Bench decision, the same should not be followed. 5. We have heard both the parties and their contentions have carefully been cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contrary decisions of the other Hon'ble High Courts, i.e. Hon'ble Calcutta High Court and Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Allabahad High Court it can be said the there can be two views possible in this matter in which event the one which is in favour of the assessee has to be followed in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vegetable Products Ltd. 88 ITR 192. Accordingly the Chennai Bench held that section 40(a)(ia) is not attracted in respect of the amount already paid by the assessee. 5. The learned D.R., on the other hand, could not place before us any contrary judgement on this issue. Though the learned D.R. promised to file written submissions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ceipts credited to P&L A/c.[A] Rs. 79,85,370/- Less: Expenditure incurred Truck/lorry rent/ hire charges and material Rs. 31,65,500/- Disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) sustained of Rs. 31,65,500/- (Assessee's Appeal) Fuel Expnse Rs. 15,98,450/- Addition deleted (No appeal) Driver & Cleaner Salary Rs. 9,78,770/- Addition deleted (No appeal) Duties and RTO tax Rs. 36,580/- Addition deleted (No appeal) Loading/unloading charges Rs. 1,89,500/- Addition deleted (No appeal) Others Rs. 36,200/- Addition deleted (No appeal) Expense debited to audited P&L A/c. [B] Rs. 60,05,000/- Gross Profit [A+B] Rs.19,80,370/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he has upheld the addition of Rs. 1,58,610/- in place of Rs. 19,82,630/-. The Revenue is aggrieved by the relief granted by Ld. CIT(A). 8. After narrating the facts it was submitted by Ld. DR that assessee did not submit details regarding the expenditure. The expenditure were claimed by the assessee in the P&L Account. It was submitted by Ld. DR that in absence of details, Ld. CIT(A) has committed an error in granting relief to the assessee. Ld. DR submitted that entire amount of Rs. 19,82,630/- was assessable as income. The relief granted by Ld. CIT(A) should be reversed and the addition made by AO should be restored. 9. On the other hand, it was submitted by Ld. AR that assessee had actually incurred these expenditure. He submitted tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
