9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 395X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in that case there was composite letting of building fitted with furniture and fixtures for the purpose of paying rent as a hotel. - Decided against assessee. Addition invoking provisions of section 68 - CIT(A) confirmed addition - Held that:- In the assessment order the AO observed that during the year under consideration the company did not show any receipt from its manufacturing activity. Therefore, it is not clear as to how the assessee could ask for advance. The assessee did not file any confirmation letter from the party or its bank statement or income-tax return details, PAN etc. Ld. CIT(A) has observed that on perusal of the relevant alleged account of the said party, it was seen that the amounts had been received by the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to A.Y. 2001-02. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee who is one of the group companies of Himachal Futuristic Communications Ltd., in the relevant assessment year, was engaged in the business of manufacturing of telecom equipments. It had filed its return of income declaring loss of ₹ 5,63,460/-. During the year under consideration the assessee company did not show any receipt from its manufacturing activities. The assessment was completed at a net loss of ₹ 1,16,08,586/-, inter alia, after making following additions/ disallowances: (i) Rental income of ₹ 16,33,125/- returned as business income by assessee, was treated as income from house property. (ii) Addition of ₹ 20,61,090/- u/s 68 rejecting t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d returned the same as business income. The AO assessed the income under the head income from house property, inter alia, observing that it is the settled legal position that if any income is assessable under the specific head, then it is to be assessed under that head even though such income may also fall under the other head. 6. He pointed out that the assessee is the absolute owner of the premises 286, Udyog Vihar, Phase-II and other fitments and fixtures therein. The company was incorporated on 6-2-1995 and has put the property on rent since 1-10-1997. He, therefore, concluded that the rent was received in exercise of the property rights of assessee. Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the AO's action, inter alia, observing that t he issue is n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... smissed. 9. Brief facts apropos ground no. 4 are that during the year under consideration. The assessee had claimed to have received advance of ₹ 20,61,090/- from M/s Aegis India CATV Systems Pvt. Ltd., C-12, Sector 20, Noida (UP). The AO issued summons u/s 131. The Inspector informed, after local inquiry, that the company was never in existence at the given address. The AO further observed that the company was not filing any income tax return. The AO brought this fact to the knowledge of assessee and asked to produce M/s Aegis India CATV Systems Pvt. Ltd. along with confirmed copy of account. Since assessee did not produce any person on behalf of the said company nor filed any confirmation, he made addition of ₹ 20,61,090/-. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ies P. Ltd. - CIT Vs. Excel Industries Ltd. 358 ITR 295 (SC); and - CIT Vs. Ram Pistons Rings Ltd. 174 Taxman 147(Del.); 14. Ld. DR relied on the order of ld. CIT(A). 15. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the record of the case. Ld. counsel has referred to page 28 of the PB, wherein the purchase order is contained and the same is dated 7-7-1999 for ₹ 1,30,00,000/-. In the assessment order the AO observed that during the year under consideration the company did not show any receipt from its manufacturing activity. Therefore, it is not clear as to how the assessee could ask for advance. The assessee did not file any confirmation letter from the party or its bank statement or income-tax return details, PA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
