9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 381X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the learned CIT(A) was very fair in reducing the disallowance to 10% of the total claim made by the assessee. - Decided against revenue. Disallowance of salary - CIT(A) deleted addition - Held that:- complete details and evidences have been furnished before the learned CIT(A). The Assessing Officer has examined the details and evidences and nothing adverse was found and he was free to examine whatever further he required and the disallowance cannot be sustained merely on the ground that salary was paid in cash, particularly when complete details and evidences are available. It is further seen that the assessee submitted Salary Muster, and nothing adverse has been reported in the remand report. Keeping in view the facts and submissions and material placed before us, we find that no interference is called for in the order of the learned CIT(A).- Decided against revenue. Admission of additional evidence by the learned CIT(A) in terms of rule 46A of the I.T. Rules, 1962 - Held that:- No case has been brought out by the learned Departmental Representative to convince us as to how and in what manner provisions of rule 46A has not been complied with by the learned CIT(A). On the ot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l as the submissions of the assessee and, thereafter, reduced the disallowance to ₹ 26,00,282/-, deleting the balance. The Revenue has challenged the action of the learned CIT(A) in reducing the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. 5. Before us, the learned Departmental Representative supported the order of the Assessing Officer and contended that the disallowance was rightly made by the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) has wrongly reduced the amount of disallowance, praying for reversing the action of the learned CIT(A). 6. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that, in fact, no disallowance was called for. The learned CIT(A) has been very fair and reasonable in sustaining the part disallowance whereas full disallowance ought to have been deleted by the learned CIT(A). He also drew our attention on the remand report, copy of which was enclosed in the paper book filed by the Revenue. 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material placed on record. It is seen that the remand report has been called for by the learned CIT(A) during the appellate proceedings. The Assessing Officer had full opportunity to examine all the facts and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,734 Rs. 4,87,25,095 Rs. 3,44,54,829 COST OF LABOUR (a) Payments to sub contractors Rs. 1,41,22,423 Rs. 59,46,437 Rs. 26,08,279 Rs. 1,25,07,518 (b) Wages Rs. 1,28,24,737 Rs. 1,08,35,175 Rs. 2,60,02,822 Rs. 1,25,42,896 (c) Salary Rs. 24,00,000 Rs. 22,47,400 Rs. 29,22,620 Rs. 1,25,42,896 Ratio of cost of labour to receipts 70.70% 69.85% 64.72% 80.44% iii. The wages are claimed to have been paid in cash to various persons. This being so, the veracity of the claim remains unascertainable. In support of the expenditure debited under this head, the assessee has, vide letter dated 11/6/2012, filed copy of muster sheet for two months viz. April 2008 and January 2009, wherein names ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 61,31O/ was, consequently, made to the returned income. Along with the letter dated 11/4/2012 filed before your good 'self, the assessee has filed a chart giving names of 25 persons to whom salary payment has been made. Out of the same, 8 persons have permanent account numbers. Out of the balance parties, 7 parties apparently belong to the assessee's family (Biradlrar group). Since these payments are made in cash, the veracity of the assessee's claim is not ascertainable. During the course of the remand proceedings, the assessee has filed copy of salary muster for the month of April 2008 indicating payment of salary of ₹ 2,59,000/- to 19 employee. 11. Before us, the learned Departmental Representative relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer and prayed that the order of the Assessing Officer should be restored and the order passed by the learned CIT(A) should be reversed. 12. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(A) has rightly deleted the disallowance and submitted that everything has been examined by the Assessing Officer and, therefore, there was no reason to uphold the disallowance. 13. We have heard the rival c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
