9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 841X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2008. This way the accumulated profit as on 23.10.08 can at the most be taken at ₹ 37,613/-. In view of above facts, I hold that M/s. K.V. Fashions Pvt. Ltd. was having accumulated profit of ₹ 37,613/- at the date of payment of loan of ₹ 13,00,000/- on 23.10.2008 and accumulated profits to the extent of ₹ 37,613/- can only be taxed as per the provisions of sec.2(22)(e). Accordingly, addition to the extent of ₹ 37,613/- is confirmed. The appellant will get a relief of ₹ 1,88,065/- (Rs. 2,25,678 - 37,613). - Decided against revenue. Disallowance of interest on partner’s capital as well as secured and unsecured loans - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- CIT(A) has given a finding in para-4.7 of his order that the assessee has got huge interest-free funds of ₹ 5,12,26,212/- [Rs.4,84,86,738/- as sundry creditors, ₹ 11,63,551/- as advances from customers and ₹ 15,75,923/- as unpaid expense] during the year under consideration. This finding of the ld.CIT(A) is not controverted by the Revenue by placing any contrary material on record. Therefore, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order of the ld.CIT(A), same is he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the purposes of suppression of production has given an erroneous figure. These facts, clearly indicate that the A.O. had adopted erroneous figures for working out the value of suppression which has resulted into disproportionate or unrealistic value of suppression - Decided against revenue. Addition made on account of fall in G.P. Ratio - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- AO himself has stated in his order that since the addition in respect of suppression of production and disallowance of interest u/s.36(1)(iii) of the Act has been made, therefore the ground raised is ill-conceived. We find that the AO, however, proceeded to make the addition of ₹ 24,33,112/- and decided not to make separate addition in respect of fall in GP rate. Therefore, this ground is not arising out of the assessment order and, hence, rejected. - Decided against revenue. - I.T.A. No.2860/Ahd/2012 - - - Dated:- 30-9-2015 - SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Appellant : Shri Shiva Sewak, Sr.DR For The Respondent : Ms. Urvashi Sodhan, AR ORDER PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER : This appeal by the Revenue is directed a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eld that the AO was not justified in rejecting the books of accounts. Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), the Revenue is now in appeal before us. 3. First ground of appeal is against the deletion of addition of ₹ 1,88,065/-. The ld.Sr.DR submitted that the ld.CIT(A) was not justified in deleting the addition. He supported and relied upon the finding of the AO. 3.1. On the contrary, the ld.counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the order of the ld.CIT(A) and submitted that ld.CIT(A) has given a finding on fact. The ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that the AO was not justified in making the addition. 4. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the ld.CIT(A) has given finding on fact in para-3.2 of his order as under:- 3.2 I have carefully considered the rival contentions. It is seen that the A.O. had discussed in detail about the basic conditions as laid down u/s.2(22)(e) and how the same are fulfilled in the case of the appellant. Such discussion has been made by the A.O. in para 3.2 of the assessment order. During the appellate proceedings the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of ₹ 37,613/- is confirmed. The appellant will get a relief of ₹ 1,88,065/- (Rs. 2,25,678 - 37,613). This ground of appeal is partly allowed. 4.1. The aforesaid finding on fact of the ld.CIT(A) is not controverted by the Revenue by placing any contrary material on record. Therefore, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order of the ld.CIT(A), same is hereby upheld. Therefore, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order of the ld.CIT(A), same is hereby upheld. Thus, ground No.1 of Revenue s appeal is rejected. 5. Second ground of appeal is against deletion of addition of ₹ 3,08,041/-. The ld.Sr.DR relied on the order of the AO and submitted that the ld.CIT(A) was not justified in deleting the addition. He submitted that the AO had made disallowance on the basis that the assessee is paying interest on partner s capital as well as secured and unsecured loans. Therefore, interest free fund is not available to the assessee for making interest free advances. The assessee has paid interest of ₹2,93,035/- on secured and unsecured loans and ₹ 15,006/- on partners capital. The total interest paid by the assessee is ₹ 3,08,041 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gister was not possible. 8. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the ld.CIT(A) has not upheld the book of account on the ground that during the course of assessment proceedings the assessee has furnished details of sales and purchase, quantitative monthly summary of grey cloth and finished cloth sales. The details of income and expenditure were also available on record. The AO has not found any specific details either in the book of accounts or in the details furnished by the appellant. The ld.CIT(A) observed that the AO has not found any specific details either in the book of accounts or in the details furnished by the assessee. The ld.CIT(A) relied on the judgement of Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Vikram Plastic (239 ITR 161-Guj.). The AO has proceeded to reject the book of accounts on the ground that the yield shown by the assessee was not correct since in the subsequent year, the assessee has shown yield at 96.63% for AY 2010-11. We find that the AO has noted the fact that the certificate dated 12/11/2011 was given to the assessee by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
