9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2488X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... GH COURT ) is fully applicable. CIT(A) correctly deleted the addition - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 391/JP/2013 - - - Dated:- 23-10-2015 - SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Appellant by : Shri N.S. Vyas (CA) Respondent by: Shri Raj Mehra (JCIT) ORDER PER: R.P. TOLANI, J.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 02/01/2013 passed by the learned CIT(A)-I, Jaipur for A.Y. 2008-09. The respective grounds of appeal are as under:- 1. That the authorities below erred in making the addition of ₹ 2,00,000/- in the declared trading results by the petitioner to cover up any alleged leakage of revenue. 2. That the authorities below further erred in disallowing a sum of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant partly succeeds on this ground. 4. Aggrieved the assessee is in second appeal. The ld counsel for the appellant has relied on the Hon ble ITAT s order dated 19/06/2009 passed in ITA No. 1689/JP/2008 in assessee s own case and in that case the Assessing Officer made disallowance of ₹ 4,33,441/-, which was reduced to Rs. One lac by the ld CIT(A). The Hon ble ITAT further reduced the same to ₹ 50,000/-. It is pleaded that the facts of the case are similar to A.Y. 2005-06. 4.1 Apropos ground No. 2, reliance is placed on the decision of Hon ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Vector Shipping Services (P) (2013) 357 ITR 642 (All) in which proposition that Section 40(a)(ia) disallowance can be made only in r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6 cannot be compared with the facts of A.Y. 2008-09. Every year is a distinct and separate unit of assessment and principle of res judicata does not apply to factual findings. The ld CIT(A) has taken a reasonable lenient view which may be upheld. Apropos the second ground, reliance is placed on the order of the lower authorities. 6. I have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on the record. Apropos 1st ground of appeal, looking on the facts on record, interest of justice will be served if the trading addition is restricted to Rs. One lac instead of ₹ 2 lacs retained by the ld CIT(A). This ground is partly allowed. 6.1 Apropos second ground, I find merit in the argument of the ld coun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
