9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 851X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enging the respective impugned orders of the Ld. CIT (A) dated 11.10.2011. The solitary issue in controversy in both the assessment years is the addition of ₹ 1,50,000/- made by the A.O. for alleged household expenses and sustained @30% of said by Ld. C.I.T.(A). 2. The facts which revealed from the record are as under. There was search and seizure action u/s.132 of Act on 05.03.2009 in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iginal return filed by him should be treated as return in response to the notice u/s.153A. The A.O. accepted the total return income of the assessee at ₹ 1,50,426/-. No undisclosed income was declared. The A.O. considered the withdrawal shown by the assessee and by making the observation that looking the status and size of the family of the assessee an addition of ₹ 1,50,000/- is made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mily, their monthly expenditure, what is the meaning of the status? etc. At least some facts are required to be brought on record when a particular finding is to be given. Ld. CIT(A) deleted 70% of the addition but without giving any convincing reason sustained 30% addition. In my opinion, judicial propriety demands that there should be some justification even to sustain 30% addition. I delete add ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
