9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 834X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Saini, J.M.: This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order of the ld.CIT(A), Varanasi dated 22.03.2012 for the assessment year 2009-10 on the following grounds : "1. That the order of the learned CIT(A) is erroneous in law and on facts. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 44,86,635/- as contract pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and salary paid to the partners. Further addition was made of ₹ 3,36,447/- on acco0unt of income from other sources. The assessee challenged the total addition of ₹ 48,23,112/- under the two head before the ld. CIT(A), i.e., ₹ 44,86,635/- as extra profit and ₹ 3,36,477/- under interest on FDRs on other income. The assessee's written submission is reproduced in the appellate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal is same as has been argued by both the parties in the case of DCIT vs. M/s. Swastik construction (supra). In this case, the Tribunal vide order of the even date has held as under : "5. We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and the material available on record and do not find any justification to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT(A) in deleting the additions. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplied. The ld. CIT(A) has given same treatment while computing the business income of assessee. On interest on FDRs, the ld. CIT(A) specifically noted, the addition is made by the Assessing Officer on this head without giving any opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Therefore, on this reason itself, the order of the Assessing Officer is liable to be set aside. Further, the ld. CIT(A) fund that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
