9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 49X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 47/148 and section 263 if the requisite conditions are fulfilled. The Hon’ble High Court further observed that in presence of such specific provisions, the CIT (A) does not have the power to tax a new source of income not considered by the AO in the order of assessment which was appealed against before him. In coming to this finding the Hon’ble Delhi High Court approved its own decision in the case of CIT vs. Union Tyre (1999 (9) TMI 81 - DELHI High Court) and CIT vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962 (2) TMI 12 - SUPREME Court ) and CIT vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria (1967 (4) TMI 8 - SUPREME Court). Thus we hold that the Ld. CIT (A) did not have the power to enhance the income of the assessee in the instant case and the enha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made by the AO on the ground that the assessee had failed to submit the necessary bills and vouchers as well as evidence of deduction of tax at source, but the AO did not bring any material on record to justify the application of net profit rate of 8%. The Ld. CIT (A) further observed that the assessee had itself admitted that there had been a delay in making the payment of TDS to the account of the Government. The Ld. CIT (A) gave a finding that TDS amounting to ₹ 94,638/- had been deducted on job work charges of ₹ 97,68,528/- for the period April, 2004 to February, 2005 but the payment was made to the Government Account only on 29.11.2005. The Ld. CIT (A) held that the assessee firm had failed to comply with the provisions of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t appreciating that section 40(a)(ia) being punitive in character needs strict interpretation and as held is subject to theory of doubtful penalization and cannot convert gross receipts to assessee s taxable income . 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in making disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act amounting to ₹ 97,68,528/- without appreciating that said provision is not a carte blanche in revenue s favour to be used indiscriminately without application of mind. 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in making disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act amounting to ₹ 97,68,528/- without appreciating the mand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the net profit rate of 8% had been applied without giving any reasonable basis and, therefore, the same was not sustainable. 4. The Ld. DR relied heavily on the order of the Ld. CIT (A) on the issue of enhancement of income and submitted that in view of the detailed findings of the Ld. CIT (A) on the issue, the enhancement ought to be sustained. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and have gone through the relevant records. As far as the issue of enhancement of income by the Ld. CIT (A) is concerned, the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sardari Lal Company 251 ITR 864 (Del) has held that CIT (A) has no power to direct the AO to bring to tax a new source of income, which is not considered by the AO in the order a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
