9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1043X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come in the hands of company and the company has passed the necessary entries showing as advance given to the assessee and hence the sources for the investment was explained as expenditure. Therefore, considering the facts of the case, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition made by the AO and the same is here by upheld dismissing the grounds raised by the revenue on this issue. - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 870/Hyd/2016 - - - Dated:- 18-1-2017 - SMT P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Revenue : Shri A. Sitarama Rao For The Assessee : None ORDER PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M.: This appeal filed by the revenue is dire ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore, the learned Assessing Officer opined that the explanation of the assessee is not satisfactory and made an addition of Rs,49,50,000/-. 3. Aggrieved by the addition, so made, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) and submitted before the CIT(A) as under: 1. In this regard it is submitted that the assessee produced the account copies of the assessee in the books of India Productions Pvt. Ltd., for the period 01-042008 to 31-03-2009 before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings. 2. The learned AO never doubted the transaction i.e., payment of ₹ 99,00,000/- in cash by the company Indira Productions Pvt. Ltd., to M/s Emaar Hills Township Pvt. Ltd., however, not accepted the transaction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the hands of the assessee. 4. Addition of ₹ 49,50,000/- is made to the income returned, probably u/s 69 of the I.T. Act, however, the learned Assessing Officer has not mentioned any section in the assessment order. The initial burden for proving the nature and source for the investment is explained by submitting the detailed submission before the AO. The Assessee explained that the investment is made out of the declarations made in the hands of company during the period relevant to the subject assessment year. In respect of this explanation the learned AO has not made any enquiries to disprove the same as false or untrue. The addition is made with certain assumptions such as the transaction is not recorded by the company as per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... equired entries were passed during the AY 2009-10, seems to be logical and acceptable. In view of the above observations, the CIT(A) held that since the amount was already offered as additional income in the hands of the company and the company had passed the necessary entries showing as advance given to the assessee, hence, the sources for this investment was explained as expenditure, therefore, the addition made by the AO is deleted. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the revenue is in appeal before us raising the following grounds of appeal: 1. Where in the facts and in the circumstances of the case the CIT(A) is correct in allowing the additional information in the form of copy of loans and advances and ledger as on 09.02. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the income in the hands of the company, advances given for the property out of said income as there was no other income for the assessee. There was no cash at the time of survey and it has been accepted that cash has been received and utilized by the Directors at the time of survey operations. When the same reply was furnished before the CIT(A), he accepted the same and deleted the addition made by the AO by holding that the amount was already offered as additional income in the hands of company and the company has passed the necessary entries showing as advance given to the assessee and hence the sources for the investment was explained as expenditure. Therefore, considering the facts of the case, we do not find any infirmity in the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
