9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 825X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld.Counsel made a general reply and was unable to reconcile the two balance. We are therefore of the view that in the given circumstances asssessee has no plausible basis to reconcile the difference in the two accounts viz. one appearing in the personal balance sheet and another in the proprietorship concern. Thus we confirm the addition. Addition on account of house withdrawal - Held that:- Assessee has not brought on record the details of any family members and their income tax return as well as withdrawal made by them in their individual capacity. In the totality of the facts and considering the minimum standard of living required, we find the estimation of household expenses by AO to be justified. We therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the order of Ld.CIT(A) and we therefore, dismiss this ground of the assessee. Penalty u/s.271(1)(c) - unexplained cash - addition u/s 68 - Held that:- As during the course of assessment and appellant proceedings as well as during the penalty proceedings assessee, in order to prove the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the alleged cash credit of ₹ 1 Lac, assessee could not find favour from any of the authori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the delay, admit the appeal and proceed to adjudicate the issues raised. 4. Brief facts of the case as culled out from the records are that, assesse is an individual engaged in the business of trading in M.S. Pipes under sole proprietary-concern in the name of M/s. Gopal Pipe Hardware. The assesse is also partner in M/s.Vinay Enterprise. Assesse filed his return of income 29/12/2008, for A.Y. 2008-09, declaring total income of ₹ 1,56,620/- . Case was selected for scrutiny assessment and notice u/s.143(2) of the Act, was issued and duly served, necessary details were called for. During the course of assessment proceedings Ld. Assessing Officer inquired about unsecured loan, cash credit, difference in capital account reflected in personal and proprietary concern and household expenses. Reply of the assessee could not convince Ld. Assessing Officer and accordingly income was assessed at ₹ 6,24,567/- after making various additions of ₹ 4,67,949/-. Aggrieved assessee went in appeal before Ld.CIT(A) and partly succeeded. Subsequent to order of Ld.CIT(A) in quantum appeal penalty proceedings were initiated u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act, on the alleged sustained addition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and circumstances of the case where assessee has failed to prove the genuineness and creditworthiness of the alleged cash credit of ₹ 1 Lac from Mr.Manilal Madhavdas, we confirm the addition u/s.68 of the Act, at ₹ 1 Lac and call no interference in the order of Ld.CIT(A). In the result this ground of assessee is dismissed. 11. Ground no.2 raised in this appeal is as follows: 2. ITO has erred in law out on facts to all an amount of ₹ 78,000/- difference worked in capital a/c of Gopal Pipe Hardware and capital a/c shown in on the set side. Personal set, overlooking capital of the appellant in the books of Gopal Pipes which shows balance of ₹ 6,83,926/- and in Balance Sheet of Personal Set is also ₹ 6,83,926/- . Learned CIT(A) has also erred to sustain the additions of ₹ 1,00,000/- 12. We observe that this ground relates to variation in the figures of capital invested in sole proprietary concern M/s.Gopal Pipes Hardware as appearing in personal balance sheet as against balance sheet of M/s.Gopal Pipes Hardware. On perusal of the paper books we find that in the personal balance sheet of assessee in the assets side investment in M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 18. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. Assessee is aggrieved with Ld.CIT(A) s order confirming the action of Ld. Assessing Officer by making an addition on account of house withdrawal at ₹ 99,520/- We observe that Ld.Counsel has referred to the withdrawal made from Vinay Enterprises as well as M/s,Gopal Pipes Hardware, but he failed to take a note that withdrawal made from proprietorship concern and partnership firm are taken care of while preparing the personal balance sheet in which assessee only made withdrawal of ₹ 44,480/- which, inter alia, includes withdrawal made from the two concerns. We further notice that assessee has not brought on record the details of any family members and their income tax return as well as withdrawal made by them in their individual capacity. In the totality of the facts and considering the minimum standard of living required, we find the estimation of household expenses at ₹ 1,44,000/- by Ld. Assessing Officer to be justified. We therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the order of Ld.CIT(A) and we therefore, dismiss this ground of the assessee. In the result appeal of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the arguments of Ld.Counsel that proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Act, and u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act are separate. As far as imposition of penalty u/s.271(1)(c)of the Act, on going through the relevant details we find that assessee has shown unsecured loan of ₹ 1 Lac from Mr.Manilal M. Patel in his balance sheet and a some of ₹ 18,500/- was brought forward balance of loan in the name of Mr.Madhavdas Patel. The assessee has already placed on records the copy of agriculture land holding supported by sale of agriculture produce in order to prove that Mr.Manilal M. Patel, was having requisite funds. We also notice that assessee has filed certificate from the bankers of Mr.Manilal M. Patel confirming that a cheque of ₹ 1 lac has been issued to the assessee. 25. From going through various details placed by the Ld.Counsel we find that during the course of assessment and appellant proceedings as well as during the penalty proceedings assessee, in order to prove the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the alleged cash credit of ₹ 1 Lac, assessee could not find favour from any of the authorities in the quantum appeal. However, examining these facts in the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
