9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 1316X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e addition on account of marriage expenses has been deleted, therefore, the alternate contention of the assessee has become infructuous and need no further adjudication. Addition on account of gross profit - Held that:- Assessee surrendered ₹ 1 lac on account of discrepancies in the books of account, therefore, when authorities below have made addition of ₹ 1,24,214/- by rejecting the book results of the assessee, set off of ₹ 1 lac declared as additional income should be given to the assessee. Otherwise, it would amount to double addition. In this view of the matter, I set aside and modify the orders of authorities below and direct the authorities below to give set off of ₹ 1 lac to the assessee on account of add ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, Dr. Savita Jain was performed in Feb.,2006. The Assessing Officer has mentioned that there were some loose papers found and seized as per annexure A-24 indicating expenses on the marriage. They were confronted to the assessee and statement recorded. In reply during assessment, it was submitted that assessee and his family members contributed ₹ 4,01,000/- on the marriage. It was also claimed that shagun given by the relatives was also spent on the marriage. The Assessing Officer mentioned that as per document seized as Annexure A-24, expenses relating to the year 2005 were found to be ₹ 1,33,446/- while there are slips which did not carry date and the total of these amounts works out to ₹ 3,59,344/-. Accordingly, the Ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e less than the expenses shown by the assessee in two years on the marriage of daughters of the assessee. The submissions of the assessee have not been rebutted by the authorities below in any manner. The claim of the assessee was, thus, specific that when assessee performed marriage of his two daughters in two different years, marriage expenses of ₹ 7,27,000/- were spent in two marriages, however, as per seized papers, the total of the same marriage expenses were considered by the authorities below in a sum of ₹ 4,92,790/-. The contention of the assessee is supported by the fact that in some of the seized papers, assessment year under reference was mentioned but in majority of the seized paper, no date was mentioned. Therefore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ls) in not allowing set off of addition to the extent of ₹ 1 lac against surrendered income of ₹ 1 lac made by the assessee. 10. The ld. CIT(Appeals) noted in the impugned order that Assessing Officer made addition of ₹ 1,24,214/- by estimating the sale and applying higher GP than shown by the assessee. The Assessing Officer has mentioned that during the search/survey operation, certain documents and registers were found, when compared with the regular books of account, it was noticed that certain transactions were not recorded and accounted for by the assessee in the regular books of account. The Assessing Officer mentioned that such instances are for financial year 2006-07 under appeal and reflects the modus operandi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted that since assessee has surrendered ₹ 1 lac as additional income in the return of income, therefore, set off of the same should be given against the above addition of ₹ 1,24,214/-. The assessee has pointed out the declaration of additional income in the return of income, copy of the return of income is filed on record in which assessee surrendered ₹ 1 lac as additional income and also mentioned in the return of income that accounts have been prepared on the basis of information available. ₹ 1 lac has been surrendered on account of discrepancies in the accounts of the assessee during the course of search. It is, therefore, clear that assessee surrendered ₹ 1 lac on account of discrepancies in the books ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
