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 of Rs. 1 lac on account of unexplained marriage expenses and further in not allowing set off of addition of Rs. 1 lac against surrendered income of Rs. 1 lac made by the assessee. 4. Briefly the facts of the case are that the addition of Rs. 1 lac was made under section 69C of the Income Tax Act in respect of expenditure incurred on the marriage of the daughter of the assessee. The Assessing Officer has mentioned that the marriage of assessee's second daughter, 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 as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The assessee submitted before ld. CIT(Appeals) that marriages of the daughters of the assessee were held in the previous year relating to assessment year 2003-04 and 2006-07. It was also pleaded that assessee had already shown total marriage expenses of Rs. 7,27,000/- i.e. Rs. 3,26,000/- in assessment year 2003-04 and Rs. 4.01.000/- in assessment year 2006-07. Therefore, the marriage expenses as per seized document are 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, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riage expenses has been deleted, therefore, the alternate contention of the assessee has become infructuous and need no further adjudication. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. ( ITA 631/2016 : A.Y. 2007-08) 9. In this appeal, assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 1,24,214/- on account of gross profit and also challenged the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) in not allowing set off of addition to the extent of Rs. 1 lac against surrendered income of Rs. 1 lac made by the assessee. 10. The ld. CIT(Appeals) noted in the impugned order that Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the facts relating to addition made of Rs. 1,24,214/- by rejecting the books of account and applying higher profit rate. Therefore, in the absence of any argument to challenge the addition of Rs. 1,24,214/- I do not find any justification to interfere with the findings of fact recorded by the authorities below. However, the assessee has submitted that since assessee has surrendered Rs. 1 lac as additional income in the return of income, therefore, set off of the same should be given against the above addition of Rs. 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 Rs. 1 lac as additional income and also men ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
