9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1157X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e differences in the relevant P&L statement itself. As such, there is no additional evidence submitted before the Ld.CIT(A). Therefore, we uphold the findings of Ld.CIT(A) with regard to consultancy charges. Coming to cost of maintenance and salaries, assessee has recognized the pending receipts from Arogya Sree Scheme at the same time recorded the relevant expenditure only in the revised return of income filed. Assessee has submitted relevant information along with confirmation of balance received from suppliers before the CIT(A). This balance confirmation and relevant vouchers for purchase of medicine and salaries due were not submitted before the AO. In our considered view, this needs verification as the same was not submitted before the AO. Salary payable and supplier confirmation are remitted back to the file of AO for verification. Needless to say that assessee may be given proper opportunity of being heard. Ground No. 2 is allowed for statistical purposes. Claim of inflated expenditure relating to chit discount, bank interest and X-ray expenses - Held that:- We have noticed that assessee has disclosed Arogya Sree receipts in the original return of income after adjustin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... venue have been filed with a delay of one day. Revenue has filed an affidavit seeking condonation of delay for both the appeals. On the other hand, both the Cross-Objections of assessee have been filed with a delay of 379 days. Assessee has filed petitions for condonation of delay for both the Cross-Objections. 2.1. Considering the petitions for condonation of delay in respect of both the parties and being satisfied with the reasonable cause for the delay, we hereby condone the delay in filing the appeals as well as the Cross-Objections, which are admitted to be heard on merits. 3. Brief facts relating to AY. 2009-10 are that assessee is an individual, deriving income from medical profession. For this assessment year, assessee has originally filed return of income on 30-09-2009 admitting an income of ₹ 4,95,000/-. The same was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act [Act]. Subsequently, search and seizure operations were conducted in the group cases of Dr. B. Sukumar and assessee on 21-02-2011. Accordingly, notices u/s. 153A were issued to assessee. In response, assessee has filed revised return of income on 17-12-2012 declaring income of ₹ 7,09,020/-. Subsequ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evant to Saving/Current accounts, statement in respect of loans, statement in respect of chit accounts along with six files containing bills and vouchers relating to expenditure which was duly acknowledged by the O/o. AO and prayed that the findings of Ld.CIT(A) are based on the material which were placed before the AO. Therefore, the order passed by the appellate authority is proper. 8. Considered the rival submissions and material on record. The brief facts relating to Ground No.1 raised by the department relating to unexplained investment u/s. 69 of the Act are that the AO noted that the revised return of income filed by assessee in which the opening WDV of equipment falling under the block of assets viz., Equipment Generator; was increased to the extent of ₹ 19,72,731/-. During the assessment proceedings, assessee submitted that the difference in opening WDV is due to additions made to the Fixed Assets during the AY. 2007-08 and the sources for the said investments were explained during the assessment proceedings of the relevant AY. 2007-08. The same was not accepted by the AO and made the additions of the above difference as unexplained investment . Before the Ld.C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re, for the sake of justice, we are remitting back this issue of unexplained investment to the file of AO to verify the sources of investment with a proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 9. With regard to Ground No. 2, disallowance of expenditure to the extent of ₹ 20,46,562/-. The facts are that AO observed that assessee has inflated the expenditure under the head consultation charges, cost of medicine and salaries aggregating to ₹ 20,46,562/- in the revised return of income when compared to the original return of income filed by assessee. AO noted that during the course of search and seizure operations, two daily collection registers reflecting the unaccounted receipts were found and assessee also accepted the unaccounted receipts by way of undisclosed income in the revised P L A/c filed along with revised return of income. He further observed that assessee had neither claimed any expenditure relating to these additional receipts nor any material relating to inflated expenditures were found during the course of search. Therefore, these additional expenditures were disallowed by the AO. 9.1. The assessee submitted before the Ld.CIT(A) that AO has mad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aries. With regard to consultancy charges, assessee has brought on record the details of expenditure relating to consultancy charges and the differences in the relevant P L statement itself. As such, there is no additional evidence submitted before the Ld.CIT(A). Therefore, we uphold the findings of Ld.CIT(A) with regard to consultancy charges. 9.5. Coming to cost of maintenance and salaries, assessee has recognized the pending receipts from Arogya Sree Scheme at the same time recorded the relevant expenditure only in the revised return of income filed. Assessee has submitted relevant information along with confirmation of balance received from suppliers before the Ld.CIT(A). This balance confirmation and relevant vouchers for purchase of medicine and salaries due were not submitted before the AO. In our considered view, this needs verification as the same was not submitted before the AO. Salary payable and supplier confirmation are remitted back to the file of AO for verification. Needless to say that assessee may be given proper opportunity of being heard. Ground No. 2 is allowed for statistical purposes. 10. Ground No. 3 is with regard to claim of inflated expenditure rela ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re AO on 25-02-2013 which was also acknowledged by the AO. Therefore, it is not an additional evidence, it is only a book adjustment which is already in the file of AO. Therefore we are in agreement with the findings of Ld.CIT(A). Moreover, the proceedings before Ld.CIT(A) are nothing but extension of assessment proceedings. Accordingly, ground raised by Revenue is dismissed. 11. With regard to Ground No. 4, the relevant facts are that AO noticed that assessee has admitted consultancy charges to doctors under the head consultancy charges to the extent of ₹ 12,04,490/- in the revised return of income, whereas in the original return of income, the same expenditure was claimed at ₹ 10,20,000/-. When asked for the details, assessee expressed his inability to produce the same. In the absence of such deletion, AO added back the difference of ₹ 1,84,490/- u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act due to non-deduction of TDS. 11.1. During the course of appellate proceedings, assessee submitted that all the outstanding expenditure relating to consultancy charges were already paid and there is no outstanding at the year-end by relying on the Special Bench decision of ITAT in the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . ITA No. 372/Hyd/2014 (AY. 2010-11): 13. The facts relating to this appeal are, AO has completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act by making the following additions: Amount Rs . 1. Addition on account of suppression of receipts 12,88,135 2. Disallowance of Arogya Sree expenditure 43,44,834 3. Addition on account of Unexplained Investment u/s. 69 of the I.T. Act 21,63,675 4. Disallowance of depreciation 1,91,894 5. Disallowance of cash payments u/s. 40A(3) 1,15,600 6. Disallowance of expenditure u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the I.T. Act 23,71,600 7. Disallowance of expenditure owing to non-submission of evidence 9,15,929 13.1. Out of the above disallowances, all the disallowances except disallowance of deprecia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
