9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 643X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of low house withdrawal - Held that:- As perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the revenue has not controverted the fact that the A.O. has not taken a lower withdrawal and has been made addition purely on estimation basis. No reasoning is given as to why this amount is excessive. We therefore, direct the A.O. to delete this addition. Addition of Shop expenses - Held that:- A.O. has made disallowance purely on the basis of estimation. No reason is given as to why the pre-survey and post-survey are excessive. Therefore, we cannot sustain these additions and the A.O. is directed to delete the same. Excess stock as found and declared during the course of survey withou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) erred in maintaining the addition of ₹ 1,14,540/- as made by the assessing officer on account of Low household withdrawal without properly appreciating the facts of the case and submission made before him. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not reducing the total income of the assessee by the amount of excess stock as found and declared during the course of survey of ₹ 15,00,580/- without properly appreciating the facts of the case and submission made before him. 4. The appellant reserves its right to add, alter or delete any ground of appeal on or before the date of hearing. 2. Brief fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... expenses as disproportionate or excessive as wages are never remained constant. Therefore, we direct the A.O. to delete this addition. Ground No.1 of the assessee is allowed. 6. Ground No.2 is against addition made on account of low house withdrawal. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee has duly explained the expenses. It is stated that total lo house withdrawal is ₹ 1,88,679/- but not ₹ 1,25,461/- as stated by the A.O. He therefore, submitted that the order of the A.O. is erroneous as he has not appreciated the facts correctly. 7. On the contrary, Ld. D.R. supported the order of the A.O. and submitted that the withdrawals are not commensurate with the expenses incurred. 8. We have heard the rival su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the A.O. as he has not made any addition in the assessment order. Therefore, we do not see any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and the same is hereby affirmed. Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 11. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 12. Now we take up appeal No.595/Ind/2017 for the A.Y. 2014-15. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) erred in maintaining the addition of ₹ 2,16,121/- as made by the assessing officer out of shop expenses without properly appreciating the facts of the case and submission made before him. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The contention of the assessee is that it had declared business income as per the provisions of section 44AD of the Act. The A.O. was not justified in making further disallowance. On the contrary, Ld. D.R. supported the orders of the authorities below. We find that Ld. CIT(A) has decided this issue by observing as under: Ground Nos.2 3: Through these grounds of appeal the appellant has challenged the addition of ₹ 2,16,121/- out of expenses. A survey u/s 133A was carried out at the business premises incurred before and after survey. It is found that the appellant has inflated the expenses during post survey period in order to reduce the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
