9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1520X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Revenue is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 07/06/2017 of the Ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai and assessee has preferred cross objection. In the appeal of the Revenue, deleting the disallowance made towards set off of fictitious losses of Rs. 45,84,595/- and addition made of Rs. 1,37,538/- towards unexplained expenditure has been challenged. 2. During hearing, the Ld. DR, Ms. N. H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3/2016 to which the assessee explained that the return filed on 30/09/2009 may be treated as return in pursuance to notice u/s 148 of the Act. However, the Ld. Assessing Officer framed assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147, vide order dated 23/11/2016 making the addition of Rs. 45,84,595/-. The Ld. Assessing Officer also estimated 3% addition as commission on such transaction as unexplained expenditure ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Subsequently, survey proceedings u/s 133A of the Act was conducted on 25/03/2008 at the business premises of the assessee. The assessee offered additional income of Rs. 33,22,000/-. The whole case of the Revenue is that the assessee made huge client code modification resulting into loss of Rs. 2,88,55,000/-. The case of the assessee is that all the transactions were made on recognized stock exchan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee. Undisputedly, the transactions have done through recognized exchange and no evidence has been brought on record to defy the transaction by any denial from exchange authorities. Thus, we find no infirmity in the conclusion drawn by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal). Identical is the situation for deleting the addition of Rs. 1,37,538/- towards unexplained expenditure. Resultantly, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
