9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 1138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. A.O. completing the assessment under section 144 while there was no material on record to warrant for completion of assessment under section 144. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld., A.O. in not allowing the depreciation on fixed assets put to use during the year. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in partly confirming the action of Ld. A.O. of making an addition of ₹ 9,70,842/- out of total Addition of ₹ 12,70,842/- as income from undisclosed sources under section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were having sufficient cash balance to introduce the fresh capital. The ld. Authorised Representative submitted that it is admitted fact that the capital has been introduced by the partners. The A.O. himself has accepted the cash availability of the partners to the extent of ₹ 20,000/- and the CIT(A) has accepted it at ₹ 50,000/-, which means the amount has been given by the partners as their capital contribution. The ld. Authorised Representative submitted that when the assessee firm has prima facie established the amount as introduced by partner as capital, the addition cannot be made in the hands of the assessee. Ld. Authorised Representative in support of his contention relied upon the order of I.T.A.T., Agra Bench in the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acts of the present case, in which the assessee firm received capital contribution from the partner, which is necessary for running of the business of the assessee firm. Considering the facts of the case in the light of above decision, we do not find any merit in the departmental appeal. The same is accordingly dismissed. 5. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed." 7. The ld. Departmental Representative, on the other hand, relied upon the order of CIT(A). He also relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Youth Construction Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.497/2010, judgement dated 08.11.2012. 8. We have heard the ld. Representatives of the parties and records perused. The admitted facts of the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
