9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 1237X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that year. The assessing officer is directed accordingly. Regarding the amount of ₹ 1,19,550/-, it is stated that the amount outstanding was received back before the date of survey. In support of this, the assessee has drawn my attention to the written submissions. However, no supporting evidence has been filed. Therefore, I sustain this addition. Regarding amount of ₹ 1 lakh, it is stated that the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly confirmed the addition of ₹ 2 lakhs. In fact, the land was jointly owned by two persons, therefore, the addition should have been restricted to ₹ 1 lakh. As perused the agreement. As per this agreement, the land is jointly owned. Therefore, the assessing officer should have made addition of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed. Addition being the amount of credit entries during the whole year in savings bank account of the wife of the assessee - HELD THAT:- Amount of credit entries during the whole year in the savings bank account of wife of the assessee Smt. Jyotibala Jain, who is assessed to tax and the amount was properly reflected in the books of accounts has been added. In support of this, the assessee has filed her return of income of the current and earlier years were filed and as per the balance sheet, as on 31.3.2005 31.3.2004, accumulated capital was ₹ 3,40,578/- and ₹ 4,08,721/-. Looking to the evidences submitted and more particularly, the amount which has been credited in the account of the wife of the assessee who herself is as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dition made in spite of proper explanation towards partial retraction of the amount surrendered during survey on the ground that such retraction was delayed, is unjustified, improper, bad in law and deserves to be quashed. 2. That the learned CIT(A) further erred in law in confirming the addition of Rs. One lac out of ₹ 2 lacs given for purchase of agricultural land jointly by two parties as per agreement dated 21.7.2003. He ought to have considered that the amounts were advanced at ₹ 1,51,000/- and ₹ 49,000/- by both of them hence the appellant s share being Rs.One lac only, was offered for tax. It being a mistake at the time of survey was rectified with proper evidence and confirmation hence confirmati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sits being collection of cheques except cash deposit of ₹ 20,000/- only vitiated the assessment order and its confirmation is wholly unjustified, improper, bad in law. 5. The appellant further craves leave to add, alter and/or to amend the aforesaid grounds of appeal as and when required. 2. The facts of the case are that a survey action u/s 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as the Act ) was carried out at the business premises of the assessee. Thereafter, case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny assessment. It is observed by the A.O. that during the course of survey proceedings, the assessee had surrendered an amount of ₹ 15,00,847/- in different h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al submissions, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. Ground No.1 is against confirming the addition of ₹ 3,78,150/- in respect of the difference in the amount surrendered during the course of survey and income offered for filing of return of income. I have gone through the evidence filed by the assessee. The amount was retracted even filing of the return of income. In respect of amount of ₹ 1,58,600/-, the assessee has demonstrated that the amount was given during the assessment year 2003-04. Therefore, the amount was required to be added in that year. The assessing officer is directed accordingly. Regarding the amount of ₹ 1,19,550/-, it is stated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... balance amount was also recovered from debtors against advances given. It is stated that credit in current account with Mandsaur Khetriya Gramin Bank was of ₹ 13,27,300/-. The A.O. made addition of the total credit entries appearing in the bank account u/s 68 of the Act. It is stated that detailed explanation was submitted along with the documentary evidences for each and every credit entry. It is submitted that a sum of ₹ 6,56,500/- was deposited by way of cheques. The narration of such deposits is given in respect of the cash deposit. It is stated that ₹ 46,500/- was surrendered during the survey and deposit of ₹ 2 lakhs was out of the cash surrendered during the survey. Further, it is contended that a sum of S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
