9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (6) TMI 339X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... % of the total claim of conveyance expenses would be on the higher side and accordingly sustaining the disallowance of conveyance expenditure at 15% of the total claim of conveyance expenditure Addition on the ground of undisclosed rental income received by the assessee from NTPC - HELD THAT:- AO observed from the AIR data that the assessee had received rental income from NTPC. However, on perusing the return of income it was revealed that the assessee has not disclosed the same. The assessee also failed to furnish details as regards to the rental income earned by him from NTPC. Hence, the Ld. AO added the undisclosed rental receipt to the income of the assessee. The Ld. CIT (A) in his order has mentioned that the assessee admitted for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rdingly, hereby sustain the addition of ₹ 6 lakhs on this count. It is ordered accordingly. Interest U/s. 234A 234B - HELD THAT:- Levy of interest U/s. 234A and 234B of the Act is consequential in nature and accordingly the ground does not survive. - ITA No.1731/Hyd/2017 - - - Dated:- 10-6-2020 - Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Smt. S. Sandhya For the Revenue : Sri M. Murthy Naik, DR ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM.: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT (A)-1, Hyderabad in appeal No. 0527/CIT (A)-1/Hyd/2014-15/2017-18, dated 01/06/2017 passed U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 250(6) of the Act for the AY 2009-10. 2. The assessee has raised severa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... im of expenditure for ₹ 19,046/-. 5. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was observed by the Ld. AO that the assessee had claimed conveyance expenses of ₹ 67,119/- and 28,114/-. Since proper explanation was not provided by the assessee the Ld. AO opined that certain amount would have been incurred for personal purposes and therefore disallowed an amount of ₹ 19,046/- as allowable deduction. On appeal, the Ld. CIT (A) held the issue against the assessee because the assessee had neither disputed the disallowance nor provided any details. 6. Before us, the Ld. AR vehemently argued stating that the disallowance made by the Ld. AO which was further upheld by the Ld. CIT (A) is erroneous because the entire clai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee has not disclosed the same. The assessee also failed to furnish details as regards to the rental income earned by him from NTPC. Hence, the Ld. AO added the undisclosed rental receipt to the income of the assessee. The Ld. CIT (A) in his order has mentioned that the assessee admitted for having failed to disclose the rental income received from NTPC for ₹ 75,000/- in his return of income. Therefore, the Ld. CIT (A) confirmed the order of the Ld. AO. Before us also neither the assessee nor the Ld. AR could produce any details for deleting the addition. In this situation, we do not have any other alternative but to confirm the orders of the Ld. Revenue Authorities on the issue. Accordingly, this ground is decided against th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15 100 = ₹ 2,86,212. R/o. 2,85,000] as against the disallowance made by the Ld. AO of ₹ 3,95,344/- which is further confirmed by the Ld. CIT (A). 11. Ground No.(iv): addition of ₹ 12 lakhs being cash deposited in bank and the source of which remained unexplained. 12. During the course of scrutiny assessment, it was observed by the Ld. AO that the assessee had deposited cash of ₹ 12 lakhs in his SB Account No. 69136 on 16/07/2008 which was subsequently withdraw on 22/7/2008. From the other bank accounts maintained by the assessee, it was further revealed that there were no withdrawals to justify the cash deposit of ₹ 12 lakhs. The assessee also did not provide any details to the Ld. AO to explain the sou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
